DR-1 (Sands): Builders Group - Page 92

Fritz Kempf · 17 January 2006, 05:41 PM

If any one is wondering how we were able to get this far in two days, just look how fast Jim is moving in that picture.

....LOL

Ed

Jim Bruton · 17 January 2006, 05:44 PM

lol....at first, i didn't even see me in that picture!!

vongrube · 18 January 2006, 08:34 AM

Ok guys..heads up!
Why are you considering engines in the 10-20K range when you can find a proven high time Lycoming for sale under 5K ?
Granted, you will have to rebuild portions of these engines, but if you find one within the crankshaft run-out limits, and under 2000 TBO, you can still maybe get a few years of flying out of it before a major rebuild!
Remember, the average private pilot flies only 100 hours a year. That means that an engine with 300 hours left on it has another three years of flying time! Plenty of time to save up the bucks for that major rebuild.
Unless you have money to burn...consider this option. Also..remember that TBO is a manufacturer suggested time for overhaul. With care, and routine maintenence, I have seen Lycomings go 3000 hours, with the occasional cylinder or accessory replacement. In addition, remember that manufacturer limits are dictated by liability risks, which are far below the actual life of these engines. While the general aviation population flying aircraft in standard catagory are restricted by these enforced limits, along with strict regulation, we, as builders of experimental aircraft are not!
I have had tremendous luck using this logic. Last year I bought a high time Lycoming within limits, and sold it for four times what I paid for it!
Check out the following site for used engines.
http://www.whiteindustries.com/

vongrube · 18 January 2006, 08:39 AM

Jim..
Betcha can't waite to get a seat mounted in that thing!
Then its gonna be hours and hours of sitting there quietly making "vroom-vroom" sounds.....right up until a family member or friend walks up on you!
Uh....spoken from...experience?
Hehehe!

Jim Bruton · 18 January 2006, 09:28 AM

VonGrube,

Believe me, I wrestle all the time with which way to go on the engine. I want to go with a radial, but it's finances that will probably dictate which way I go at that moment of decision. And yes, the vroom noises will soon be forthcoming- but then my family already gave up on me long ago....building an archaic design of aircraft is just one of the many symptoms to them.

vongrube · 18 January 2006, 10:32 AM

Jim,
I think we would all like a radial, but the cost of one that is acceptable is almost prohibitive. The Warner is the obvious choice. But 10-12K for a run-out! Whew..no thanks.
The W670 radial Continental issue is a controvesial one. I went round and round on that one with Ron Sands. I know a few people who have mountend the W670s and have had few complaints..but it IS a big engine for such a small aircraft, plus its bigger than the 42" diameter of the Dr1 cowling.
I also personally wouldn't put one of them screaming 3000 rpm types under my cowling even with a reduction drive on it. So there goes the whole Rotec idea.
That pretty much leaves me with an opposed air-cooled design like a Lycoming or Continental. Ron made some really nice auxilary plans for the Lycoming installation, and I'm going to stick with it.
My bet would be that you will eventually go the same route once you have had some more time to mull this over. Ive had ten years.

Machinbird · 19 January 2006, 08:43 AM

The high RPM engines don't necessarily have to scream. Why not run approximately half of the exhaust ports (evenly distributed in the firing sequence) into a muffler or even a turbo and drop the pitch of the exhaust noise in half. With the odd number of cylinders that you have on almost all radial engines, you would get a little bit of a gallop to the beat, sort of like a T-28B/C but it probably wouldn't detract. You would have to consider the effects of the different exhaust layout on the engine. With enough imbalance in exhaust pressure, you could induce torsional vibration problems.

vongrube · 19 January 2006, 09:11 AM

Machinbird,
Interesting concept. One would however have to deal with uneven backpressure, and maybe a host of other hidden problems..but still..an intersting concept.
However..the "sceaming" I was refering to had more to to with the actual RPM that these engines run at...rather than the sound they make (which in my opinion is obnoxious).
Frankly..high rpm engines stress me out! Two cyle / high rpm engines were never traditionally intended for aircraft to begin with (and we're not discussing turbines right now) They were built for lawn mowers, weed-eaters,, and tiny motorcycles!
I don't know anyone who totally digs the sound of one of these screaming little banshees as it flies overhead. Most everyone I know tolerates the sound, and secretly wishes they could find a small affortable four cycle radial to stick into their homebuilt!
Lets face it.....most everyone loves the sound and power of a sweet running radial! Who can turn their back on that wonderful chug-a-lug sound of mega-size pistons doing their thang?
Its the sound of power..the sound a Harley makes while idling at a stop sign (a Harley V-twin is nothing more than two cylinders of a small radial engine).
It raises the hair on your arms and back of your neck......
Its pure horsepower! Chug-a-lug-a-lug-alug-alug-a-lug....
Or....you can listen to..EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Your choice!!
Sorry...WAY too much caffiene this morning!

Brad · 19 January 2006, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vongrube

Machinbird,
Interesting concept. One would however have to deal with uneven backpressure, and maybe a host of other hidden problems..but still..an intersting concept.
However..the "sceaming" I was refering to had more to to with the actual RPM that these engines run at...rather than the sound they make (which in my opinion is obnoxious).
Frankly..high rpm engines stress me out! Two cyle / high rpm engines were never traditionally intended for aircraft to begin with (and we're not discussing turbines right now) They were built for lawn mowers, weed-eaters,, and tiny motorcycles!
I don't know anyone who totally digs the sound of one of these screaming little banshees as it flies overhead. Most everyone I know tolerates the sound, and secretly wishes they could find a small affortable four cycle radial to stick into their homebuilt!
Lets face it.....most everyone loves the sound and power of a sweet running radial! Who can turn their back on that wonderful chug-a-lug sound of mega-size pistons doing their thang?
Its the sound of power..the sound a Harley makes while idling at a stop sign (a Harley V-twin is nothing more than two cylinders of a small radial engine).
It raises the hair on your arms and back of your neck......
Its pure horsepower! Chug-a-lug-a-lug-alug-alug-a-lug....
Or....you can listen to..EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Your choice!!
Sorry...WAY too much caffiene this morning!

Radials SOUND pretty... but honestly, a 2-stroke (YUCK!) sounds more like a rotary than anything else y'all have mentioned!

baldeagle · 19 January 2006, 03:15 PM

C'mon, a LeRhone has a nice throaty mellow sound, and a Gnome has a distinct bark, neither one like a 2 stroke. A Warner or a 220 Continental sound more like it, with their rpm range.