Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

An archive of the Matronics Pietenpol Listserve.
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Steve Eldredge
If I were to decide on using a Corvair engine for my Piet, is there a limitation to the actual year Corvair that it has to be? I read that it was the 1960 model the Mr. Pietenpol used, but is that the ONLY year that would work? I have found at least 5 engines in good shape in various places, but they are not all 1960. Some are '64 some '62, and only a couple are '60.RichardWeb Developer, http://www.autoeurope.comHomepage: http://www.wrld.com/w3builder__________ ... __________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Wkoucky(at)aol.com
Sounds good. Where would I go about getting a copy of the PAS conversion manual?I found one guy who has 3 corvair engines he'd sell me for $150 for all. I dont know exactly what condition they are in, but assuming one running engine could be made from all 3, is this a good deal, or might there be some safety concerns about 'cheap' engines?Richard > I am using the PAS convrsion manual and they suggest late model corvairs. I> think they are all somewhat similar. The early models have a little less> power. 90Hp I think. The later are110Hp. Let me know how it goes. The> folks at PAS have replacement cams to lower peal Hp rpms and also cranks,> hubs.....> > William Koucky> Traverse City, MI> >> > there a > limitation to the actual year Corvair that it has to be? I read> that it was the 1960 model the Mr. Pietenpol used, but is that the> ONLY year that would work? I have found at least 5 engines in good> shape in various places, but they are not all 1960. Some are '64> some '62, and only a couple are '60.> > Richard >>> Web Developer, http://www.autoeurope.comHomepage: http://www.wrld.com/w3builder__________ ... __________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: rdecosta(at)autoeurope.com (Richard DeCosta)
>I am using the PAS convrsion manual and they suggest late model corvairs. Ithink they are all somewhat similar. The early models have a little lesspower. 90Hp I think. The later are110Hp. Let me know how it goes. Thefolks at PAS have replacement cams to lower peal Hp rpms and also cranks,hubs.....William KouckyTraverse City, MI________________________________________________________________________________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn)
I forgot to mention Virtual Vairs, the corvair mailing list. Great help!-William________________________________________________________________________________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: michael list
>The PAS Manual is $49 from William Wynne. He parted ways with PAS so it isnow called something else. The phone number I have is 904-761-4122. If thisdoesn't work let me know. You can tell what kind of engine you have by theblock number. I'll check my block to give you a better location as it ismost likely filled with dirt. The engines they use are 164ci. They alsohave a starter that is an option. Weight with starter is about 225lbs.William________________________________________________________________________________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: rdecosta(at)autoeurope.com (Richard DeCosta)
Richard DeCosta wrote:> > If I were to decide on using a Corvair engine for my Piet, is there a> limitation to the actual year Corvair that it has to be? I read that> it was the 1960 model the Mr. Pietenpol used, but is that the ONLY> year that would work? I have found at least 5 engines in good shape> in various places, but they are not all 1960. Some are '64 some '62,> and only a couple are '60.> > Richard> ----------------------------------------> Web Developer, http://www.autoeurope.com> Homepage: http://www.wrld.com/w3builderRichard, I see that you have already been pointed to William Wynne for theCorvair conversion manual. The engine looks beautiful in the colorpicture he provides in the info pack, and he removes the cooling fan(can be retained as an option) for forced air cooling. The Corvairconversion information from Don Pietenpol indicates that a 164 cubicinch engine (non-turbo) from 1964 on can be used and the cooling fan isretained. Lots of Corvair sites on the internet to turn to for support,and we are planning on using the Corvair on our project,too. Does anyone know if an engine from a manual or automatic transmissionis preferred, or does it matter?Mike List________________________________________________________________________________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Ken Hannan
