Original Posted By: John Weikel
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: continental engines>Well, I'm finally back from my 3.5 week vacation and road trip from>Calgary, AB to St. John's, NF. That's a 13000 km round trip.>Unfortunately, we didn't have enough time to make it to B'head or OSH>despite the fact that we were fairly close by. However, next year we hope>to be to OSH in the Christavia.>>As for engines, another possibility in the same price range is the new>Franklins. I know I've mentioned them before, but heck, I like them. They>weigh 240 lbs with accessories, puts out 120 hp and will fit on a>continental mount. Strip off the accessories an you will end up with a 200>lb engine. Although the thrust will be higher than an 0-200 or simular>engine, I don't think it would be too much for the Piet frame as it's a>much smoother engine than other 4 bangers due to a viscuously damped>flywheel.>>My 150 hp version should be here early next month!!>>Just a thought.>Ken>>On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Michael Brusilow wrote:>>> Dave wrote:>>>> >> Piet. Forget about a starter though. The added weight and addition of an>> electrical system will add 10 to 16 lbs for a gen., 16 lbs for a>> starter, another 20 lbs for a battery, wiring, switches . . . You will>> end up with a one place airplane with poor performance. Hand proping is>> neither dificult or dangerous as long as you know what you are doing.>> Get someone who knows and have them teach you. You will be glad you did>> with the improved performance of an airplane about 50 lbs lighter.>>>>> Don't know about that.>>>> I have been flying my Aircamper with an 0-200, starter & altenator for 8>> yrs. Two years prior, it had Ford engine.>>>> My power configuration ( battery included ) does not weigh as much as>> the Ford engine plus the radtiator & water. ( give or take a few pounds>> in either direction ).>>>> As for performance, my aircraft cruises a + or - 80 mph at 2250 rpm (>> which is low for an 0-200 ) & climbs at approx 600 ft/min depending on>> the oat. No problem with two people.>>>> Poor performance? Try Ford Piet on a hot day from a short grass strip>> with trees at the end of the runway.>>>> Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: continental engines
Pietenpol-List: continental engines
Original Posted By: steve(at)byu.edu
Dave wrote:Piet. Forgetabout a starter though. The added weight and addition of an electricalsystemwill add 10 to 16 lbs for a gen., 16 lbs for a starter, another 20 lbsfor abattery, wiring, switches . . . You will end up with a one placeairplane withpoor performance. Hand proping is neither dificult or dangerous as longas youknow what you are doing. Get someone who knows and have them teach you.You willbe glad you did with the improved performance of an airplane about 50lbslighter.>Don't know about that.I have been flying my Aircamper with an 0-200, starter & altenator for 8yrs. Two years prior, it had Ford engine.My power configuration ( battery included ) does not weigh as much asthe Ford engine plus the radtiator & water. ( give or take a few poundsin either direction ).As for performance, my aircraft cruises a + or - 80 mph at 2250 rpm (which is low for an 0-200 ) & climbs at approx 600 ft/min depending onthe oat. No problem with two people.Poor performance? Try Ford Piet on a hot day from a short grass stripwith trees at the end of the runway.Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )Dave wrote:Any of the Continental A or C seriesengines aregood choices for a Piet. Forgetabout a starter though. The addedweight andaddition of an electrical systemwill add 10 to 16 lbs for a gen., 16lbs fora starter, another 20 lbs for abattery, wiring, switches . . . Youwill endup with a one place airplane withpoor performance. Hand proping isneitherdificult or dangerous as long as youknow what you are doing. Getsomeone whoknows and have them teach you. You willbe glad you did with theimprovedperformance of an airplane about 50 lbslighter.Don't know about that.I have been flying my Aircamper with an0-200, starter altenator for 8 yrs. Two years prior, it had Fordengine.My power configuration ( battery included )does notweigh as much as the Ford engine plus the radtiator water. ( giveor takea few pounds in either direction ).As for performance, my aircraft cruises a + or - 80 mph at 2250 rpm( whichis low for an 0-200 ) climbs at approx 600 ft/min depending on theoat. Noproblem with two people.Poor performance? Try Ford Piet on a hot day from a shortgrass stripwith trees at the end of the runway.Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )________________________________________________________________________________
