VW?

Leon McAtee wrote:
(Don) wrote in message . com...

As previously said, there's no need to use

VW now that low cost used Rotax and Jabiru are available.
Don


I don't know where your finding all of these cheap motors. Sure isn't
in TAP or on Barnstormers (or I'm just not looking in the right place)
and with the euro exchange rate the Rotax isn't such a good buy now.
The OZ dollar is starting to gain also.

As for VW reliability they get a bad reputation because the majority
of the ones that quit could be expected to quit. The VW is NOT a
simple motor to work on. You have to know it's quirks. Back when I
was build'n em for a living I lost a bunch of work to the "guy down
the road" because he would do a rebuild for $600 when I charged $800
"for the same thing". I generally had to charge $900, or more, to
redo the other guys work - if the customer had any money left 6 months
later.

Point is there are just too many "experts" that have built a 1/2 dozen
or so buggy motors that think they can build a reliable VW aero motor.
They generally can't. After you've built a few hundred and lived
with them through their life span then you begin to get an idea of
what works and what doesn't. Then you get to start all over with that
knowledge base and adapt it to the unique demands of pulln' or pushn'
a plane.

So don't disparage the VW just because some are junk. Just like the
airframe they power, if properly built and operated within a
reasonable envelope they are just as reliable as any
powerplant..................in my opinion.

=====================================
Leon McAtee

In my case it was built by Revmaster which had been building VW engines for years.

Jerry

about 60someting Sonexes build until today, about half of them fly behind a
2180cc VW
-loef (www.loeff.de)

"Jerry Springer" wrote in message
link.net...
VW let me down twice, would not fly behind one again even if it meant
I had to give up flying forever, which I almost did flying behind a VW.
When I first got into homebuilt aircraft there were many airplanes using
VW's, you do not see many anymore for a reson. YMMV

Jerry

Don wrote:
Many homebuilts on my field with engines mostly Rotax and Jabiru. Two
with VW. There were three VW but one had engine failure after takeoff
and was destroyed. A visiting aircraft with VW had engine failure on
downwind and was destroyed. As previously said, there's no need to use
VW now that low cost used Rotax and Jabiru are available.
Don

RU ok wrote in message

Out of 100 planes on my home field, there is but one VW example.
After the third engine failure, it and the KR-2 it is attached to
appear destined to remain earthbound forever more.


Barnyard BOb -

According to Sonex completions at
http://www.sonex-ltd.com/completions.html only 28% are VW.
NTSB reports that Jack Lockamy's VW powered Sonex had 'loss of engine
power' after take-off. "... crank/sleeve/hub arrangement cut loose"
reported elsewhere.
Don

"G. A. Loeffler" wrote in message ...
about 60someting Sonexes build until today, about half of them fly behind a
2180cc VW
-loef (www.loeff.de)

As for VW reliability they get a bad reputation because the majority
of the ones that quit could be expected to quit. The VW is NOT a
simple motor to work on. You have to know it's quirks. Back when I
was build'n em for a living I lost a bunch of work to the "guy down
the road" because he would do a rebuild for $600 when I charged $800
"for the same thing". I generally had to charge $900, or more, to
redo the other guys work - if the customer had any money left 6 months
later.

Point is there are just too many "experts" that have built a 1/2 dozen
or so buggy motors that think they can build a reliable VW aero motor.
They generally can't. After you've built a few hundred and lived
with them through their life span then you begin to get an idea of
what works and what doesn't. Then you get to start all over with that
knowledge base and adapt it to the unique demands of pulln' or pushn'
a plane.

Point is....
Auto rebuilds don't count for squat. Until you have built a couple
hundred engines specifically and SUCCESSFULLY for aircraft,
you are just flapping your gums, too.

So don't disparage the VW just because some are junk. Just like the
airframe they power, if properly built and operated within a
reasonable envelope they are just as reliable as any
powerplant..................in my opinion.

Leon McAtee
"Puttn' my money where my mouth is"
Quickie with 1/2 VW %55 finished

Put your money and your ass where your mouth is,
but screwing with half a VW is a 'half fast' attempt at flight.

For the rest of you contemplating VW power....
check and see if you can find an insurance company that
will write hull coverage for you and at what price. What you
discover will tell you what VW power is worth to the savvy folks
that pay out losses and survive the builder/pilots that don't.

Barnyard BOb -- over 50 years of successful flight

RU ok wrote ...

Out of 100 planes on my home field, there is but one VW example.
After the third engine failure, it and the KR-2 it is attached to
appear destined to remain earthbound forever more.


