How many are installing/switching to the Yamaha Apex Engine?

[Rik]

Seems that there are more and more guys putting an APEX in their KF's. I like the fact that they are far more economical than the Rotax 915is engines and probably more so than even the 912is engines too.

How many different variants are their though? Or is there only one APEX that is being used in the KF's?

[klamberth27]

Just one Apex - Years 2006-2010 is what is being utilized right now. I'm going to install one here shortly. I see this is an older thread. Did you end up doing it?

[Rik]

Seems that the Yamaha engines have taken off.

Ironic that no one was complaining about the cost of a Rotax or Continental engine until the Yamaha could be sourced for less than $3-4K plus a gear box for $2K and a harness and just like that everyone has a sube $10K aircraft engine and 150 hp minimum..


Oh, and an order for some ear plugs!

[rawheels]

Ironic that no one was complaining about the cost of a Rotax

Sarcasm? There has been non-stop complaining about $$$ for the last 30 years.

[Rik]

Sarcasm? There has been non-stop complaining about $$$ for the last 30 years.

Everyone has been defending the cost of a 1940’s design VW motor forever. Rotax uses the inflated prices to sell their engines as the other markets that rotax are in, they sell for a fraction of the prices they charge for the aircraft market.

Yamaha, with the mass production, high HP, low weight and cheap cost is a godsend for the experimental market

[bbs428]

Agreed new Rotax prices are hard to swallow and the Yamaha engine is a great alternative.
I have owned Yamaha motorcycles for years. Good product.
Some of us have sourced older, used low time 912UL engines and installed Zipper big bore kits. In my case, I have about 11K into an overhauled engine, new cam, HD case mod, gearbox overhaul This includes a new SR-106 luga prop, 2" extension and spinner. Mine was run test bench and the carb's were adjusted before it was shipped back to me. Granted I'll make 110hp vs 150hp and to be fair, if I had to install fuel injection, I would have to pony up another 5k. For me, I was more comfortable with a Rotax up front.
Time will tell if the Apex engine will be more desirable or not. Not a lot of high time Apex builds out there to compare. Based on price and performance, the Yamaha is a hard combination to beat.

[efwd]

Are we comparing compatible configurations? Even when considering the lower cost Rotax's that you might find on machines like SXS sand rails and snowmobiles I don't think these are even close to the aircraft versions. The additional redundancies of the aircraft versions are not inexpensive and have considerable value IMHO. Having said that, I have been watching YouTubes of the Highlander with the Yamaha in it. Awesome.:cool:

[Rik]

The thing that has been engrained into our minds with aircraft engines is that "it's a small margin, expensive engine" which is totally BS. I called LyCon in Fresno last week and inquired about what they charge to refreshen an experimental engine 0200. $18,500.00 and then I stated, "that's new cylinders, pistons, valves and cam?" NO. If you want new that's another xxxxxxxx... All the parts to rebuild an 0200 are less than 5k, that's cylinders, pistons, cam and valves, so they want 18,500.00 to re ring an 0200 and do a valve job.

Now who is going to make a post to defend this pricing??? If you do, you are brain washed.

With the Yamaha, in all honesty, they are throw away engines. Once you "aircraftinize" one, you merely transfer the parts onto the next one and go again.

Downside is the noise of a 10,000 rpm engine but they make mufflers for a reason and if the muffler eats some HP, so be it as 140 hp is still more than enough to get these planes going and enjoying. Steve Henry said in cruize they do not eat a lot more fuel but at FFT (Full ****ing Throttle) they do as there's more HP to feed.

Reliability, well we can see that Edge is trying to capitalize on the cheap engine and doing a paint job and an intake change and then adding a $30K price tag so that the consumer actually believes that they have made a difference as we all know that something that cost more is worth more because it cost more. Consumerism 101.

Steve Henry ran his to Oskosh and back as well as other events. I believe he trailered the plane to TX this year but that's due to logistics I believe the video said as he had two planes.

Point is that a supped up 300 hp version can fly across the states then it's probably ok for your day adventures too.

