Pietenpol-List: Looking for a Continental?

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:14 am

Original Posted By: "Don Emch"
Let us all stop and acknowledge that if Bernard Pietenpol listened to people whosaid you shouldn't fly car engines, every single person on this list would bebuilding some other design. Had he not innovated with the Corvair in 1960, andgone on to revitalize the design, it would have just been a historic foot note.I don't know how anyone can take a hard anti-auto engine stand, and stillclaim to respect the legacy of BHP. If you think that people who advocate autopower are misguided, I got news for you, you are building an airframe designedby the king of auto power, I am only his acolyte. It is simply not possibleto claim to understand and honor the legacy of BHP, and silmaltainiously thinkthat people who put car engine in planes are stupid.In 1993 I flew with Steve Wittman in his olds V-8 powered Tailwind, N37SW. In 2008my wife Grace flew The last original at Brodhead. Each of these planes hadmore than 800 hours on them, and they were both designed and built by men thatI uphold as the paragons of home building. (Sorry, but I don't think of TonyBingelis in that club.) If anyone built an exact replica of either plane, itwould fly the same hundreds of hours because Physics, chemistry and gravity don'tplay favorites, and if the plane is exactly the same, it will have the sametrack record. Read some of my thoughts below to understand why some homebuildersdon't have this kind of success.-----------------------------------------------Brian,I read your thoughts, and agree with many of your perspectives, but come to some different conclusions that you may find worth considering. Think about how this is true: http://flycorvair.net/2013/07/11/randy- ... 500-hours/ but your friends couldn't make auto engines work. I suggest the problem is in the people, not the metal.Saying anything about Tony Bingelis touches a nerve with people. But it isn't a simple case of 'his conservative approach works' for people. There are important things in my comments I don't want people to miss. Since 1988, things like running a hard aluminum line from your tank to the firewall is no longer considered safe. Read my story: http://flycorvair.net/2013/12/19/pieten ... d-cabanes/ and learn that getting burned over 45% of my body was likely preventable by switching to braided lines. I didn't invent that, Diamond Aircraft (right from your area) did. Ask Kevin Purtee about how I asked him to change this on his plane. Two of the same planes, same spin (I think Kevin's hit harder), different fuel line style 12 years apart. My plane burns, Kevin's does not. If Tony were alive today, he could change his mind, just like I did, but he isn't, and continuing to build planes with the hard lines he drew is not honoring his contribution to experimental aviation, it is simple unnecessary risk.That is one example, I have others. easy ones like ethanol in fuel was unknownin 1988, and it is practically unavoidable in non-100LL today. As a reasonableprecaution against availability and price of 100LL, I suggest people select materialsthroughout their fuel system that is ethanol tolerant. Not everythingin Tony's book is. Many smart people have made the case that A-65s are betteroff on auto fuel than 100LL, but I wouldn't try that with a 1988 era fuel system.Let me teach you something about some of the people who choose car engines: Some of them have two Achilles heels. they are cheap and they don't like following the guidance of experienced people. It doesn't matter what type of power plant a builder chooses if he has those two issues in his personality. Understand that car engines attract people with that mindset, and it is the mind set, not the engine itself that causes the problem. I openly discourage people with those perspectives from working with the Corvair, and truthfully I am ok if they quit aviation all together. Cheap and unwilling to learn are not qualities of successful aviators. Would you like to see the opposite? Look at these examples: http://flycorvair.net/2013/01/11/pieten ... red-piets/ Tom Brown has 1,500 on his Piet. It isn't dumb luck that did it, he has a different mindset that the people you mention.-----------------------------------------------------Mike, If Tony was your hero, I am sorry If I was not kind to him. As an engineer,builder and a pilot, if you want to do something to defend Tony's legacy, don'targue with me nor have blind allegiance to the book as if it were holy, Dosomething great, like rewrite the 1/3 of the book that needs correcting. Thatwould honor the man. You work for NASA. They have never been stagnant, theysuccessfully honor Grissom and all the others by constantly advancing. Why shouldn'twe do the same?Your comment "This list happens to be about building Pietenpols" is a good thought.Now if a guy built an exact replica of The Last Original, and put it rightnext to your plane, could we ask "Who built the real Pietenpol?" I say you bothdid, but I don't follow the logic of people that claim an A-65 is the 'correct'power plant. I think it is an excellent alternative engine for BHP's design,but in the case of the last original, BHP clearly had his choice of engines,and he picked Corvair. Bingelis's book argues to do just the reverse.So I agree the list is about building Pietenpols. Tony Bingelis didn't like autoengines and Bernard did, and when it comes to building Pietenpols, BHP's perspectivetrumps Bingelis's in my book. It doesn't mean we can't use some informationin Bingelis's books, but we also don't have to buy into, and repeat, hisnegative attitude on auto engines. Especially because none of Tony's opinionson car engines was based on personal experience, and 100% of Bernard's opinionswere. Let me point out that when people without personal experience repeatnegative stories about car engines, they are acting just like Bingelis did. Conversely,when people limit their comments on engines to things they know frompersonal experience in the Arena, they are acting just like Bernard Pietenpol.---------------------------------------------I used to call BHP 'Bernie" in my writing. I can tell you the exact minute I stoppedthis. I was speaking with Vi Kappler at Brodhead, in the MacDonald's intown. Listening to Vi, he was speaking of a man who was not an aviation legend,but a dear personal friend, who was gone. When Vi said the name 'Bernie', itsuddenly struck me as private, sacred and something that was not mine to usein Vi's presence. BHP, was my hero, but he was Vi's friend, and to use the familiarname in Vi's presence seemed very wrong. I stopped right there, and havewritten 'Bernard' ever since, because I never wanted to imply I was friends withthe man, especially not to anyone who really was.Although I never knew him, I have made great effort to know something about him. I have a little coffee can of soil from the runway at Cherry Grove I picked up in 2002 sitting on top of the refrigerator. Read this short piece to understand why: http://flycorvair.net/2013/01/12/cherry ... ry-part-2/. I have worked in experimental aviation nearly all of my adult life, I have worked on the same engine that Bernard did. I have known some of the great triumphs and also the tragic losses. I was not the man's friend, and I would not know his voice, but I will claim to understand many of his perspectives and values. As an auto engine guy I have far sharper understating of him than any writer who dissuades builders from engines Bernard loved, developed, advocated and shared with us. -ww.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Looking for a Continental?