Dave wrote:Piet. Forgetabout a starter though. The added weight and addition of an electricalsystemwill add 10 to 16 lbs for a gen., 16 lbs for a starter, another 20 lbsfor abattery, wiring, switches . . . You will end up with a one placeairplane withpoor performance. Hand proping is neither dificult or dangerous as longas youknow what you are doing. Get someone who knows and have them teach you.You willbe glad you did with the improved performance of an airplane about 50lbslighter.>Don't know about that.I have been flying my Aircamper with an 0-200, starter & altenator for 8yrs. Two years prior, it had Ford engine.My power configuration ( battery included ) does not weigh as much asthe Ford engine plus the radtiator & water. ( give or take a few poundsin either direction ).As for performance, my aircraft cruises a + or - 80 mph at 2250 rpm (which is low for an 0-200 ) & climbs at approx 600 ft/min depending onthe oat. No problem with two people.Poor performance? Try Ford Piet on a hot day from a short grass stripwith trees at the end of the runway.Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )Dave wrote:Any of the Continental A or C seriesengines aregood choices for a Piet. Forgetabout a starter though. The addedweight andaddition of an electrical systemwill add 10 to 16 lbs for a gen., 16lbs fora starter, another 20 lbs for abattery, wiring, switches . . . Youwill endup with a one place airplane withpoor performance. Hand proping isneitherdificult or dangerous as long as youknow what you are doing. Getsomeone whoknows and have them teach you. You willbe glad you did with theimprovedperformance of an airplane about 50 lbslighter.Don't know about that.I have been flying my Aircamper with an0-200, starter altenator for 8 yrs. Two years prior, it had Fordengine.My power configuration ( battery included )does notweigh as much as the Ford engine plus the radtiator water. ( giveor takea few pounds in either direction ).As for performance, my aircraft cruises a + or - 80 mph at 2250 rpm( whichis low for an 0-200 ) climbs at approx 600 ft/min depending on theoat. Noproblem with two people.Poor performance? Try Ford Piet on a hot day from a shortgrass stripwith trees at the end of the runway.Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: continental engines
Original Posted By: mbell1(at)columbiaenergygroup.com
Well, I'm finally back from my 3.5 week vacation and road trip fromCalgary, AB to St. John's, NF. That's a 13000 km round trip.Unfortunately, we didn't have enough time to make it to B'head or OSHdespite the fact that we were fairly close by. However, next year we hopeto be to OSH in the Christavia.As for engines, another possibility in the same price range is the newFranklins. I know I've mentioned them before, but heck, I like them. Theyweigh 240 lbs with accessories, puts out 120 hp and will fit on acontinental mount. Strip off the accessories an you will end up with a 200lb engine. Although the thrust will be higher than an 0-200 or simularengine, I don't think it would be too much for the Piet frame as it's amuch smoother engine than other 4 bangers due to a viscuously dampedflywheel. My 150 hp version should be here early next month!!Just a thought.KenOn Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Michael Brusilow wrote:> Dave wrote:> > > Piet. Forget about a starter though. The added weight and addition of an> electrical system will add 10 to 16 lbs for a gen., 16 lbs for a> starter, another 20 lbs for a battery, wiring, switches . . . You will> end up with a one place airplane with poor performance. Hand proping is> neither dificult or dangerous as long as you know what you are doing.> Get someone who knows and have them teach you. You will be glad you did> with the improved performance of an airplane about 50 lbs lighter.>> > Don't know about that.> > I have been flying my Aircamper with an 0-200, starter & altenator for 8> yrs. Two years prior, it had Ford engine. > > My power configuration ( battery included ) does not weigh as much as> the Ford engine plus the radtiator & water. ( give or take a few pounds> in either direction ). > > As for performance, my aircraft cruises a + or - 80 mph at 2250 rpm (> which is low for an 0-200 ) & climbs at approx 600 ft/min depending on> the oat. No problem with two people. > > Poor performance? Try Ford Piet on a hot day from a short grass strip> with trees at the end of the runway. > > Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Well, I'm finally back from my 3.5 week vacation and road trip fromCalgary, AB to St. John's, NF. That's a 13000 km round trip.Unfortunately, we didn't have enough time to make it to B'head or OSHdespite the fact that we were fairly close by. However, next year we hopeto be to OSH in the Christavia.As for engines, another