[jrevens]

There’s the small matter of an engine being designed, manufactured and marketed specifically as an “aircraft” engine, and then the huge additional expense to protect against liability lawsuits in today’s world. Insurance companies may look at your use of a non-aircraft engine in your homebuilt and not be real comfortable with that also. Anger at the lawyers and the legal system might be more reasonable than targeting a company that saw a need and spent many, many years and a fortune, I’m sure, developing and improving an engine specifically to meet a need, and now sells more “airplane” engines than all of the other manufacturers combined. More power to true “experimenters”, but without Rotax, our experimental aircraft world would not be what it is today.

[bbs428]

"The thing that has been engrained into our minds with aircraft engines is that "it's a small margin, expensive engine" which is totally BS. I called LyCon in Fresno last week and inquired about what they charge to refreshen an experimental engine 0200. $18,500.00 and then I stated, "that's new cylinders, pistons, valves and cam?" NO. If you want new that's another xxxxxxxx... All the parts to rebuild an 0200 are less than 5k, that's cylinders, pistons, cam and valves, so they want 18,500.00 to re ring an 0200 and do a valve job."

I totally agree. Certified aircraft, engines and anything else pertaining to it is big $$ and we all know why. "Liability."

"There’s the small matter of an engine being designed, manufactured and marketed specifically as an “aircraft” engine, and then the huge additional expense to protect against liability lawsuits in today’s world. Insurance companies may look at your use of a non-aircraft engine in your homebuilt and not be real comfortable with that also."

Exactly John. Well said.

Everyone has their own comfort zone. I don't think their is any wrong way or right way to go. For me, I couldn't afford a low time certified engine ( to heavy for me imho) or a new 912is/915is AND G3X avionics. Something had to give...

[Rik]

Here comes the defenders with that "insurance, layers and liability" argument.

Tell us, when is the last time you have seen any of those three amigo's come into effect with your personal aircraft life, much less your "Experimental Aircraft Experiences"

There are no guarantee's with an Aircraft engine in the first place. There certainly aren't any guarantee's in the experimental market place either so bringing those three into the equation is just the habit from the brain washing days of certified aircraft.

Certainly, you can use a certified engine in an experimental aircraft, you just have to write a larger check is all. There is no data to support that every certified engine will last longer than every non certified engine out there. However, some owners are willing to trade X amount of hours for X+ amounts of $ if needed. Remember, most pilots non Part 135, are cheap SOB's and in proving so, we see everything from a Rotax, Lycoming, Continental, Subaru, VW, Yamaha, Suzuki, Mazda, to a Chevrolet being installed into these planes in order to fit the budget of the builder/owner.

If the Yamaha will last only 1,000 hrs vs 1,500 for certified and only cost 4k vs 20+K then it's a no brainer as to what people will want to do with their buying power. Let's not forget that most certified engines are top'd at 1,000 hrs so really none of these are going to last for ever and none are ever going to be cheap enough in some's eyes.

[109JB]

Here comes the defenders with that "insurance, layers and liability" argument.

Tell us, when is the last time you have seen any of those three amigo's come into effect with your personal aircraft life, much less your "Experimental Aircraft Experiences"

It affects me right now. Many of the aircraft insurance companies will not insure an airplane that has a converted engine. My current ride is a Sonerai with a converted VW engine and my broker told me that many of the companies they deal with refused to quote because Sonerais are typically VW powered. Even the quotes that were received had several that stated emphatically that an airplane with a converted engine could not be covered. Here is what one quote, that I still happen to have, that said in the notes section of the quote: "This is an experimental aircraft. To bind this quote the make and model of the installed engine must be documented to us and approved by the underwriter. Aircraft equipped with automobile engines and two-stroke engines are not acceptable."

The situation was similar when I had my 582 powered Kitfox, the 2-stroke was a deal killer for many of the quotes I got and i had to go with a company that charged about 50% more than what a 912 powered Kitfox would cost.

Did either of these instances it stop me? No, of course not, but it did in fact affect me in the wallet and is in turn still affecting me and my "Experimental Aircraft Experience".

[Rik]

Understand.

I didn't want to write on and on and on but at one time, Rotax were seen as inferior to the normalcy of aircraft engines. Now they are the gold standard and they charge accordingly.

