Gentreau Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 ....... rip the heads off at 300hrs and you will sleep better. .... In that case you might as well be flying behind a Rotax 582. That's supposed to be overhauled every 300hrs, and yet there are loads of them running way past that figure. Sure you'll be climbing a bit slower, but you'll spend a lot less money and have a greater payload. . 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggles5128 Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Quote..biggles5128.... spend a little insurance money and rip the heads off at 300hrs and you will sleep better. Just as well they are no where near as costly to do that as say a Rotax.Simply wouldn't need to do that with a 912 at 300 hours , and most likely wouldn't need to till 2000 hrs TBO !.......................................................Maj... I agree Maj, however Rotax is not an option from Jabiru if you want a cert aircraft and one of the best airframes around.... Maybe my choice may have been different if I knew what I know now, however do not have the coin to change to another aircraft with a different powerplant so I am trying to get the best I can out of what I have. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seb7701 Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Interestingly , I am still noticing regular Jabiru installations occurring in the USA and UK according to my occasional readings in kit planes and other overseas mags, in a variety of aircraft. I think the 3300 is the one though. Whilst we obviously have the largest proportion of installations in Oz, I would love to hear whether there are any issues over in these other locations or whether perhaps things such as cooler climates have proven to aid running conditions somewhat. Just curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultralights Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 thats one thing that gets under my skin with Jabiru, giving their engines a temperature range, to be operated in, and using the ambient air temp variations as excuses as to why their engines fail, my 912 has been operated by me, at temps as low as -5 in the snowy mountains, to 44 deg out west in summer, only change to operation was the amount of tape covering my oil cooler to maintain oil temps in the preferred range. 46 deg at Bankstown a week or so ago, plenty of Lycoming, continental, rotax powere aircraft in the air, no issues.. Jabiru on the other hand... could you image Boeing building a certified aircraft, then telling carriers, oh, just make sure you dont operate this in temps above 38 degC. and expecting to sell airplanes.. and if something does fail, then blaming the operator for operating their product in 38.1 deg temps.. part of, or possibly, all of the problem is the manufacturers arrogance in face of these issues. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Funny you should mention O/S, I was in Salt lake City after going for a ride in Motionaero's Tornado 2 S, which has a 3300 pushing it along. The conversation turns to the Jab and they mention that they picked up the engine brand new but sat in it's shipping crate for 5 years. They ran it for 20 hours before the rings gave out and they needed to do a rebuild on it. Going OK for the last 400 hours. The Tornado with a 3300 was scary, too much power for such a light airframe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Let me predict that within 6 to 8 months time, anybody with a question regarding Jab's historical engine shortcomings are all gonna smack themselves in the forehead with a brickie's hammer and exclaim "never mind the factory, why didn't I see that!" It's a proven airframe, all of the engine variations have the potential to be equally as good as the fuse and soon hopefully, there won't be a surfeit of low-priced Jab's on the market. I'd bare my ass in front of the GPO at high noon on any Friday if this doesn't happen. (On reflection, perhaps I should start arranging a Canadian re-entry visa just in case?). cheers 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cscotthendry Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Let me start by saying that I have no direct experience with Jab engines. That said, When I had a fist full of dollars that I was considering laying down on an aircraft, the engine options was a significant factor in my decision. I di the same reading you have done and there was this lingering and ongoing question mark over Jab engines. Not so for the Rotax. There just seems to be too much uncertainty with the Jab engines for my liking. I wasn't prepared to bet my life on one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gareth lacey Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 we chose the UL 130 hp over ALL the other engines ! cheers gareth:plane: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Perry Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 TurboplanerHi is was not wanting to sound offensive with the term Jab Bashing at all but from my perspective that's what I see in some posts. And seeing those adds tells me that I need to be educated in the subject Gentreau I think a little bit of emotive argument as you say isn't always a bad thing either. Isn't the reason most of us that try to get in the air at great cost is passion for the flying. Seeing someone defend there opinion with a little emotion is a good thing. Maj Thanks for the reply and I do try to read back through the threads when I can but I always seem to get stuck on the humour pages. It is a forum after all this site seems to get a heap of new members so rehashing topics that have been discussed before can't be that