possibility in the same price range is the newFranklins. I know I've mentioned them before, but heck, I like them. Theyweigh 240 lbs with accessories, puts out 120 hp and will fit on acontinental mount. Strip off the accessories an you will end up with a 200lb engine. Although the thrust will be higher than an 0-200 or simularengine, I don't think it would be too much for the Piet frame as it's amuch smoother engine than other 4 bangers due to a viscuously dampedflywheel. My 150 hp version should be here early next month!!Just a thought.KenOn Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Michael Brusilow wrote:> Dave wrote:> > > Piet. Forget about a starter though. The added weight and addition of an> electrical system will add 10 to 16 lbs for a gen., 16 lbs for a> starter, another 20 lbs for a battery, wiring, switches . . . You will> end up with a one place airplane with poor performance. Hand proping is> neither dificult or dangerous as long as you know what you are doing.> Get someone who knows and have them teach you. You will be glad you did> with the improved performance of an airplane about 50 lbs lighter.>> > Don't know about that.> > I have been flying my Aircamper with an 0-200, starter & altenator for 8> yrs. Two years prior, it had Ford engine. > > My power configuration ( battery included ) does not weigh as much as> the Ford engine plus the radtiator & water. ( give or take a few pounds> in either direction ). > > As for performance, my aircraft cruises a + or - 80 mph at 2250 rpm (> which is low for an 0-200 ) & climbs at approx 600 ft/min depending on> the oat. No problem with two people. > > Poor performance? Try Ford Piet on a hot day from a short grass strip> with trees at the end of the runway. > > Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: continental engines
Original Posted By: mbell1(at)columbiaenergygroup.com
How much is a new or used Franklin?Thanks....MikeDallas>Well, I'm finally back from my 3.5 week vacation and road trip from>Calgary, AB to St. John's, NF. That's a 13000 km round trip.>Unfortunately, we didn't have enough time to make it to B'head or OSH>despite the fact that we were fairly close by. However, next year we hope>to be to OSH in the Christavia.>>As for engines, another possibility in the same price range is the new>Franklins. I know I've mentioned them before, but heck, I like them. They>weigh 240 lbs with accessories, puts out 120 hp and will fit on a>continental mount. Strip off the accessories an you will end up with a 200>lb engine. Although the thrust will be higher than an 0-200 or simular>engine, I don't think it would be too much for the Piet frame as it's a>much smoother engine than other 4 bangers due to a viscuously damped>flywheel. >>My 150 hp version should be here early next month!!>>Just a thought.>Ken>>On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Michael Brusilow wrote:>>> Dave wrote:>> >> >> Piet. Forget about a starter though. The added weight and addition of an>> electrical system will add 10 to 16 lbs for a gen., 16 lbs for a>> starter, another 20 lbs for a battery, wiring, switches . . . You will>> end up with a one place airplane with poor performance. Hand proping is>> neither dificult or dangerous as long as you know what you are doing.>> Get someone who knows and have them teach you. You will be glad you did>> with the improved performance of an airplane about 50 lbs lighter.>>> >> Don't know about that.>> >> I have been flying my Aircamper with an 0-200, starter & altenator for 8>> yrs. Two years prior, it had Ford engine. >> >> My power configuration ( battery included ) does not weigh as much as>> the Ford engine plus the radtiator & water. ( give or take a few pounds>> in either direction ). >> >> As for performance, my aircraft cruises a + or - 80 mph at 2250 rpm (>> which is low for an 0-200 ) & climbs at approx 600 ft/min depending on>> the oat. No problem with two people. >> >> Poor performance? Try Ford Piet on a hot day from a short grass strip>> with trees at the end of the runway. >> >> Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>________________________________________________________________________________
