Pietenpol-List: Engines and Mounts

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Thu Feb 08, 2007 11:28 pm

Original Posted By: "john smoyer"
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Engines and Mounts I don't think Continental ever built a 'C65' engine. It was an A65, then an A75, then a C85 engine, which is close to the O-200. Recently, there was an article in Sport Aviation about the history of Continental engines. Throughout the history of the Pietenpol, it is notable to have had a wider variety of engines than any other airframe in aviation history. However,there is None that I know of that has had success with a V W engine. In my opinion, the A65 engine is a near perfect match for the Pietenpol Airframe. Asfar as PSRU's (Prop Speed Reduction Units), they add weight, complexity, expense and maintenance...and more notable, they reduce reliability and dependability. You simply can't disregard a trend analyst. An engine mount would almost certainly have to be custom built for any particular homebuilt airplane, or at least modified in some way if you would purchase one. Another huge reason to build your own mount, is that it is a reasonable method to attain a safe Center of Gravity location. Shad is correctin that my engine mount is long, in order to maintain a safe C of G in any loading configuration. I used the next heavier wall thickness tubing than in theplans, and I built it with down thrust, and right thrust. And Gus, I think you should certainly purchase a set of plans from the Pietenpol Family. There is a link to their web site on my home page.Chuck GantzerWichita, KSNX770CGhttp://nx770cg.com/________________________________________________________________________________Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 07:27:37 -0500

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Fri Feb 09, 2007 7:01 am

Original Posted By: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Chuck,I have a Continental A-80 in my GN-1. It is an A-65 case with some company mods.Mike KingGN-177MKPonder, Texas ----- Original Message -----

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Fri Feb 09, 2007 7:14 am

Original Posted By: Gene Beenenga

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Fri Feb 09, 2007 7:58 am

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
John,I solved this problem in mine with a well calibrated whack to one of the hornswith a 2 lb sledge hammer. It shifted the associated cable by a 1/4" or so andthe rubbing magically went away.Jack PhillipsNX899JP-----Original Message-----

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Fri Feb 09, 2007 7:49 pm

Original Posted By: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Engines and MountsPieters, Does anyone know if it would be possible to bore out a 65 case to fit 85 cylinders. New ones are much cheaper than 65s. Ken in cold Iowa________________________________________________________________________________

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:43 pm

Original Posted By: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Rubbing Aileron cablesIn a message dated 2/9/2007 6:29:48 AM Central Standard Time, jpsmoyer(at)verizon.net writes:Isthe rubbing going to cause unacceptable wear problems in the cables? Is itcommon to other Piet's with this arrangement?John,The rubbing is unacceptable. As mentioned in other posts, the best solution is to offset the legs of the horns on the aileron torque tube, however, you can also offset the holes in the base of the instrument area as somewhat of a fairlead to keep them separated. And remember, there is no actual tension on any of the control cables on the Pietenpol...just take all the slack out of thecables.Chuck G.NX770CG________________________________________________________________________________

Brodhead Pietenpol Association