Not to sound completely stupid, but I need it spelled out before I drive 300 miles and spend $150. Is 1964 (as stated below) the ONLY year I can use? If not, is there any written documentation that will tell me EXACTLY which engines I can use?Thanks much!Richard> conversion information from Don Pietenpol indicates that a 164 cubic> inch engine (non-turbo) from 1964 on can be used and the cooling fan is> retained. Lots of Corvair sites on the internet to turn to for support, Web Developer, http://www.autoeurope.comHomepage: http://www.wrld.com/w3builder__________ ... __________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Wkoucky(at)aol.com
I like to get mail for this group but getting the same mail 19 times in oneday is unnecessary in my books. Once is enough. >Richard DeCosta wrote:>> >> If I were to decide on using a Corvair engine for my Piet, is there a>> limitation to the actual year Corvair that it has to be? I read that>> it was the 1960 model the Mr. Pietenpol used, but is that the ONLY>> year that would work? I have found at least 5 engines in good shape>> in various places, but they are not all 1960. Some are '64 some '62,>> and only a couple are '60.>> >> Richard>> ---------------------------------------->> Web Developer, http://www.autoeurope.com>> Homepage: http://www.wrld.com/w3builder>Richard,> I see that you have already been pointed to William Wynne for the>Corvair conversion manual. The engine looks beautiful in the color>picture he provides in the info pack, and he removes the cooling fan>(can be retained as an option) for forced air cooling. The Corvair>conversion information from Don Pietenpol indicates that a 164 cubic>inch engine (non-turbo) from 1964 on can be used and the cooling fan is>retained. Lots of Corvair sites on the internet to turn to for support,>and we are planning on using the Corvair on our project,too.> Does anyone know if an engine from a manual or automatic transmission>is preferred, or does it matter?>>Mike List>>________________________________________________________________________________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Steve Eldredge
PAS recommends 1965-1969 110 hp engines. Top case has a 2 diget letter codebehind the oil filler tube. RD, RF, RH, RX and RK are the correct codes forthe above.william koucky________________________________________________________________________________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Brad Schultz
michael list wrote:> Richard DeCosta wrote:> >> > If I were to decide on using a Corvair engine for my Piet, is there a> > limitation to the actual year Corvair that it has to be? I read that> > it was the 1960 model the Mr. Pietenpol used, but is that the ONLY> > year that would work? I have found at least 5 engines in good shape> > in various places, but they are not all 1960. Some are '64 some '62,> > and only a couple are '60.> >> > Richard> > ----------------------------------------> > Web Developer, http://www.autoeurope.com> > Homepage: http://www.wrld.com/w3builder> Richard,> I see that you have already been pointed to William Wynne for the> Corvair conversion manual. The engine looks beautiful in the color> picture he provides in the info pack, and he removes the cooling fan> (can be retained as an option) for forced air cooling. The Corvair> conversion information from Don Pietenpol indicates that a 164 cubic> inch engine (non-turbo) from 1964 on can be used and the cooling fan is> retained. Lots of Corvair sites on the internet to turn to for support,> and we are planning on using the Corvair on our project,too.> Does anyone know if an engine from a manual or automatic transmission> is preferred, or does it matter?>> Mike ListWhat did you do I got 22 copys of the message?________________________________________________________________________________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Jere Reineberg
Atnd we are planning on using the Corvair on our project,too.> Does anyone know if an engine from a manual or automatic transmission>is preferred, or does it matter?>>If you use the manual transmission, you can use the 11/32 bolts that arementioned in Pietenpols conversion drawings with the prob hub converter inthe Pietenpol drawings. I don't know what type of bolt the automatictransmissions use. My source(at The Corvair Underground) told me that theywere totally different, and he did not stock the bolts necessary for theautomatic transmission. >The PAS manual recommends enlarging the flange threads to 3/8-24 to allowthe use of AN bolts. Clarks Corvair in Massachussetts has these pre-threadedflanges, according to PAS. BTW Vitalis Kapler(1033 Forest Hills Dr. SW, Rochester,MN 55902, makes theprop hub shown in the Piet drawings>________________________________________________________________________________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Ryan Stacy
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Ryan Stacy
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Doug Dever