How much is a new or used Franklin?Thanks....MikeDallas>Well, I'm finally back from my 3.5 week vacation and road trip from>Calgary, AB to St. John's, NF. That's a 13000 km round trip.>Unfortunately, we didn't have enough time to make it to B'head or OSH>despite the fact that we were fairly close by. However, next year we hope>to be to OSH in the Christavia.>>As for engines, another possibility in the same price range is the new>Franklins. I know I've mentioned them before, but heck, I like them. They>weigh 240 lbs with accessories, puts out 120 hp and will fit on a>continental mount. Strip off the accessories an you will end up with a 200>lb engine. Although the thrust will be higher than an 0-200 or simular>engine, I don't think it would be too much for the Piet frame as it's a>much smoother engine than other 4 bangers due to a viscuously damped>flywheel. >>My 150 hp version should be here early next month!!>>Just a thought.>Ken>>On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Michael Brusilow wrote:>>> Dave wrote:>> >> >> Piet. Forget about a starter though. The added weight and addition of an>> electrical system will add 10 to 16 lbs for a gen., 16 lbs for a>> starter, another 20 lbs for a battery, wiring, switches . . . You will>> end up with a one place airplane with poor performance. Hand proping is>> neither dificult or dangerous as long as you know what you are doing.>> Get someone who knows and have them teach you. You will be glad you did>> with the improved performance of an airplane about 50 lbs lighter.>>> >> Don't know about that.>> >> I have been flying my Aircamper with an 0-200, starter & altenator for 8>> yrs. Two years prior, it had Ford engine. >> >> My power configuration ( battery included ) does not weigh as much as>> the Ford engine plus the radtiator & water. ( give or take a few pounds>> in either direction ). >> >> As for performance, my aircraft cruises a + or - 80 mph at 2250 rpm (>> which is low for an 0-200 ) & climbs at approx 600 ft/min depending on>> the oat. No problem with two people. >> >> Poor performance? Try Ford Piet on a hot day from a short grass strip>> with trees at the end of the runway. >> >> Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: continental engines
Original Posted By: John Weikel
My custom rebuild will be $6500 USD but does not include carb, mags oraltenator. The rebuilder was able to use the $15 4220 mags with a littlemodification. I also had an 0-200 MS carb in the shop that he re-jettedand used. The engine is now running and awaiting some minor tweaking. The new ones are $7900 USD and use a lower compression cylinder puttingout 120 hp. Mine has the 10:1 jugs for 150 hp. THere is a web site at:There are two companies providing parts and engines. Franklin AircraftEngines, Inc. and Franklin Engines Parts and Supply. The later is buildingmy engine.Hope this helps,Ken On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Michael King wrote:> How much is a new or used Franklin?> > Thanks....> > Mike> DallasKen Beanlands B.Eng (Aerospace)Calgary, Alberta, CanadaChristavia MK 1 C-GREN________________________________________________________________________________
My custom rebuild will be $6500 USD but does not include carb, mags oraltenator. The rebuilder was able to use the $15 4220 mags with a littlemodification. I also had an 0-200 MS carb in the shop that he re-jettedand used. The engine is now running and awaiting some minor tweaking. The new ones are $7900 USD and use a lower compression cylinder puttingout 120 hp. Mine has the 10:1 jugs for 150 hp. THere is a web site at:There are two companies providing parts and engines. Franklin AircraftEngines, Inc. and Franklin Engines Parts and Supply. The later is buildingmy engine.Hope this helps,Ken On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Michael King wrote:> How much is a new or used Franklin?> > Thanks....> > Mike> DallasKen Beanlands B.Eng (Aerospace)Calgary, Alberta, CanadaChristavia MK 1 C-GREN________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: continental engines
Original Posted By: Ken Beanlands
Doesn't Franklin make a two cyl engine of 50 hp or so also? Seems thatwould beat the socks off of a 40 hp Model A.John W-----Original Message-----
Doesn't Franklin make a two cyl engine of 50 hp or so also? Seems thatwould beat the socks off of a 40 hp Model A.John W-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Re: continental engines
Original Posted By: walter evans
Ken Beanlands wrote:> > My custom rebuild will be $6500 USD but does not include carb, mags or> altenator. The rebuilder was able to use the $15 4220 mags with a little> modification. I also had an 0-200 MS carb in the shop that he re-jetted> and used. The engine is now running and awaiting some minor tweaking.How about more detail on the mag conversion. I've been told that the15 degree lag is not enough, that the 0-200 needs something like 20-25Pat________________________________________________________________________________
Ken Beanlands wrote:> > My custom rebuild will be $6500 USD but does not include carb, mags or> altenator. The rebuilder was able to use the $15 4220 mags with a little> modification. I also had an 0-200 MS carb in the shop that he re-jetted> and used. The engine is now running and awaiting some minor tweaking.How about more detail on the mag conversion. I've been told that the15 degree lag is not enough, that the 0-200 needs something like 20-25Pat________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: continental engines