Still today, there are pilots who wish nothing to do with a Rotax engine. Flip side if you can write the check, Rotax needs roughly $55K for an installed 915iS (requires a certain panel constraints and a constant speed propeller which add $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$)

The VW, as I mentioned was an attempt to not pay for a certified engine. There has been a history both good and bad with these engines and thus the results from an insurance companies willingness to insure the aircraft, however, they are not the arguments that everyone uses for a certified engine as the argument is from a manufacture's POV in regards to the trios amigos. (Attorney, Insurance & Liability) Your argument is for hull insurance not engine insurance issue from a manufacturer's POV.

[jrevens]

Here comes the defenders with that "insurance, layers and liability" argument.

Tell us, when is the last time you have seen any of those three amigo's come into effect with your personal aircraft life, much less your "Experimental Aircraft Experiences" ....

There's no reason to make this personal, Rik. Speaking only for myself, I'm not trying to be a defender or apologist for anyone... simply stating some facts as I see them. The "three amigo's"? I'll tell you when - when you purchase pretty much anything, including aircraft parts and insurance. I don't know how long you've been in this game, but I started building an airplane in the mid 1970's and in 1981 I purchased a brand new 160 hp Lycoming O-320 for $5140. Based on inflation alone that very same engine would cost less than $15,000 today. They're going for over $34,000 now. What else do you attribute that to? If you think that lawyers and the legal system aren't a major factor I think you're deceiving yourself.

I was never a fan of Rotax engines (I've changed my mind in recent years), but I stand by what I said. They have had a huge positive influence on the type of flying we're involved with on this forum. People complain about the price, but don't forget that $34,000 + new Lycoming versus a $19,000 new Rotax, which is much more complicated and expensive to manufacture. I am also a huge fan of people who try new engines. I don't think anyone likes spending more money than they need to, and finding a new, more powerful and cheaper alternative should be applauded, and I do!

[Rik]

Please do not take this as personal. The trios amigos are the Insurance, the liability and the attorney.. Not anyone on here.

These are the three things that everyone uses in a defense to why certified engines cost what they cost and act like no one is making a profit. We are naïve if we think no one but the attorneys are making a profit here as we see manufacturers enter an leave markets chasing profits.

The buyers vote with their dollars and the market reacts to the voting of the buyers. Simply look at what Edge has done. They were made aware of a sub $4K engine that they said, hey we can put our foo foo magic on and charge the same as we get now. There was ZERO attorney involved in that money grab nor was there any insurance company in there as we all know there is no warranty and even Jan from Viking has proved that getting the turnip is harder than getting the blood from it.

I am not knocking any of the engines out there nor the buyers choices for choosing them. Rather I feel the pink elephant in the room is the aircraft engine and everyone is in denial about why aircrafts cost what they cost and the cost of flying is what it is.

Not to push another forum, but on Home Built Aircraft forum, the decision to use an Audi Diesel engine on the experimental aircraft "Raptor" has been so vigorously bashed because the builder decided not to spend $100K on a certified engine for his aircraft and wants to sell his product with an Audi V6 Turbo Diesel instead as it is an economical and easily sourced engine for builders.

A certified aircraft that is selling for let's say $50K with an engine that is at 2/3rds TBO is only worth $50K even after the owner spends another $40K to rebuild the engine. So is the aircraft worth 10K or is the engine over priced????

It's time to have that talk about our addiction or our acceptance that aircraft engines are over priced.

[jiott]

What's the point of this repetitive foaming and ranting Rik? If you think you're going to convince many of us to install a cheaper conversion engine in our aircraft rather than a purpose designed aircraft engine your wasting your and our time. I may not like it but I will pay what I need to for the product I want and can afford. We are all able to make those choices without your help. By the way, I also applaud those who choose the conversion route even though its not for me.

[patrick.hvac]

Reliability, well we can see that Edge is trying to capitalize on the cheap engine and doing a paint job and an intake change and then adding a $30K price tag so that the consumer actually believes that they have made a difference as we all know that something that cost more is worth more because it cost more. Consumerism 101

Simply look at what Edge has done. They were made aware of a sub $4K engine that they said, hey we can put our foo foo magic on and charge the same as we get now. There was ZERO attorney involved in that money grab nor was there any insurance company in there as we all know there is no warranty and even Jan from Viking has proved that getting the turnip is harder than getting the blood from it.
.