Wow! Where's Vern located?On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 9:54 PM, KM Heide CPO/FAAOP wrote:Fellow Pieters,--I met up with an old time friend today for some Corvair talk. Vern is a retired GM Factory Corvair engineer and engine specialist for over 30 years! A walking Corvair guru!-Anyhow, here is what $125.00 bucks will get you! You should of heard it run! He has a barn full of parts! -KMHeide---- Ken Chambers512-796-1798=0A=0A=0A ________________________________________________________________________________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: 0-235 info

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: carson
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: 0-235 infoI have the c1b engine and have spoken to lycoming about other issues and found them very helpful. I would suggest you do the same. No sense going with questionable information when the experts are just a phone call away JohnSent via DROID on Verizon Wireless-----Original message-----
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Fuselage question

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: KM Heide CPO/FAAOP
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: 0-235 info

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Tim Willis
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "tdudley(at)umn.edu"
Has anyone seen or thought about the Turbo Corvair Engine, I had one that I usedin a swamp buggy, It had low compression cylinders , could use standard fueluntil I used the Turbo and had to use hi octane fuel to prevent knocking,Shesure cranked out HP.Pieti LowellRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "Gary Boothe"
KM,I'm in Alexandria, MN and would be interested in maybe meeting with both you andVern. I'm early in my build (started building ribs a week ago and have fivedone) but I'm interested in the Corvair engine. Let me know.TomRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Ken Chambers
Since I don't see a tree in the picture, or a rusty old F-100 up on cement blocksI think you are safe from the redneck label. Good luck at the Corvair College next week, I'm sure you will let us all know howthat turned out.--------Billy McCaskillUrbana, ILtail section almost done, starting on ribs soonRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 17:47:37 -0500Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Ryan Mueller
#yiv136870005 #yiv136870005yiv227279818 {word-wrap:break-word;background-color:#ffffff;}At all in for 8 k why not buy a used aircraft engine at around 800 to 1000 hours ? Following the advice of Tony B it makes good sense, unless you're in for a bit more adventure than safe reliability.=C2-=C2- Juss axinJohnSent via DROID on Verizon Wireless-----Original message-----
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: helspersew(at)aol.com
I have perceived some anti-Corvair bias on the list. Is this for real? I plan to use a Corvair engine in my Piet but if there is some REAL fault with the engine I need to know it now. Is the bias real or just done in jest? From watching William Wynne's videos I can't see anything that would cause the bias unless it's just jealousy.Chuck________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Charles Campbell
I think Chuck needs to watch the video that was procuced last Summer by John Hoffman. Anybody got the link?. -----Original Message-----
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

RE: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Here is the link, but it won't play on my computer anymore. I've had someproblems with my PC lately so maybe you can view this:http://gallery.me.com/johnnyskyrocket#100026Jack PhillipsNX899JP "Icarus Plummet"Raleigh, NC _____
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

RE: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Chuck,PLEASE do not encourage them! You are on a good path. Become a WW student,and enjoy the process of building your own engine, too. Are you also on theCorvair List? There are a bunch of flying Pietenpols with Corvairs,including the Bell boys, all the Big Piets, PF Beck, Gardiner Mason, AxelPurtee just to name a few. There are a bunch more that will become airbornein a year or two. I think most comments are meant in jest, as in thefollowing, as requested by Dan Helsper (thanks to John Hoffman):http://gallery.me.com/johnnyskyrocket#100017BTW.Dan Helsper and PF Beck are also accomplished prop carvers. Wanna' startanother debate about the pros & cons of carving your own prop? How aboutlaminating your own struts, like Axel?.....Now look what you've done! You got me started...Painting with house paint, raising the turtledecks, modifying the centersection, using motorcycle wheels, rear control stick push rods..the listgoes on.Point is: FAA calls it 'EXPERIMENTAL' for a very good reason. I say, "Goahead and experiment. It's your dream."Gary Boothe Cool, Ca. Pietenpol (with laminated struts!)WW Corvair Conversion, Running! Tail done, Fuselage on gear (23 ribs down.) _____
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By:> owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
On political comment boards, 'encouraging them' is known as 'feeding the trolls' - it's like at the zoo - no feeding the animals! :)To be fair, there have been some issues that have come up over the years with regards to William Wynne's conversion, but he's been good about addressing them (costs more $, but they are addressed). Most of the issues arise from the fact that WW has modified the engine to put out higher HP (he claims 100hp), changing the torque curve by using a different cam.The problems come from the fact that the lack of a support bearing at the prop end has resulted in a few snapped crank failures in high stress applications (mostly Corvairs installed in KR's). This is fixed by the addition of a 5th bearing, of which there are a couple after market choices that have been developed specifically for the aircraft conversion. Roy's Garage in Michigan is one example.Bernard, of course used a largely unmodified Corvair in his "Last Original". You could do the same by doing a basic WW conversion but leaving in the original cam, and setting up a pressure cowl for cooling (thus allowing you to take out the blower fan) and probably get 50-60hp without (or at least fewer) concerns about the crank failing. After all, "The Last Original" has been flying continuously for nearly 50 years now. For myself, I'm going the full WW conversion route, with a 5th bearing from Roy's, because I think his 5th bearing design is the best and easiest to incorporate into the engine.Kip GardnerOn Dec 21, 2010, at 8:24 AM, Gary Boothe wrote:> Chuck,>> PLEASE do not encourage them! You are on a good path. Become a WW > student, and enjoy the process of building your own engine, too. Are > you also on the Corvair List? There are a bunch of flying Pietenpols > with Corvairs, including the Bell boys, all the Big Piets, PF Beck, > Gardiner Mason, Axel Purtee just to name a few. There are a bunch > more that will become airborne in a year or two. I think most > comments are meant in jest, as in the following, as requested by Dan > Helsper (thanks to John Hoffman):>> http://gallery.me.com/johnnyskyrocket#100017>> BTW=85Dan Helsper and PF Beck are also accomplished prop carvers. > Wanna=92 start another debate about the pros & cons of carving your > own prop? How about laminating your own struts, like Axel?.....>> Now look what you=92ve done! You got me started=85..>> Painting with house paint, raising the turtledecks, modifying the > center section, using motorcycle wheels, rear control stick push > rods=85.the list goes on.>> Point is: FAA calls it =91EXPERIMENTAL=92 for a very good reason. I say, > =93Go ahead and experiment. It=92s your dream.=94> Gary Boothe> Cool, Ca.> Pietenpol (with laminated struts!)> WW Corvair Conversion, Running!> Tail done, Fuselage on gear> (23 ribs down=85)>
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

RE: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Chuck,Yes it is in jest, mostly. If I lived in the midwest, I would probably havebuilt my Piet with a Model A, because I really like the look and sound(pockity, pockity) of that engine. However, for me reliability is key,flying above the forests of North Carolina and the mountains of Virginia,and I'm just not a fan of auto engine conversions for aircraft. The designrequirements are simply too different. Car engines are not designed to operate anywhere near full power for morethan a few seconds at a time, whereas an aircraft engine must be capable offull power continuously. That's why Corvairs require such little tricks aspainting the pushrod tubes white to try to keep the oil down to a manageabletemperature. Putting that engine in an airplane is asking it to dosomething it was simply not designed to do. Now the Corvair guys are addinga 5th main bearing (at significant expense, negating the supposed costadvantage of using a car engine to begin with) to handle the loads that apropeller puts on the crankshaft. There have been numerous cases ofcrankshafts breaking in Corvairs in aircraft, although I don't know of anyin a Pietenpol, other than Shad Bell's.Car engines (other than the Model A) also tend to get their power at higherRPMs than are useful for driving propellers. Props really loose efficiencywhen the tips start going supersonic (to say nothing of being VERY noisy -ever hear a T-6 takeoff?) and with the size props used on planes of our sizethat happens at about 2500 RPM. Power generated at speeds faster than thatis not very useful and there needs to be substantial torque in the 2000 -2500 RPM range. That's why so many auto engine conversions require gearingto reduce the propeller speed, which adds cost, weight and complexity, andhurts reliablity.As Gary says, these are EXPERIMENTAL airplanes, so you are free to do as youwish. Just realize that in this as in most decisions made in building anairplane, there are tradeoffs. Reliability is not something I choose totrade away, if I can help it.Jack PhillipsNX899JP "Icarus Plummet"Raleigh, NC _____
