Josh, did you get your airmaster and prop used, too? What prop are you going with?
Josh, did you get your airmaster and prop used, too? What prop are you going with?
I would call Debra and talk to her a bit. She can readily clarify what comes in the current kits.
- Gary
S7 SuperSport Tri-gear
w/Rotax 912, Oratex, Dynon
Well that is a question that I don't have the answer for. I am not certain where he sources his engines, and any further pursuit would require that.
ALSO... I haven't bought anything and discussion is free.
A Couple of points though:
Cost- For what its worth this endeavor is far from free and everyone has their own comfort level.
Honda- I have a lot of faith in Honda engines. They can squeeze 240 reliable HP out of 1L and hammer the living crap out them with a lean mapping on a race track for 60 miles and they simply don't come apart.
Failure-I think that most power plants if not all have experienced an in flight failure rare or not. I am not sure I want to trust my life with a 50+ year old crankshaft from a Certified A/C Engine or Corvair conversion either. (yet) I guess what I am saying is that there is risk in everything.
Viking-I know a person that owns a Viking and have see it run in person. There were no shenanigans with the sale. The person ordered a $14,000 engine, received it, received support for it, and it makes a sewing machine jealous because it runs so smooth. The workmanship on it looks top notch. Will it come apart in flight? - I have no idea.
This is also a pretty small arena and bad new always travels fast. I feel that he probably realizes what his short comings were. I also feel that he and a lot of others have moved past that in the Spirit of powering Aircraft. - But this is merely worthless speculation on my part.
In conclusion, for sure the 912 is gold standard, but I feel it is also wise to at least consider others.
I love the experimental side of experimental aviation and I applaud those who go down that road.
Know this with regard to auto engines vs. airplane in airplanes: There is increased risk. There is almost always more work. You might even spend more on the conversion. (many have)
I read on a forum something I believe to be true: If you want to tinker, an auto conversion is good. If you want to fly, get an airplane engine.
I hope the Viking proves the best engine ever and we are all flying one some day. If that will be the case somebody has to go for it. There some people unhappy with the previous Eggenfelner iterations, though. Do a lot of research on Jans so that you can be familiar with his business practices.
http://www.meyette.us/engine.htm
http://www.meyette.us/RV10crash.htm This is a good read on almost everything not to do. Mostly not Eggenfelner related.
Last edited by N981MS; 01-09-2018 at 06:34 AM.
Maxwell Duke
Kitfox S6 IO-240 Built it (Flying since 2003)
Maule M7-235C Sold it (liked it though)
RV-10 IO-540 Bought it
Zenith CH-750 Built with 7 friends (DAR Vic Syracuse)
Hi Justin,
I do agreee with most of what you wrote - this is experimental and it is certainly worth exploring options. I have no doubt Honda engines are great auto engines. I am suggesting a thorough investigation and that you be comfortable with your choices.
I did extensive due diligence into this "manufacturer" in 2014. I had email interaction with the owner that was less than positive.
There is no doubt these are used Honda engines though.
Back then I was told everything went through a thorugh 100 point inspection.
Back then his website showed a HP curve straight out of the Honda website.
Back then his website showed several conficting and apples to oranges comparisons between aircraft performance.
Via email I asked for a copy of the 100 point inspection list and a copy of THEIR dyno printout - I was told and I quote:
"We have nothing to "prove
We don't want to give you any "evidence"
I was told that on 3 different occasions.
Also asked if I could have a tour of his entire facility and was told:
"You have no right to any company details."
And: "You would never be a potential buyer."
And subsequently I was removed and banned from his forum and all of my questions werre removed as well.
I have no skin in this game, nor do I have an axe to grind, but just want you to know if you read what is written on his site or his forums - it is controlled and edited to his satisfaction. Anything that he doesn't want to answer is either ignored or removed and/or banned - so it is pretty one sided.
He has since revised most of his website to say very little. Still won't provide any of HIS dyno numbers, inspection procedures, etc.
I know of one recent customer who went through a warped head (from the "factory") - engine replaced and subsequently 3 linkage failures between the flywheel and gearbox- the last one totalling the aircraft. You can read that here: https://sites.google.com/site/viking...tengineissues/
How does a warped head get past a 100 point inspection?
Since 2014, he is now using the Honda used factory engines with the factory catalytic converter in place. His website states 100LL can be used, on his forum he states: "There are no negative effects of using 100LL with a direct injected engine. You can use it any time you would like."
Well maybe? I don't care to find out. We have all pretty much seen what 100LL can do to an engine that is water cooled running at lower temperatures than air cooled - valves, seats, pistons, heads, etc. How do they hold up? What about the potential for reduced airflow and efficiency through the cat over time? I don't know and I suspect he doesn't either because the customer is not only the test pilot, the customers are the R&D department.
To sum up, in one of his final comments to me, he stated "We just like to fly, build hours and have fun." And: "550 hours on the latest test aircraft, and building." (in October of 2014) And: "We just fly a lot to see what could brake."
If that works for you - great, didn't work for me.
Have fun with your build and choices.
YMMV, Greg
Last edited by Danzer1; 01-09-2018 at 04:05 PM. Reason: spelling