Actual time to build SS-7

[49clipper]

Of those who have completed or near completion on an Super Seven, how long to build with quick build wings for an experienced builder. I have built two aircraft and rebuilt 8 others. Looking for real world hours.
Jim

[neville]

I have 80 hrs on my SS7 with 912iS. It took me 1 year and 1 month to build. I had purchased the wing pre build and the factory fabricated misc
parts. I am retired and averaged 10 hr. per day 6 days a week.

[AirFox]

My build took 1 year and 4 months while working a full time job. I think that I could have finished in a year if I had ordered the FWF, Engine, and Prop earlier. I estimate between 1000 and 1200 hours build time. I did have the quick build wings with the Laker Leading Edge Kit. I was a first time builder without much experience building stuff. I had a great time building the plane, but flying has been much more fun. My Kitfox has been worth all the work and money that went into it!!!!

[49clipper]

great info, thanks. I am looking for my last plane to build and realize I don't want to spend 4 yrs or more on it, likw the RV and Acro Sport builds. I am trying to narrow it down from Rans -7, Kitfox -7, or the Bearhawk LSA. the bearhawk is the hardest build of the three by far, but quite an airplane. Speed at cruise matters to me and at least the Kitfox has more speed than most of the others of its type. I also think its the strongest of the tube spar type wings. Not sure why but it seems to be. I wondered what the 'prefab kit' referred to. A year would be great. Unfortunetly, I have a C-85-12 I rebuilt and did not use on my last build. Its a stroker with 100hp, but i realise the Rotax is probably a better matched engine. Hate not use it.

I am retired so work time is not a factor, just total time to build.
Jim

[tommg13780]

I have a model 4 speedster that came as quick build equivalent. I'm at 1000 hours spread over 35 months. I've had several breaks where months go by and no productive time applied to the project. It's all painted, engine functioning (912) and essentially ready for A/W inspection. Paperwork was submitted to the local DAR and waiting for an appointment.
Tom Parkhurst
N37TP

[49clipper]

So, it looks like a guy on the go can do it in about a thousand hours.
One other thing, what is the Laker Leading Edge?
Jim

[AirFox]

The LLEdge is a fiberglass cover over 20% of the leading edge of the wing. Makes the leading edge look good also supposed to add performance. I've never done side by side comparisons on the performance advantages. I was told it decreases the stall speed and increases the cruise speed. I would install the LLE kit again if I was to repeat the build.

http://www.teamkitfox.com/Forums/album.php?albumid=298&pictureid=3591

This link is a picture of my LLE on my wing.

Scott
8047

[Brandon Petersen]

Probably due to the extruded I-beam insert. Adds a lot in a critical area.


I also think its the strongest of the tube spar type wings. Not sure why but it seems to be.

[herman pahls]

It took me a year and 2 weeks to build a Model 2-582.
It took a minute to write a check for a Model 4-912ULS.
The 912ULS is the perfect all around engine for my 700# Kitfox on 29" ABW's.
The only problem with the 912 that I have had is that when the starter fails you are stuck until you remove the engine to replace the starter.
I just told a friend I wished a 100HP C-85 could be made light enough to compete with the weight of a 912.
I would consider flying without a starter, charging system, wood prop and lightweight ignition, if the C-85's all around performance came close to that of the 100 HP Rotax.
I saw Frank Knapp's LiL Cub fly at Oshkosh.
I believe it weighs less than my Kitfox and it sure lands short.
It probably will not cruise at 110-115 mph (even with a different prop) .
There are several 0-200 Kitfox's flying and they may weigh in the 900# range.
How light could your C-85 be made ready to fly?
You need to be the first on your block to try the C-85 out in a Kitfox.
Herman

[Wheels]

I didn't build it but I did have a good mechanic once. He cut an escape hatch in the firewall for my starter on the Model IV 1200 with the 912. Its still fire "proof" and I can remove the starter in about an hour with a screwdriver and a Leatherman.

[49clipper]

My Stroker C-85 weighed in at 200# w/carb &w/o exh.(and thats with Bendix mags which are heavier than Slicks). I put a lightweight B&C starter (7#) on it also. I am with you, if you have a problem out in the boonies or away from home, you cannot hand prop it, or easily repair it. I would consider the O-233 Lyc even though it would bring the EW up to about 878 according to John Mc. He mentioned this morning to me, the Lyc worked out fine, but was just about 80-90# heavier.

[kitfoxnick]

I was told that you can't hand prop a 912. To me it was the biggest drawback to the engine, and I always believed it to be the case.

I landed on a gravel bar one day, and saw a buddy flying over turned on the master to talk him into coming down. Went for a little hike came back to the plane. Guess what somebody left the master on. Dead battery I figured it can't hurt to try hand propping it. The sucker started right up. Since then I've it done it two other times. It starts as easy as a c85 does. Made a little piece that holds the choke out for doing it cold. Now that I know this I'm more careful pulling the prop through.

After typing this I searched youtube and found a video of someone hand propping a Rotax 912. This guy has a two blade mine is a three blade.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JUBrHYsh4E

[vetdrem]

I have hand propped my 912UL, too. I also fly a Taylorcraft with an A-65 which has to be hand propped every time, so when my Kitfox wouldn't start one day, I didn't have a second thought about spinning it to life. Reading the manual later I found out that I couldn't do that.

I admit the T-craft is much easier, and propping the kitfox is scary but it can be done.

Louie

[Danh]

The hand propping is a question i had always wondered, I was also under the impression it couldn't be done, this is great news. What about the injected 912? Less likely?,

[kmach]

From discussions over the last few years on hand propping, it is my understanding that a 912 ul 80 hp engine is possible to hand prop, the higher compression 912 uls is not, I would think the SI would be the same .

[Av8r3400]

With enough force on the prop I see no reason the ULS can not be hand propped like a UL. It will just take a stronger pull-through to overcome the higher compression. All you need is 200 crank RPM to get the ignitions to fire.

The IS motor, being fuel injected, requires electricity to run the pumps to pressurize the fuel rails so hand propping probably won't have any need unless the starter motor has failed.