Probably a good idea. If the fellow can't do it right, he shouldn't
be flying it. Therein lies the crux of the problem with VW's and
other auto-conversions: If LyCons were being built by 100's of
backyard mechanics and self-styled experts randomly using a huge base
of aftermarket dune buggy parts from God knows where, following
do-it-yourself self published tracts, applying racing engine
methodologies and being abused by asking two and three times the
performance they are capable of, you'd likely see similar incidences
of failure. Those who are successful with VW conversions are
generally those who put as much effort into building their engines
right as LyCon puts into theirs, and then operate the engine within
it's abilities.

Daniel

RU ok wrote in message . ..
Then you get to start all over with that
knowledge base and adapt it to the unique demands of pulln' or pushn'
a plane.

Point is....
Auto rebuilds don't count for squat. Until you have built a couple
hundred engines specifically and SUCCESSFULLY for aircraft,
you are just flapping your gums, too.

I believe that - is - essentially what I was saying. But I disagree
with the assertion that any prior experience is "worth squat". That
prior experience lets one avoid at least some of the basic mistakes.
If you or anyone else thinks in some way that I am claiming to be an
aero VW expert I'm sorry to have mislead. I am NOT an aero VW expert
- yet (my never be). But I do have enough VW experience to see the
problems with some of the VW conversions. Many of these problems are
basic, known and understood by those with some experience, and lead to
unreliability of VW engines, even when installed in ground bound
applications.

That prior experience allows me to see the limitations of the VW
motor. It as a result of that prior experience that I generally
recommend to others that they NOT consider the VW as an aircraft
powerplant because most often expectations are unrealistically high.
To dismiss the motor completely due the the shortcomings of a bunch of
amateur converters is short sighted and closed minded.
=================
Leon McAtee
Atkins trimmed ass leaves less for the 1/2 VW to pull G

To dismiss the motor completely due the the shortcomings of a bunch of
amateur converters is short sighted and closed minded.
Leon McAtee
Atkins trimmed ass leaves less for the 1/2 VW to pull G
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

OK...
For the sake of discussion, consider the amateurs eliminated.

Who is left with a reputation of converting and selling hundreds
of VW engines that yield PROVEN equal reliability, performance
at a significantly lower overall LONG TERM cost than suitably
rebuilt aircraft engines... like the 65 hp Continental, for example?

Nobody, if you 'axe' me.

As far as anyone using 1/2 of a VW goes...
They are not even in the business of flying.
TURD comes to mind.....

Trainee
Under
Rapid
Development.

Barnyard BOb -

RU ok wrote:
As for VW reliability they get a bad reputation because the majority
of the ones that quit could be expected to quit. The VW is NOT a
simple motor to work on. You have to know it's quirks. Back when I
was build'n em for a living I lost a bunch of work to the "guy down
the road" because he would do a rebuild for $600 when I charged $800
"for the same thing". I generally had to charge $900, or more, to
redo the other guys work - if the customer had any money left 6 months
later.

Point is there are just too many "experts" that have built a 1/2 dozen
or so buggy motors that think they can build a reliable VW aero motor.
They generally can't. After you've built a few hundred and lived
with them through their life span then you begin to get an idea of
what works and what doesn't. Then you get to start all over with that
knowledge base and adapt it to the unique demands of pulln' or pushn'
a plane.


Point is....
Auto rebuilds don't count for squat. Until you have built a couple
hundred engines specifically and SUCCESSFULLY for aircraft,
you are just flapping your gums, too.


So don't disparage the VW just because some are junk. Just like the
airframe they power, if properly built and operated within a
reasonable envelope they are just as reliable as any
powerplant..................in my opinion.


Leon McAtee
"Puttn' my money where my mouth is"
Quickie with 1/2 VW %55 finished


Put your money and your ass where your mouth is,
but screwing with half a VW is a 'half fast' attempt at flight.

For the rest of you contemplating VW power....
check and see if you can find an insurance company that
will write hull coverage for you and at what price. What you
discover will tell you what VW power is worth to the savvy folks
that pay out losses and survive the builder/pilots that don't.

Barnyard BOb -- over 50 years of successful flight



Bob
Notice in the NTSB prilimanary reports for this last weekend that out of
the four experimental forced landings three of them were auto engines. :-)

Jerry(crashed behind a VW and lived to tell about it twice)Springer

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 03:31:54 GMT, Jerry Springer
wrote:

RU ok wrote:
As for VW reliability they get a bad reputation because the majority
of the ones that quit could be expected to quit. The VW is NOT a
simple motor to work on. You have to know it's quirks. Back when I
was build'n em for a living I lost a bunch of work to the "guy down
the road" because he would do a rebuild for $600 when I charged $800
"for the same thing". I generally had to charge $900, or more, to
redo the other guys work - if the customer had any money left 6 months
later.