much of a sin can it ? Hiya Marck, and welcome to the forum. Listen mate,. . . have a really good read,. . . . you say you have,, " A little" but get stuck on the jokey pages, well., , , ,when I was your age I didn't take much notice of old farts either. But you obviously have enough nouse to ask questions in the first place, so go ahead and read ALL OF THE POSTS. . . look at the thread "ANOTHER THROUGH BOLT GONE" for one, and you will find a multitude of opinions and actual experiences in there, along with opposite ones from other operators. I'm located in the UK, and the Jabiru produces nothing but praise here, but there are not really that many owners, compared with Australia, to produce a reasonably sound "control group" for sensible statistics here, so . . . logically, you should form your own opinion based upon the experiences of those people who have A LOT of experience with useage of the type. Have a good read,. . . . think. . . take your time. . . . .digest, . . . only then are you going to get the feel for what you really want to buy / fly.. . . at your age mate, you've got time on your side. Cheers Phil ( old fart ) 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skeptic36 Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 There just seems to be too much uncertainty with the Jab engines for my liking. I wasn't prepared to bet my life on one. Scott, are you saying that you seriously believe that you life depends on the Rotax continuing to operate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seb7701 Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 I googled 'jabiru engine problems' and nearly fell over when I saw what exists. There is some suggestion that Rotax 4 strokes initiated with some stumbling blocks, which makes a couple of Jab issues expected, just not the way Jab appears to respond to these hiccups (based on what I have read). The frustration on the situation remains that if Jab received their issues positively, I would have thought that they would truly be a real market force given their potential and price. Many a time I have thought of he sweetness of a 2200 on the back of a Drifter! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 seb if you look on barnstormers you will see that tornados with 2200s just don't sell 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 thats one thing that gets under my skin with Jabiru, giving their engines a temperature range, to be operated in, 38.1 deg temps... Been through this before ...... they dont! Its a limit on the aircraft to do with all composites. Its up to you to install and fly in such a way that keeps engine in limits, just like all aircraft and cars for that matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Allow me if I may to notate some of the engine issue I have encounted in 4 years of operating 4 jabs in a flying school. * partial engine failure ( causing damage) . Hrs 48. Factory explination, spark plugs gapped wrong. * dropped oil ring. Hrs 220.explination, operated at too low an rpm for too long. * total engine failure, hrs, 68 since factory top end. Explanation, through bolt broken, mod not performed.( see next ) * head bolt sheared off. Hrs, 55 since mandatory nut change. Explination, new stud used with 12 point nut not fitted.( not required or even known about) * total engine failure , hrs 30 since factory circlip mod. Valve ingested by engine. Factory explanation , poor Maintanence. ( note 30 hrs since factory mod.) * total engine failure. Hrs, 69 since factory rebuild. Intake manifold loose. Explanation, pre flight inspection no good. * engine loss of power. Cylinders out of round . factory explanation, some of them are like that. * total electrical failure, cct breakers tripped, inspection revealed wiring looms not crimped AT ALL in factory acft. Explanation, must have been a Friday arvo job. That is some of the problems I've had. :) 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultralights Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 38 deg C temp limit is for composite airframes? What a load of ....... so, what happens to the 787, 747,767,737, Airbus A330,A320,A340,A380 aircraft, all the gliders, Grob aircraft, and countless other airframes that sit parked in hangars and operate in environs far hotter than 38 deg C? what about all those composite engine cowls wrapped around countless Lycoming, continental, rotax, Rolls Royce GE and Pratt and whitney turbine engines? dont forgedt the internal core cowls that sit at temps well above 100 deg for trips across the pacific every day? all those composite F18s sitting and flying around the deserts of the middle east? by they way, my specialty is Composite airframe structures..... that limit is just a Jabiru excuse. their airframes can handle well over 38 deg C, if they used the cheapest lowest rated epoxy resins, then the maximum will be 70 deg C. unless of course, Jabiru dont use Milspec or aviation grade epoxy? hmmmmm 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 To be fair, I should also talk about the total issues we have had in rotax powerd school acft. * exhaust cracked. Hrs, 1300 * exhaust cracked . Hrs 750 * low oil temperature. Faulty guage * high oil pressIre, faulty guage * engine not starting. Flat battery * rough running at low rpm. Carbies not tuned. rotax's fail too, I just haven't had one yet.;) 2 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooperplace Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 we chose the UL 130 hp over ALL the other engines !cheers gareth:plane: and what's it like? 130hp sounds nice, but what about fuel consumption and reliability? thanks 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 