That's twice you have dismissed Edge as snake oil sales. I think you need to take a look at the product they are providing before you slander the company. I am not speaking about the dollar amount because value is subjective but they are providing a well engineered product and their crate motors are not 'repainted foo foo magic' motors. That's a little unfair. Check out the 912STI twins on here or look at the build sheet for the EPEX.. Fully forged carillo internals and a bunch of custom gear.
You are entitled to your opinion of their work but your statements are simply untrue and misleading about the product.

You mention the Apex as being a sub-10k godsend. Most are installing FWF for a bit more than that.
Steve Henry has a realistic build list for the non-fabricator; https://www.wildwestaircraft.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/FWF-Pricing.pdf
There are also a few highlander examples just becoming airworthy that are not sub 10k. I can help you locate their contact information if you like.

The Apex is a great motor but it has its challenges and unknowns. Rotax is a great motor with a great reputation. You cannot compare a redundant FADEC engine to a carb dinosaur either. Yes they are expensive but 'too expensive' is a projection of your personal circumstance and really means 'too expensive, FOR ME'. There are clearly plenty of customers who will pay for the reputation the same way as there are buyers for a 500$ Gucci t-shirt. Everyone has to make decisions that best suit them. I personally can't afford an EPEX 300 or a 915is, that doesn't make it a **** product.

I have attached a handy spreadsheet that may help someone weigh the costs and benefits of an Apex system.
Cheers,
Pat



26394

[ken nougaret]

What's the point of this repetitive foaming and ranting Rik? If you think you're going to convince many of us to install a cheaper conversion engine in our aircraft rather than a purpose designed aircraft engine your wasting your and our time. I may not like it but I will pay what I need to for the product I want and can afford. We are all able to make those choices without your help. By the way, I also applaud those who choose the conversion route even though its not for me.
Well said Jim.

[Rik]

What's the point of this repetitive foaming and ranting Rik? If you think you're going to convince many of us to install a cheaper conversion engine in our aircraft rather than a purpose designed aircraft engine your wasting your and our time. I may not like it but I will pay what I need to for the product I want and can afford. We are all able to make those choices without your help. By the way, I also applaud those who choose the conversion route even though its not for me.

For those challenged to get the point it is often necessary for repetitiveness.

I have never presented to say that you need to do as I say, in fact I have stated that I respect whatever decision one makes but if you have a personal gripe because I hold an opinion that differs from your own, well that says something about yourself not me.

If if you do not like that I merely presented facts about the current situation in aviation, well I do not have an answer simply because I don’t care if you accept that there are alternatives to certified aircraft engines.

Good of luck upon you to be able to afford whatever decisions that you make.

[Rik]

B
That's twice you have dismissed Edge as snake oil sales. I think you need to take a look at the product they are providing before you slander the company. I am not speaking about the dollar amount because value is subjective but they are providing a well engineered product and their crate motors are not 'repainted foo foo magic' motors. That's a little unfair. Check out the 912STI twins on here or look at the build sheet for the EPEX.. Fully forged carillo internals and a bunch of custom gear.
You are entitled to your opinion of their work but your statements are simply untrue and misleading about the product.

You mention the Apex as being a sub-10k godsend. Most are installing FWF for a bit more than that.
Steve Henry has a realistic build list for the non-fabricator; https://www.wildwestaircraft.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/FWF-Pricing.pdf
There are also a few highlander examples just becoming airworthy that are not sub 10k. I can help you locate their contact information if you like.

The Apex is a great motor but it has its challenges and unknowns. Rotax is a great motor with a great reputation. You cannot compare a redundant FADEC engine to a carb dinosaur either. Yes they are expensive but 'too expensive' is a projection of your personal circumstance and really means 'too expensive, FOR ME'. There are clearly plenty of customers who will pay for the reputation the same way as there are buyers for a 500$ Gucci t-shirt. Everyone has to make decisions that best suit them. I personally can't afford an EPEX 300 or a 915is, that doesn't make it a **** product.

I have attached a handy spreadsheet that may help someone weigh the costs and benefits of an Apex system.
Cheers,
Pat



26394


Slander and snake oil. Or am I paraphrasing here?