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "TOM STINEMETZE"
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By:> owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Of course, as Jack will attest, aircraft engines never fail. :). I also recall Amy Laboda, back when she was writing for EAA, doing a column about how the crank snapped on takeoff on her big, old reliable Continental-powered Cessna, putting her & her 2 daughters into Biscayne Bay. It's flying, sh** can happen no matter what your choice of aircraft, engine, etc.The other thing to consider is that even with the 5th bearing, if you are good at doing your own work, a zero-time Corvair conversion will cost you about 6K. For that amount, you might get an A-65 overhauled, but how many guys on this list have A-65's, and have concerns about flying on hot days, or carrying passengers who weigh more than about 180lbs., or worry about the length of their runways, etc. etc. ? Can you get a C-85 or C-95 rebuilt to zero time for 6K? I'm not sure, but that would be the appropriate comparison. (On a different, but related note, Oscar, how IS the C-85 working out? Better, I hope).This is the debate that will NEVER die :)Kip GardnerOn Dec 21, 2010, at 9:07 AM, Jack Phillips wrote:> Chuck,>> Yes it is in jest, mostly. If I lived in the midwest, I would > probably have built my Piet with a Model A, because I really like > the look and sound (pockity, pockity) of that engine. However, for > me reliability is key, flying above the forests of North Carolina > and the mountains of Virginia, and I=92m just not a fan of auto engine > conversions for aircraft. The design requirements are simply too > different.>> Car engines are not designed to operate anywhere near full power for > more than a few seconds at a time, whereas an aircraft engine must > be capable of full power continuously. That=92s why Corvairs require > such little tricks as painting the pushrod tubes white to try to > keep the oil down to a manageable temperature. Putting that engine > in an airplane is asking it to do something it was simply not > designed to do. Now the Corvair guys are adding a 5th main bearing > (at significant expense, negating the supposed cost advantage of > using a car engine to begin with) to handle the loads that a > propeller puts on the crankshaft. There have been numerous cases of > crankshafts breaking in Corvairs in aircraft, although I don=92t know > of any in a Pietenpol, other than Shad Bell=92s.>> Car engines (other than the Model A) also tend to get their power at > higher RPMs than are useful for driving propellers. Props really > loose efficiency when the tips start going supersonic (to say > nothing of being VERY noisy ' ever hear a T-6 takeoff?) and with the > size props used on planes of our size that happens at about 2500 > RPM. Power generated at speeds faster than that is not very useful > and there needs to be substantial torque in the 2000 ' 2500 RPM > range. That=92s why so many auto engine conversions require gearing > to reduce the propeller speed, which adds cost, weight and > complexity, and hurts reliablity.>> As Gary says, these are EXPERIMENTAL airplanes, so you are free to > do as you wish. Just realize that in this as in most decisions made > in building an airplane, there are tradeoffs. Reliability is not > something I choose to trade away, if I can help it.>> Jack Phillips> NX899JP =93Icarus Plummet=94> Raleigh, NC>
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By:>> owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
In the last post, I meant C-90 (O-200) of course.On Dec 21, 2010, at 9:35 AM, Kip and Beth Gardner wrote:> Of course, as Jack will attest, aircraft engines never fail. :). I > also recall Amy Laboda, back when she was writing for EAA, doing a > column about how the crank snapped on takeoff on her big, old > reliable Continental-powered Cessna, putting her & her 2 daughters > into Biscayne Bay. It's flying, sh** can happen no matter what your > choice of aircraft, engine, etc.>> The other thing to consider is that even with the 5th bearing, if > you are good at doing your own work, a zero-time Corvair conversion > will cost you about 6K. For that amount, you might get an A-65 > overhauled, but how many guys on this list have A-65's, and have > concerns about flying on hot days, or carrying passengers who weigh > more than about 180lbs., or worry about the length of their runways, > etc. etc. ? Can you get a C-85 or C-95 rebuilt to zero time for > 6K? I'm not sure, but that would be the appropriate comparison. > (On a different, but related note, Oscar, how IS the C-85 working > out? Better, I hope).