There's been heaps of stuff on this subject and most of us don't want to put up the same old opinions all the time. I'm fairly neutral to cautious. The six is a very smooth engine. If your engine doesn't overheat and the mixtures are even and rich enough you improve your chances of a good run a lot. The compressions MUST be monitored and don't keep running with even ONE down. This applies to all engines but certainly a bit more critical for this one, Valves and guides have to be in good order. Parts are cheap. If you can and are serious, I would suggest that you talk to people who have operated them. Motz is not happy with them so we know what he thinks and Diesel10 has had a few problems too. In their shoes I would be a bit upset too. I correspond privately to owners. ( They ring ME usually) and I have some ideas, but they don't get put here, and different owners have different abilities. IF you want to" fit and forget" a motor, go for something else. or possibly don't fly, except with airlines.. I would go to a lot of trouble to ensure the quality of the fuel that is used is good. Nev 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damkia Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 and what's it like? 130hp sounds nice, but what about fuel consumption and reliability?thanks There are a few of us interested in this engine. Would it be possible to start another thread about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 "Fit and forget" in aviation doesn't work either. It needs to be "fit - service and inspect as required - fly safely"...............Maj... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nunans Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 There's a saying in the transport industry, "There's no bad trucks, just bad mechanics and bad drivers" I think it could be loosely translated into aviation except some engines might need better mechanics and pilots to keep them running than other engines. My very limited personal experience is Jab-0 failures, Rotax-1 failure, but the rotax had no fuel in the selected tank so I don't think that counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cscotthendry Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 Scott, are you saying that you seriously believe that you life depends on the Rotax continuing to operate? Nope. What I'm saying is that I think the odds of an engine failure with the Rotax are less than the odds with a Jab. Nice job at twisting my words though. You're not a politician or a business exec are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nunans Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 Scott, are you saying that you seriously believe that you life depends on the Rotax continuing to operate? Doesn't the life of any single engine pilot who ever ventures over non suitabe landing areas depend upon the engine continuing to operate? Surely thats 90% of pilots at one time or another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skeptic36 Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 Doesn't the life of any single engine pilot who ever ventures over non suitabe landing areas depend upon the engine continuing to operate? Surely thats 90% of pilots at one time or another. For sure. But if you're flying responsibly then the actual percentage of time that you spend over tiger country should be minimal, then if you have an engine out, say, every 300 hrs the chances that you can glide to a safe landing have to be pretty good I would have thought. Scott, I was not trying to twist your words and I don't believe I did. What I am trying to get across is that we should not be continually pushing the idea that engine failure means death, it is insinuated regularly on these forums, sometimes flipantly , sometimes seriously. An inexperienced pilot, which most of us are, has enough on their plate in the almost inevitable event of engine failure and shouldn't have the added pressure of thinking this is the end. I know panic would be hard for me to resist if I thought that were the case. So apologies Scott if you thought I was trying to be abrasive or a smart axx, that was not my intention, just trying to make a point. regards Bill 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetjr Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 38 deg C temp limit is for composite airframes? What a load of ....... so, what happens to the 787, 747,767,737, Airbus A330,A320,A340,A380 aircraft, all the gliders, Grob aircraft, and countless other airframes that sit parked in hangars and operate in environs far hotter than 38 deg C? what about all those composite engine cowls wrapped around countless Lycoming, continental, rotax, Rolls Royce GE and Pratt and whitney turbine engines? dont forgedt the internal core cowls that sit at temps well above 100 deg for trips across the pacific every day? all those composite F18s sitting and flying around the deserts of the middle east?by they way, my specialty is Composite airframe structures..... that limit is just a Jabiru excuse. their airframes can handle well over 38 deg C, if they used the cheapest lowest rated epoxy resins, then the maximum will be 70 deg C unless of course, Jabiru dont use Milspec or aviation grade epoxy? hmmmmm who said anything about other aircraft? i was talking about the materials used by Jabiru. Its something to do with conditions when made and only really effects new airframes but has to be a limit published apparantly. The point I made is the limit has nothing to do with the engine which is the point of the post one point most agree is the airframe is sound and tough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now