Would you buy a MPG wonder if it was available ?

Discussion in 'Hangar Flying' started by topspeed100, Jan 24, 2012.

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes Forum by donating:

  1. Feb 9, 2012 #61

    topspeed100

    topspeed100

    topspeed100

    Banned

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    4,063
    Likes Received:
    63
    Location:
    Oulu/Finland
    I did get the data and seem that MZ175 is the way to go....it has 26 + hp and is lighter than the MZ100 of 18 hp.

    My next question is..if this bird went 150 mph at full throttle and was aerobatic ( 2 gallons / hr duration 1,5 hr )...and cost 24 000 usd to build..would you rather buy that than one with solar panels at 55 mph indefinitely without fuel ( in a sunny day ) and cost 35 000 usd ???

    Or one that went max 100 mph but cruised at 70 mph at MPG 130 and cost just 20 000 usd ?
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Feb 9, 2012 #62

    WonderousMountain

    WonderousMountain

    WonderousMountain

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,853
    Likes Received:
    192
    Location:
    Clatsop, Or
    I think I know how they made it lighter...
     
  3. Feb 9, 2012 #63

    topspeed100

    topspeed100

    topspeed100

    Banned

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    4,063
    Likes Received:
    63
    Location:
    Oulu/Finland
    The cylinder heads seem lighter than in MZ100 ?!
     

    Attached Files:

  4. Feb 9, 2012 #64

    WonderousMountain

    WonderousMountain

    WonderousMountain

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,853
    Likes Received:
    192
    Location:
    Clatsop, Or
    I think there was a lot more done on the PSRU crankshaft end than it appears at first glance. The new one is at least an inch shorter and looks to be bolted more centrally than on the outside of the engine. Also the hollow bottom spinner probably replaces a steel shaft steeling maybe a few more ounces. Looks like a complete reworkup of the lower end.

    Actually was just joking that your picture showes engine blocks missing many components.

    Cheers all you airheads..!!!
    Mountain
     
  5. Feb 9, 2012 #65

    bmcj

    bmcj

    bmcj

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    12,630
    Likes Received:
    4,648
    Location:
    Fresno, California
    You are throwing a lot of changing variables at us, and I think most would find it difficult to choose among so many variations. Add to that, the choice one makes in a plane involves other factors such as appearance, brand loyalty, nostalgia, personal likes and dislikes, etc. I think that "the numbers" are often overlooked in light of these other factors, with the possible exception of purchase price and number of seats.

    Bruce :)
     
  6. Feb 10, 2012 #66

    topspeed100

    topspeed100

    topspeed100

    Banned

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    4,063
    Likes Received:
    63
    Location:
    Oulu/Finland
    I apply here the Faberge Egg theory of aircraft design ( you know all silversmiths working at Faberge were finns Wickbergs etc ? ) that I have been talking about...this will have second to none appearance. I mean it also has to be..otherwise it could not claim a thing. I actually named this first Spitfire II...but it was considered non original so I switched it into TIKKA ( dart/woodpecker ) in finnish. I might change it another time since the AF flight academy is being transfered to Tikkakoski from Kauhava...where I was born. I don't want to honor my aircraft with this name..I think I might change it to IO....the fourth moon of the planet Jupiter.

    http://www.solarviews.com/eng/io.htm

    Sounds extraordinary like my aeroplane !
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2012

Share This Page

arrow_white