Original Posted By: Copinfo
Unfortunately, the Franklin Engine God did not share with me his secret. Ido know that it was taken apart and the fron half of the case was swappedwith another old case. As for the lag angle, 15 degrees may be enough forthe Franklin. In any case, it is running.KenOn Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Pat Panzera wrote:> Ken Beanlands wrote:> > > > My custom rebuild will be $6500 USD but does not include carb, mags or> > altenator. The rebuilder was able to use the $15 4220 mags with a little> > modification. I also had an 0-200 MS carb in the shop that he re-jetted> > and used. The engine is now running and awaiting some minor tweaking.> > How about more detail on the mag conversion. I've been told that the> 15 degree lag is not enough, that the 0-200 needs something like 20-25> > Pat> Ken Beanlands B.Eng (Aerospace)Calgary, Alberta, CanadaChristavia MK 1 C-GREN________________________________________________________________________________
Unfortunately, the Franklin Engine God did not share with me his secret. Ido know that it was taken apart and the fron half of the case was swappedwith another old case. As for the lag angle, 15 degrees may be enough forthe Franklin. In any case, it is running.KenOn Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Pat Panzera wrote:> Ken Beanlands wrote:> > > > My custom rebuild will be $6500 USD but does not include carb, mags or> > altenator. The rebuilder was able to use the $15 4220 mags with a little> > modification. I also had an 0-200 MS carb in the shop that he re-jetted> > and used. The engine is now running and awaiting some minor tweaking.> > How about more detail on the mag conversion. I've been told that the> 15 degree lag is not enough, that the 0-200 needs something like 20-25> > Pat> Ken Beanlands B.Eng (Aerospace)Calgary, Alberta, CanadaChristavia MK 1 C-GREN________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: continental engines
Original Posted By: MACKORELL(at)aol.com
Dear Mike,Thank you for respoding to my email. I don't think it is, but is the motor mount for the O-200 the same as the one shown for the A-65 shown in the Air Camper plans? If the mount is different from that of the A-65, where can you find engine mount plans for the O-200 or for the C85 if I choose to use that one? With the O-200 did you have to use the short or long fuselage version. With the higher horsepower engine did you have to modify the fire wall in any way?Thank You,Jacob ________________________________________________________________________________
Dear Mike,Thank you for respoding to my email. I don't think it is, but is the motor mount for the O-200 the same as the one shown for the A-65 shown in the Air Camper plans? If the mount is different from that of the A-65, where can you find engine mount plans for the O-200 or for the C85 if I choose to use that one? With the O-200 did you have to use the short or long fuselage version. With the higher horsepower engine did you have to modify the fire wall in any way?Thank You,Jacob ________________________________________________________________________________
> Re: continental engines
Original Posted By: Gordon Brimhall
John, Franklin made a two cylinder, 60 HP engine back in the early 70s. It wassold in a Champion 7ACA which was to be an updated "Airknocker", butdidn't sell well. I worked on one about 1972.John Langstonwrites:>Doesn't Franklin make a two cyl engine of 50 hp or so also? Seems >that>would beat the socks off of a 40 hp Model A.>John W>-----Original Message----->From: Ken Beanlands >To: Pietenpol Discussion >Date: Wednesday, August 18, 1999 12:19 PM>Subject: Re: continental engines>>>>Well, I'm finally back from my 3.5 week vacation and road trip from>>Calgary, AB to St. John's, NF. That's a 13000 km round trip.>>Unfortunately, we didn't have enough time to make it to B'head or >OSH>>despite the fact that we were fairly close by. However, next year we >hope>>to be to OSH in the Christavia.>>>>As for engines, another possibility in the same price range is the >new>>Franklins. I know I've mentioned them before, but heck, I like them. >They>>weigh 240 lbs with accessories, puts out 120 hp and will fit on a>>continental mount. Strip off the accessories an you will end up with >a 200>>lb engine. Although the thrust will be higher than an 0-200 or >simular>>engine, I don't think it would be too much for the Piet frame as it's >a>>much smoother engine than other 4 bangers due to a viscuously damped>>flywheel.