Jump to content

Big bore 914 (165HP Edge) • Kitfox install.


Recommended Posts

Yes Farri, but you are not a high tech geek, looking for the greatest technical udate at whatever cost. Just a practical bloke. Have a great Christmas and may you make even more people enjoy flying.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Yenn said:

Yes Farri, but you are not a high tech geek, looking for the greatest technical udate at whatever cost. Just a practical bloke. Have a great Christmas and may you make even more people enjoy flying.

I hope you got, I was kidding... I will continue to try and make even more people enjoy flying, Drifter flying, that is! for as long as I can! I have two ladies coming to fly with me, for their first time, tomorrow morning...Merry Christmas to you also.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

What reason could there be to spoil a beautiful Kitfox with 145hp? They fly perfectly well on 65 (rather small) Rotax ponies via 582.

Edited by Methusala
speller
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Methusala said:

What reason could there be to spoil a beautiful Kitfox with 145hp? They fly perfectly well on 65 (rather small) Rotax ponies via 582.

want to climb faster, cruise faster and takeoff shorter perhaps? just a wild stab in the dark.... 🙄

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, kgwilson said:

Well the Drifter still pulls the women (or is it the pilot). Whatever it's more than money that talks.

Sorry for the thread drift!...This morning!!!1893977047_3lovelyladies(Large).thumb.JPG.50bd3e5bf137741c3617580ccc238a8f.JPGBack to topic.

I can tell you all for a fact, that it takes more than money!!!....Franco.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What top speed will that big engine give the Kitfox. I doubt that it would be anywhere near what you would expect from the increased percentage of HP.

Climb will definitely be better, but there is only so much that you need, unless you just want to show off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It'd also take some extra horses to move those fat tyres around.

These are high performance, back country, flying folks. 

The Rag and tube faith is a broad church ... as John Howard might once have said.

Edited by Garfly
Link to post
Share on other sites

Over powered and underbrained. You'd have to modify a Kitfox a lot or it'd lose the wings. They are nice as they are. (especially the GAZELLE). Probably the easiest plane to fly ever made. Nev

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Gazelle is ridiculously easy to fly. The first ever landing i ever did in one was a simulated engine out, which involved a turn back to a strip I had just overflown, during a flight review. That was the only time I ever flew one, but they are nice.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, facthunter said:

Over powered and underbrained. You'd have to modify a Kitfox a lot or it'd lose the wings. They are nice as they are. (especially the GAZELLE). Probably the easiest plane to fly ever made. Nev

 

oh yes, of course he is underbrained... silly me *facepalm*

 

far be it from anyone to innovate and try to improve/alter or dare I say it Experiment on Experimental aircraft!

 

and, this is a kitfox 7 SS (design gross 1550 lbs, 700ish kg Link), and as I'm sure you are aware the Skyfox Gazelle (CA-25 variant 1150 lbs, 520kg Link (according to wikipedia, i'm sure i'm be soundly reprimanded if i've got it wrong)) is a similar but quite different.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not the way I mean it at all.  We have a lot of aging Kitfoxes and Gazelle's here that would need some care and diligence to make safe anyhow. I believe in self builds and making them strong enough for the job they perform. Our rules are much more restrictive than the USA. where nearly anything can be done.. Good for them.  Nev

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not highly competitive by nature and so the view I have of aviation is as a gentle and absorbing experience. My shortsightedness in failing to recognise the other, more competitive faction of faster, higher and more extreme forms of activity.

I had access to a simple Mk 1 which I enjoyed for its good manners and charm.

  • Winner 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Speed was everything for me in the early days. I HAD to hot up everything, even lawnmowers..  Now I place more emphasis on smoothness, reliability and efficiency. Over powering a plane helps the take off, then the usually heavier motor becomes a weight burden as you reach a speed where flutter and drag and stresses of turbulence become limiting and you have less range due the   extra fuel required..  COST is a major determinant also. Development is a good thing as some lessons learned can be applied widely, but realistically , it's not always the case. You can prove a lot of things without actually going to all the Pain and cost of building it. .Nev

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the impression that reliability was the most important thing in aircraft engine applications. When you start "hotting things up", then you're setting out on a test to see how long it runs, before it breaks.

 

"Hotting up" aircraft engines is at complete cross-purposes to most pilots aim of staying aloft with 100% engine reliability.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, facthunter said:

Speed was everything for me in the early days.

Hey Nev, don't get me wrong! I had the opportunity to do a days "driver education" courtesy of Lake Constanz Porsche Club and my brother's 944S at Hochenheim ring in 1991. Won in my class and had a blast. Speed in automobiles is addictive. In aircraft it is beyond my thin wallet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy reckons the big-bore mod's a simpler way to get more power for high DA ops than the turbo option. 

He also says the 912 runs a lot smoother after having been Edged.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

An interesting vid even if it doesn't really answer its own question.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can have a good stab at the answer. 1. The aircraft will turn around the engine, instead of the other way around. 2. The engine will rip itself free from the engine mountings (I can recall reading about a Junkers Tri-motor JU-52 in PNG in the 1930's, where the centre engine tore itself free from its mountings on takeoff! That would certainly get your attention!)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...