>> This is the debate that will NEVER die :)>> Kip Gardner>> On Dec 21, 2010, at 9:07 AM, Jack Phillips wrote:>>> Chuck,>>>> Yes it is in jest, mostly. If I lived in the midwest, I would >> probably have built my Piet with a Model A, because I really like >> the look and sound (pockity, pockity) of that engine. However, for >> me reliability is key, flying above the forests of North Carolina >> and the mountains of Virginia, and I=92m just not a fan of auto >> engine conversions for aircraft. The design requirements are >> simply too different.>>>> Car engines are not designed to operate anywhere near full power >> for more than a few seconds at a time, whereas an aircraft engine >> must be capable of full power continuously. That=92s why Corvairs >> require such little tricks as painting the pushrod tubes white to >> try to keep the oil down to a manageable temperature. Putting that >> engine in an airplane is asking it to do something it was simply >> not designed to do. Now the Corvair guys are adding a 5th main >> bearing (at significant expense, negating the supposed cost >> advantage of using a car engine to begin with) to handle the loads >> that a propeller puts on the crankshaft. There have been numerous >> cases of crankshafts breaking in Corvairs in aircraft, although I >> don=92t know of any in a Pietenpol, other than Shad Bell=92s.>>>> Car engines (other than the Model A) also tend to get their power >> at higher RPMs than are useful for driving propellers. Props >> really loose efficiency when the tips start going supersonic (to >> say nothing of being VERY noisy ' ever hear a T-6 takeoff?) and >> with the size props used on planes of our size that happens at >> about 2500 RPM. Power generated at speeds faster than that is not >> very useful and there needs to be substantial torque in the 2000 ' >> 2500 RPM range. That=92s why so many auto engine conversions require >> gearing to reduce the propeller speed, which adds cost, weight and >> complexity, and hurts reliablity.>>>> As Gary says, these are EXPERIMENTAL airplanes, so you are free to >> do as you wish. Just realize that in this as in most decisions >> made in building an airplane, there are tradeoffs. Reliability is >> not something I choose to trade away, if I can help it.>>>> Jack Phillips>> NX899JP =93Icarus Plummet=94>> Raleigh, NC>>
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Kip and Beth Gardner
Gary, forget my question about how to join the Corvair list -- I just did! Chuck----- Original Message -----
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "Charles Campbell"
Hi Chuck - I've got a rule of thumb: if it keeps me up at night I won't do it.Example - the one thing that kept me up during construction was my landing gearwheels and axles. I changed them from my flimsy, motorcycle-based design toa much stouter setup. My corvair did not, and does not, keep me up at night.That's no guarantee it won't quit, it just shows where I put the corvair inthe risk management equation. A couple of things I do personally to mitigate the risks of flying with a non-aircraftengine: I occasionally do landings with the engine turned off, I try tomake all landings with the engine at idle, and I fly over places where I canland if the motor does quit. Probably a good idea to do those things in anyaircraft. Jack's point about the mountains is a good one. My Austin/Brodhead/Oshkosh/Austintrip last year was planned over very forgiving ground, for both engine outscenarios and for recovering-the-plane-after-the-engine-out scenarios.I would not steer you away from the corvair. Fat Bottomed Girl's been flying 14months and I intend to fly the 176th uneventful hour on Thursday.BTW: the words "Aviation Safety" are actually in my job title. I'm familiar withmanaging risk. For what it's worth, my friend.Axel--------Kevin "Axel" PurteeNX899KPAustin/Georgetown, TXRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Kip and Beth Gardner
Kip, I was considering the full WW conversion except for the 5th bearing. The engines without the 5th bearing operated OK for years. ----- Original Message -----
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Ryan Mueller
Q2hhcmxlcywgDQoNCk1lIHRvby4gRGVtYW5kcyBvbiBQaWV0IHByb3BzIGFyZSBmYXIgbGVzcyB0aGFuIGZhc3RlciBwbGFuZXMuDQoNCkdhcnkNCkRvIG5vdCBhcmNoaXZlDQpTZW50IG9uIHRoZSBTcHJpbnSuIE5vdyBOZXR3b3JrIGZyb20gbXkgQmxhY2tCZXJyea4NCg0KLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCkZyb206ICJDaGFybGVzIENhbXBiZWxsIiA8Y25jYW1wYmVsbEB3aW5kc3RyZWFtLm5ldD4NClNlbmRlcjogb3duZXItcGlldGVucG9sLWxpc3Qtc2VydmVyQG1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20NCkRhdGU6IFR1ZSwgMjEgRGVjIDIwMTAgMTA6MjU6MzkgDQpUbzogPHBpZXRlbnBvbC1saXN0QG1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20+DQpSZXBseS1UbzogcGlldGVucG9sLWxpc3RAbWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbVN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBQaWV0ZW5wb2wtTGlzdDogQ29ydmFpciBFbmdpbmUNCg0KVGhpcyBpcyBhIG11bHRpLXBhcnQgbWVzc2FnZSBpbiBNSU1FIGZvcm1hdC4NCg0K________________________________________________________________________________Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 09:44:09 -0600Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By:> Kip and Beth Gardner