>>>>My 150 hp version should be here early next month!!>>>>Just a thought.>>Ken>>>>On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Michael Brusilow wrote:>>>>> Dave wrote:>>>>>> >a>>> Piet. Forget about a starter though. The added weight and addition >of an>>> electrical system will add 10 to 16 lbs for a gen., 16 lbs for a>>> starter, another 20 lbs for a battery, wiring, switches . . . You >will>>> end up with a one place airplane with poor performance. Hand >proping is>>> neither dificult or dangerous as long as you know what you are >doing.>>> Get someone who knows and have them teach you. You will be glad you >did>>> with the improved performance of an airplane about 50 lbs >lighter.>>>>>>> Don't know about that.>>>>>> I have been flying my Aircamper with an 0-200, starter & altenator >for 8>>> yrs. Two years prior, it had Ford engine.>>>>>> My power configuration ( battery included ) does not weigh as much >as>>> the Ford engine plus the radtiator & water. ( give or take a few >pounds>>> in either direction ).>>>>>> As for performance, my aircraft cruises a + or - 80 mph at 2250 rpm >(>>> which is low for an 0-200 ) & climbs at approx 600 ft/min depending >on>>> the oat. No problem with two people.>>>>>> Poor performance? Try Ford Piet on a hot day from a short grass >strip>>> with trees at the end of the runway.>>>>>> Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>When once you have tasted flight, you will always walk with your >eyes>>turned skyward, for there you have been and there you will always >be.>>>>>__________________________________________________________________________________________
John, Franklin made a two cylinder, 60 HP engine back in the early 70s. It wassold in a Champion 7ACA which was to be an updated "Airknocker", butdidn't sell well. I worked on one about 1972.John Langstonwrites:>Doesn't Franklin make a two cyl engine of 50 hp or so also? Seems >that>would beat the socks off of a 40 hp Model A.>John W>-----Original Message----->From: Ken Beanlands >To: Pietenpol Discussion >Date: Wednesday, August 18, 1999 12:19 PM>Subject: Re: continental engines>>>>Well, I'm finally back from my 3.5 week vacation and road trip from>>Calgary, AB to St. John's, NF. That's a 13000 km round trip.>>Unfortunately, we didn't have enough time to make it to B'head or >OSH>>despite the fact that we were fairly close by. However, next year we >hope>>to be to OSH in the Christavia.>>>>As for engines, another possibility in the same price range is the >new>>Franklins. I know I've mentioned them before, but heck, I like them. >They>>weigh 240 lbs with accessories, puts out 120 hp and will fit on a>>continental mount. Strip off the accessories an you will end up with >a 200>>lb engine. Although the thrust will be higher than an 0-200 or >simular>>engine, I don't think it would be too much for the Piet frame as it's >a>>much smoother engine than other 4 bangers due to a viscuously damped>>flywheel.>>>>My 150 hp version should be here early next month!!>>>>Just a thought.>>Ken>>>>On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Michael Brusilow wrote:>>>>> Dave wrote:>>>>>> >a>>> Piet. Forget about a starter though. The added weight and addition >of an>>> electrical system will add 10 to 16 lbs for a gen., 16 lbs for a>>> starter, another 20 lbs for a battery, wiring, switches . . . You >will>>> end up with a one place airplane with poor performance. Hand >proping is>>> neither dificult or dangerous as long as you know what you are >doing.>>> Get someone who knows and have them teach you. You will be glad you >did>>> with the improved performance of an airplane about 50 lbs >lighter.>>>>>>> Don't know about that.>>>>>> I have been flying my Aircamper with an 0-200, starter & altenator >for 8>>> yrs. Two years prior, it had Ford engine.>>>>>> My power configuration ( battery included ) does not weigh as much >as>>> the Ford engine plus the radtiator & water. ( give or take a few >pounds>>> in either direction ).>>>>>> As for performance, my aircraft cruises a + or - 80 mph at 2250 rpm >(>>> which is low for an 0-200 ) & climbs at approx 600 ft/min depending >on>>> the oat. No problem with two people.>>>>>> Poor performance? Try Ford Piet on a hot day from a short grass >strip>>> with trees at the end of the runway.>>>>>> Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>When once you have tasted flight, you will always walk with your >eyes>>turned skyward, for there you have been and there you will always >be.>>>>>__________________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: continental engines
Original Posted By: BARNSTMR(at)aol.com
Re: Pietenpol-List: continental engines
Original Posted By: BARNSTMR(at)aol.com
Re: Pietenpol-List: continental engines