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Wed Mar 19, 2014 6:19 am

Original Posted By: "Douwe Blumberg"
This appears to be a nice deal for someone looking for a Continental. I just sawit on Barnstormers, don't know anything about it...A-65-8F $1,750 NO TIREKICKERS Running well when removed for HP upgrade. withengine mount, mags, carb.Oil tanks nice! As removed Contact Call Ed or Amber,Owner - located Birmingham, AL USA Telephone: 205 578-2582 . 866 922 2672. Posted March 18, 2014 Show all Ads posted by this Advertiser Recommend ThisAd to a Friend Email Advertiser Save to Watchlist Report This Ad Don EmchNX899DERead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Wed Mar 19, 2014 9:04 am

Original Posted By: "tools"
Here's my $.02In my humble opinion and from my building experience, the Bingilis books arevaluable because to my knowledge, they are the only place where MOST of theinfo needed for a novice to build a plane is to be found in one place. Thetwo main sources of info I had at my disposal during my build was this listand those books. Sure I could search the web endlessly for different waysto swage a cable or make a fitting or drill a hole, but having all thatbasic knowledge in one place was a huge blessing.Sure some of it is dated, heck the guy was an early gen EAA builder and thebooks reflect both his personal experience and the era he wrote in. Theprocedures he wrote about were considered "standard" at the time and MOST ofwhat he wrote is still accurate and if followed, will produce an airworthyPietenpol. Maybe we need another Bingilis to write some new comprehensive books wherewe can go for one-stop info shopping using all the current technology.I say until someone does this, keep the books as the basic "go-to" manual.Douwe________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Bingilis books

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Wed Mar 19, 2014 10:15 am

Original Posted By: Steven Dortch
[quote="douweblumberg(at)earthlin"]...and MOST of what he wrote is still accurateand if followed, will produce an [MOSTLY] airworthy Pietenpol. Douwe > Is that what ya meant? I've got the books. Use them. Got a lot of other books too, use them also.You guys ever read how to rebuild the Chevy Turbohydramatic 350 transmission? The ending is FANTASTIC, never saw it coming... great read!Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 10:59:06 -0500Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: you don't need a static port or static line ona Pietenpol