Corvair conversion engines

"Cal Vanize" wrote

Good points all.

The point that stood out most for me was the part about the crank from the
engine that William built for his own demo 601. From the article: "This
engine represents a standard installation, albeit one that was flown at
its limits by Gus"... "showed stress fractures on both sides of the area
in question." at 200 hours. "no nitride"
\
Yes, that paragraph does seem to run contrary to the rest of the _long_
website's information. So what gives, others in the know?
--
Jim in NC

Morgans wrote:

"Cal Vanize" wrote

Good points all.

\
Yes, that paragraph does seem to run contrary to the rest of the _long_
website's information. So what gives, others in the know?

Or could it be that it's just taken a few years to rack up 200 hours?

I didn't catch a time span reference on any of the example engines.
But I thought it has been years?

Richard Lamb wrote:
Morgans wrote:


"Cal Vanize" wrote

Good points all.

\

Yes, that paragraph does seem to run contrary to the rest of the
_long_ website's information. So what gives, others in the know?


Or could it be that it's just taken a few years to rack up 200 hours?

I didn't catch a time span reference on any of the example engines.
But I thought it has been years?

First flight of William's 601 was 13 May 2004. That engine had 200 hours.

The article implies that all the engines were torn down at about the
same time. It must have been fairly recently because one of the engines
was a 2005 engine with 71 hours. The previous "crank update" was 15 August.

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 09:05:51 GMT, Richard Lamb
wrote:

Morgans wrote:

"Cal Vanize" wrote

Good points all.

\
Yes, that paragraph does seem to run contrary to the rest of the _long_
website's information. So what gives, others in the know?

Or could it be that it's just taken a few years to rack up 200 hours?

I didn't catch a time span reference on any of the example engines.
But I thought it has been years?

About one year of flying - MAX.

Morgans wrote:

"Cal Vanize" wrote

Good points all.

The point that stood out most for me was the part about the crank from
the engine that William built for his own demo 601. From the article:
"This engine represents a standard installation, albeit one that was
flown at its limits by Gus"... "showed stress fractures on both sides
of the area in question." at 200 hours. "no nitride"

\
Yes, that paragraph does seem to run contrary to the rest of the _long_
website's information. So what gives, others in the know?

My read was that he was updating his policy based on new data. He even
mentioned one of his customers reminding him of a sentence in his
conversion manual saying something like "I reserve the right to get
smarter."

"Morgans" wrote in
:


"Cal Vanize" wrote

Good points all.

The point that stood out most for me was the part about the crank
from the engine that William built for his own demo 601. From the
article: "This engine represents a standard installation, albeit one
that was flown at its limits by Gus"... "showed stress fractures on
both sides of the area in question." at 200 hours. "no nitride"
\
Yes, that paragraph does seem to run contrary to the rest of the
_long_ website's information. So what gives, others in the know?

His recomendation of nitriding every corvair crank is NEW based on this
data and the several KR crank issues in the recent past. In other words,
nitriding was considered optional until the last week or so....

--
-- ET :-)

"A common mistake people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools."---- Douglas Adams