Original Posted By: "Les Schubert"
Les,A prop on a taperered shaft crank with the hub, as used on the A-50 throughA-80 in the A series and the C-75/85 in the C series, would not require thebolt holes to be counterbored on the engine side of the propeller's hub (ie.in the wood). The prop is held to the hub assembly by bolts with cotterpinned nuts (that are on the forward face of the hub, BTW).The integral flanged crankshaft, as used on the motors quoted above AND theC-90 and O-200, have pressed in bushings that are threaded to recieved theprop bolts that are safety wired in pairs. It is required that the propbolt holes be counterbored on the engine side to receive these bushings.The bushings are not there to "drive" the prop but rather to provide enoughthread engagement for the prop bolts. It is the friction of the front plate(used with a wood prop) and the crank flange provided by the proper tensionon the prop bolts that provides the abiltiy to transfer the torque from thecrank to the prop.Old Sensenich props for the A series where designated, for example, W72C42.The W for wood, the 72 for diameter, the 42 for pitch, and the C for a 4-3/8x 6 bolt pattern with hp not to exceed 65 and the rpm not to exceed 2350.This was later changed to a W72CK42 designation. The K is to designate thatthe props are counterbored so to be able to be used on a flanged crankshaft.If the W72CK42 prop is to be used on a tapered shaft crank with its separatehub, then aluminum bushings are pressed into the holes to fill them up withmatter.I hope this helps.Best to do a google search on "sensenich wood propeller" and see theirwebsite.If a prop maker says he never has seen an A series with an integral flangedcrank, then find another prop builder.chris bobka----- Original Message -----
Les,A prop on a taperered shaft crank with the hub, as used on the A-50 throughA-80 in the A series and the C-75/85 in the C series, would not require thebolt holes to be counterbored on the engine side of the propeller's hub (ie.in the wood). The prop is held to the hub assembly by bolts with cotterpinned nuts (that are on the forward face of the hub, BTW).The integral flanged crankshaft, as used on the motors quoted above AND theC-90 and O-200, have pressed in bushings that are threaded to recieved theprop bolts that are safety wired in pairs. It is required that the propbolt holes be counterbored on the engine side to receive these bushings.The bushings are not there to "drive" the prop but rather to provide enoughthread engagement for the prop bolts. It is the friction of the front plate(used with a wood prop) and the crank flange provided by the proper tensionon the prop bolts that provides the abiltiy to transfer the torque from thecrank to the prop.Old Sensenich props for the A series where designated, for example, W72C42.The W for wood, the 72 for diameter, the 42 for pitch, and the C for a 4-3/8x 6 bolt pattern with hp not to exceed 65 and the rpm not to exceed 2350.This was later changed to a W72CK42 designation. The K is to designate thatthe props are counterbored so to be able to be used on a flanged crankshaft.If the W72CK42 prop is to be used on a tapered shaft crank with its separatehub, then aluminum bushings are pressed into the holes to fill them up withmatter.I hope this helps.Best to do a google search on "sensenich wood propeller" and see theirwebsite.If a prop maker says he never has seen an A series with an integral flangedcrank, then find another prop builder.chris bobka----- Original Message -----
> Pietenpol-List: continental engines
Original Posted By: Jim Cooper
Re: Pietenpol-List: AN (DZUS) latches
Original Posted By: Jim Cooper
I'll snap some pics tomorrow and then post a link to them. That little RC GN-1has been getting LOTS of flight time over the past few months. I swapped themotor for one that uses less amps and produces more thrust. I'd estimate it hasabout 60 flights on it so far. It looks really odd when I fly it inverted!DJ VeghN74DVMesa, AZwww.imagedv.com/aircamper ----- Original Message -----
I'll snap some pics tomorrow and then post a link to them. That little RC GN-1has been getting LOTS of flight time over the past few months. I swapped themotor for one that uses less amps and produces more thrust. I'd estimate it hasabout 60 flights on it so far. It looks really odd when I fly it inverted!DJ VeghN74DVMesa, AZwww.imagedv.com/aircamper ----- Original Message -----
Re: Pietenpol-List: continental engines
Original Posted By: "Les Schubert"
Les,I have not done my homework on this YET but maybe the B is the nonadjustable mixture carb.Chris----- Original Message -----
Les,I have not done my homework on this YET but maybe the B is the nonadjustable mixture carb.Chris----- Original Message -----