Nice chart, however, it might be better to list the cost for the HP as we know the 912 is between 80 and 1?? Hp and the rotax starts at 150 hp stock and upwards from there.

As to that premium, well it seems that a lot of home builders figured they can take that profit and keep it within their own pockets as there are many people doing it alone. Nothing against Apex, but the $12.5 you listed on top of the shipping and customs issues that come along with the acquisition seems excessive for the current bottom of the market engine.

There is a buyer at every level, however it is a bell shaped curve and the premise behind the Apex as well as most non certified engines is lower cost not a boutique higher cost.

[alexM]

I think this has been an interesting discussion with valid points from all. I don't know Rik and can't speak for his intentions but I don't think he was trying to make anyone mad. A few observations from a random idiot:

I've been around Yamaha products my entire adult life. My first motorcycle was an RD400, a two stroke street bike that was obsolete and hard to find by the time I owned one. That bike was shockingly fast period, let alone for being a 400cc bike. I also owned two generations of Ford SHO Taurus (Tauri?), a second generation 3.0 V6 and third generation 3.4 V8. The 3.0 was insane and over delivered in every category, including being bullet proof. The latter was a Cosworth block/crank and pure Yamaha above the head gaskets. The shockingly fast description applied to both of those vehicles too. Years of reading motorcycle magazines and seeing multi brand "shoot outs" it was common to see a comparison of 750cc bikes, and there was Yamaha with its 700cc offering. To assume it was the slow bike of the crowd would be a mistake often repeated. In short, they know what they're doing. I never owned an R1 but they are pretty much the final word in fast bikes, and the Apex engine shares a lot of design with the R1 motor.

$18k to freshen a non-certified O-200 does seem excessive. I have to assume it still includes crankcase work, line bore, all new bearings, crank inspections and some fancy paint (the least important part). I can't defend the overhaul quote other than to say they will probably stand behind their work, and while an O-200 is anything but modern it is a very dependable motor. Not half bad as an ice maker either, am I right?

Looking at the table presented I have to wonder why one would order a new 912 if they are going with the Zipper big bore. You have tear it at least part way down to install the kit and your warranty vaporizes when the Zipper kit is installed (my reading, not verified). If 80/100 hp isn't enough then I would look for a decent used engine and do the upgrade. And (also from my brief reading), the big bore kit won't get you to 150hp unless you also split the case and do some crank work, add a turbo, etc. So it seems the $19k (rounded up) for a 912 in a crate isn't the smartest place to start.

Oh, yes. Junk yard motors. If you're going it on your own would you really pull a dirty engine out of a 10+ year old snow machine (or car) and fly behind it just because you heard it run once? I saw the reference to the Audi turbo diesel in the Raptor. Lets just say that Peter gets trashed for a whole lot of reasons, one of which is ignoring the advice of Audi engineers who developed that engine and would like to see him succeed.
Like the Yamaha engine, I have no question the Audi diesel is strong enough to fly behind (er, in front of). If Peter's plane was not 1000 lbs overweight and he accepted help from the right people his program would be a lot further along.
About 18 months ago I was driving a rented, nearly brand new SUV when some drugged up ladies in a small car crossed the centerline and hit us head on. The impact destroyed the 5k+ pound SUV. Full air bag deployment, we're lucky to be alive. That engine is no doubt available as a low mile, perfectly good engine. No way in h*** I would fly behind that thing without holding every piece in my hands first. Low mile cars don't find their way to a wrecking yard because someone didn't like the paint.

It is my understanding that Edge Performance and other companies like Aeromomentum build engines by hand, and do not sell junk yard motors. They have a reputation to build/uphold and they are entitled to a profit. I don't see the beef there. They put a lot of time into engineering the motor mount, cooling/fuel systems and keeping the gooey stuff inside - and it's harder than it seems.

[Dave S]

Alex,

Quote "........an O-200 is anything but modern it is a very dependable motor. Not half bad as an ice maker either, am I right?......."

Are you right???...lemme see.......that last small continental I flew behind apparently had a moisture detector as it could fine two molecules of H2O within a 5 nautical mile radius, put it in the carb and make an ice cube.:eek: