Quantcast

Unbiased look at AeroVee 2.1?

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

Hot Wings

Grumpy Cynic
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
7,492
Location
Rocky Mountains
There's also the Quickie Q-2 with a 64hp revmaster.
And this is classic example of what not to put a VW conversion into. Built light and flown expecting moderate cruise speeds it worked - barely. There is a reason most now have O-200's or Jabiru 3300's.

Re-read post #11. There is simply no substitute for real world experience.
 

autoreply

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
10,762
Location
Rotterdam, Netherlands
You're absolutely right, but the A-40, A-65, and Aeronca E-113 made power at 2500 rpm or less. Not 3,000+. The difference in prop diameter really matters at low speed.
Yep, static thrust (big prop at low revs), much more so then HP are the limiting factor in take-off performance. Expect almost twice the TO roll for 80 hp@3300 rpm vs the Rotax 912ULS (100hp) with both the biggest (climb) prop they can swing.
 

saini flyer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Messages
478
Location
Dallas, TX
Good solid numbers that shows the practical difference, Thanks.
Now I am curious to know the difference in the climb performance for comparison.... :)

Expect almost twice the TO roll for 80 hp@3300 rpm vs the Rotax 912ULS (100hp) with both the biggest (climb) prop they can swing.
 

Pops

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
8,801
Location
USA.
On my !835 cc VW engine with single port heads and small intake and valves for low rpm torque, I am using a 60" X 26" Culver prop. It will shove you back in the seat as you feed full power and rotate in about 200'-250' and climb 1200-1300 fpm. Stall speed is about 28 knots. ROT climb RPM is 3050 rpm, so I am not getting the full 60 hp with this prop, but with a 80 mph cruise at 2650 rpm, I will keep it. Dan
 

autoreply

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
10,762
Location
Rotterdam, Netherlands
Good solid numbers that shows the practical difference, Thanks.
Now I am curious to know the difference in the climb performance for comparison.... :)
For climb, RPM is far less relevant; the difference in prop efficiency there is a wash for most aircraft (unless climb occurs at very low speeds). It's certainly not linear with power though. Very important for draggy aircraft (like the Sonex), where you need a considerable amount of power to just overcome the drag of the airframe.
An RF5B with 20 hp less as a Sonex and 100 lbs heavier will still have the same climb speed.
 

dino

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
688
Location
florida
Climb rate is also highly dependent on span loading.

Dino
 

glenbradley

New Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
2
Both of our two place designs use the Revmaster 2300 engine which has several engineering/design changes over other VW engines. It is truly superior and robust. I have almost 900 hours on my CX5 and I still do not have to add oil between oil changes. With a Zenith carb it is good at high altitudes and requires only a 5 min carb setup
Dr. Glen Bradley
Thatcher Aircraft Inc.
CX5 tandem. CX7 SbyS
 

Pops

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
8,801
Location
USA.
If I was going to buy a VW engine, it would be the Revmaster engine. Hummel engines by Scott Castler would be second.
I never liked the slide valve carbs ( been there and done that ) and I do like the Zenith carb, so my Revmaster would also have the Zenith carb. Better carb than the Stromberg carb for the small continental engines. Like you said, easy to set up and trouble free. I never had any need for mixture adjustment going from 500' agl to about 10k and just turned the mixture screw 1/2 turn for summer in May and back again in Oct where I live. Never missed a beat in 10 years.
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
14,177
Location
Memphis, TN
I think one of the slight differences is you probably have a Zenith jetted leaner overall over an airplane carb at full rich. Full rich is idiot proof. May I take you by a flight school. A builder has his hand in setting up the carb. It’s closer to best power but just a little richer. It already leaned some by airplane standards so going high is not such a loss.
 

Derswede

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2016
Messages
1,008
Location
Central North Carolina
NC Pilot, there is a VERY nice Sonex at the airport at the Montgomery Co. airport below Asheboro (near Candor/Star, NC). The owner has quite a bit of experience with the Sonex. Not sure what engine is currently installed, but you should be able to get some information from him. Can't remember his name, but he is a regular who hangs out at the airport. Where are you based? (never mind, just saw Salisbury, Used to fly out of "Lake Norman International" my self.)

Derswede
 

C Michael Hoover

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2019
Messages
58
The one guy lived and flew in South Florida. It didn't seem to bother him unless he was loaded down. Didn't stop him, he just backed further up the grass runway they have at his airport. Don't remember how long the strip was, X05 I think. Indian town, florida.
X05 is Pilot Country, NE of Tampa International. No Sonex's here. Indiantown is X58.
 

Pops

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
8,801
Location
USA.
I think one of the slight differences is you probably have a Zenith jetted leaner overall over an airplane carb at full rich. Full rich is idiot proof. May I take you by a flight school. A builder has his hand in setting up the carb. It’s closer to best power but just a little richer. It already leaned some by airplane standards so going high is not such a loss.
I remember somewhere (might have been on this site) that the design of the Zenith carb is altitude compensating a certain amount in the mixture. Very simple carb to set up, and when set, it tends to stay the same at any altitude.
 

Daleandee

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2015
Messages
1,210
Location
SC
I see that we are replying to a thread that was last visited in 2013. As far as a Sonex and an Aerovee ... I had an Aerovee powered nose dragger Sonex. I now have a 3.0 Corvair powered tail dragger. Needless to say I'm nearly a zealot that insist that the 120HP Corvair is the engine that this air frame needs. Plenty of power, no overheating, great sound, and the most important thing ... it's been extremely reliable.

Dale
N319WF

PS: 1000% agree with Pops ... no slide carbs for me!
 

Latest posts

Top