Point is there are just too many "experts" that have built a 1/2 dozen
or so buggy motors that think they can build a reliable VW aero motor.
They generally can't. After you've built a few hundred and lived
with them through their life span then you begin to get an idea of
what works and what doesn't. Then you get to start all over with that
knowledge base and adapt it to the unique demands of pulln' or pushn'
a plane.


Point is....
Auto rebuilds don't count for squat. Until you have built a couple
hundred engines specifically and SUCCESSFULLY for aircraft,
you are just flapping your gums, too.


So don't disparage the VW just because some are junk. Just like the
airframe they power, if properly built and operated within a
reasonable envelope they are just as reliable as any
powerplant..................in my opinion.


Leon McAtee
"Puttn' my money where my mouth is"
Quickie with 1/2 VW %55 finished


Put your money and your ass where your mouth is,
but screwing with half a VW is a 'half fast' attempt at flight.

For the rest of you contemplating VW power....
check and see if you can find an insurance company that
will write hull coverage for you and at what price. What you
discover will tell you what VW power is worth to the savvy folks
that pay out losses and survive the builder/pilots that don't.

Barnyard BOb -- over 50 years of successful flight



Bob
Notice in the NTSB prilimanary reports for this last weekend that out of
the four experimental forced landings three of them were auto engines. :-)

Jerry(crashed behind a VW and lived to tell about it twice)Springer
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

We who are considered 'messengers of doom' concerning auto
conversions are not likely to sway those who herald them as equal
or better than certified aircraft engines. However, if I can be the
cause for just one swayable soul to understand that they are laying
their life and their passengers on the line in a high risk venture, it
is easily worth any backlash that comes my way.

IMHO, anyone who puts a 'happy face' on auto engines for
airplane use should be held liable for such cavalier behavior.
Converting is a terribly, terribly serious and complex endeavor
that few can measure up to and successfully master.

The usual words heard for considering an auto conversion are...
"I can't afford a real airplane engine."

With rare exception... few can truly afford otherwise.


Barnyard BOb - over 50 years of successful flight

I respect all of your opinions but does anyone have actual numbers on
engines (VW, Corvair, Rotax, Lycoming,...)? I'm looking for the number in
use, hours flown, number of accidents, etc.


"RU ok" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 03:31:54 GMT, Jerry Springer
wrote:

RU ok wrote:
As for VW reliability they get a bad reputation because the majority
of the ones that quit could be expected to quit. The VW is NOT a
simple motor to work on. You have to know it's quirks. Back when I
was build'n em for a living I lost a bunch of work to the "guy down
the road" because he would do a rebuild for $600 when I charged $800
"for the same thing". I generally had to charge $900, or more, to
redo the other guys work - if the customer had any money left 6 months
later.

Point is there are just too many "experts" that have built a 1/2 dozen
or so buggy motors that think they can build a reliable VW aero motor.
They generally can't. After you've built a few hundred and lived
with them through their life span then you begin to get an idea of
what works and what doesn't. Then you get to start all over with that
knowledge base and adapt it to the unique demands of pulln' or pushn'
a plane.


Point is....
Auto rebuilds don't count for squat. Until you have built a couple
hundred engines specifically and SUCCESSFULLY for aircraft,
you are just flapping your gums, too.


So don't disparage the VW just because some are junk. Just like the
airframe they power, if properly built and operated within a
reasonable envelope they are just as reliable as any
powerplant..................in my opinion.


Leon McAtee
"Puttn' my money where my mouth is"
Quickie with 1/2 VW %55 finished


Put your money and your ass where your mouth is,
but screwing with half a VW is a 'half fast' attempt at flight.

For the rest of you contemplating VW power....
check and see if you can find an insurance company that
will write hull coverage for you and at what price. What you
discover will tell you what VW power is worth to the savvy folks
that pay out losses and survive the builder/pilots that don't.

Barnyard BOb -- over 50 years of successful flight



Bob
Notice in the NTSB prilimanary reports for this last weekend that out of
the four experimental forced landings three of them were auto engines.
:-)

Jerry(crashed behind a VW and lived to tell about it twice)Springer
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

We who are considered 'messengers of doom' concerning auto
conversions are not likely to sway those who herald them as equal
or better than certified aircraft engines. However, if I can be the
cause for just one swayable soul to understand that they are laying
their life and their passengers on the line in a high risk venture, it
is easily worth any backlash that comes my way.

IMHO, anyone who puts a 'happy face' on auto engines for
airplane use should be held liable for such cavalier behavior.
Converting is a terribly, terribly serious and complex endeavor
that few can measure up to and successfully master.

The usual words heard for considering an auto conversion are...
"I can't afford a real airplane engine."

With rare exception... few can truly afford otherwise.


Barnyard BOb - over 50 years of successful flight