I'm going with the 5th bearing mainly because I can afford to & I tend to be a belt and suspenders kind of guy. I know it's probably not necessary with the loads a Piet imposes. Plus, I don't mind a little extra weight in the nose for W & B, rather than having to move the wings back too far, so why not make it useful wt. instead of a 20 lb. chunk of lead?Kip G.On Dec 21, 2010, at 10:44 AM, Ryan Mueller wrote:> If you are going to do the full boat WW conversion.....and probably > looking at in the ballpark of $6000 to $7000 for your conversion/ > overhaul.....why not spend another grand for at least the Weseman > BTA 5th bearing and not have to worry about the crank at all? In the > overall grand scheme (or cost) of things, $1000 is not that much....>> Ryan>> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Charles Campbell > wrote:> Kip, I was considering the full WW conversion except for the 5th > bearing. The engines without the 5th bearing operated OK for years.> ----- Original Message -----
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By:> Kip and Beth Gardner
One last comment, and something else not mentioned by anyone. Namely, it's easy to put electric start on the Corvair. Now I know this will send all the purists into apoplectic fits, BUT as a Lefty, and therefore by definition something of a Klutz, I don't relish the thought of doing a jig in front of (or even to the side of) a large moving piece of wood. Putting an electrical system of a C-85 or C-90 is a bit more costly, I've heard.KipOn Dec 21, 2010, at 10:44 AM, Ryan Mueller wrote:> If you are going to do the full boat WW conversion.....and probably > looking at in the ballpark of $6000 to $7000 for your conversion/ > overhaul.....why not spend another grand for at least the Weseman > BTA 5th bearing and not have to worry about the crank at all? In the > overall grand scheme (or cost) of things, $1000 is not that much....>> Ryan>> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Charles Campbell > wrote:> Kip, I was considering the full WW conversion except for the 5th > bearing. The engines without the 5th bearing operated OK for years.> ----- Original Message -----
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Ryan Mueller
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________________________________________________________________________________Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 10:27:15 -0600Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

>> ** Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: dnboyd1(at)comcast.net
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "kevinpurtee"
Thank you, them's my sentiments exactly. I never worried much about enginefailure. Quite a bit of my flying has been over open water (ocean) and theonly time I heard strange sounds from the engine compartment was on my firstfew night flights. After that everything was cool.----- Original Message -----
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Ryan Mueller
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair EngineAt all in for 8 k why not buy a used aircraft engine at around 800 to 1000 hours ? Following the advice of Tony B it makes good sense, unless you're in for a bit more adventure than safe reliability. Juss axinJohnSent via DROID on Verizon Wireless-----Original message-----
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Ryan Mueller
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair EngineAt all in for 8 k why not buy a used aircraft engine at around 800 to 1000 hours ? Following the advice of Tony B it makes good sense, unless you're in for a bit more adventure than safe reliability. Juss axinJohnSent via DROID on Verizon Wireless-----Original message-----
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Kip and Beth Gardner
Kip, I will seriously consider that option when I get to it. Thanks. ----- Original Message -----
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "Charles Campbell"
Jack Textor has a spreadsheet of pretty much all the builders on this list andhas a column for "engine". I didn't count the distribution but it looks likethere are a lot of us, myself included, that are using the Corvair. Some of theguys using Corvairs in other airframes (Mark Langford and Dan Weseman cometo mind) have abused the crap out of them and the engine stays together prettydarn well. Dave AldrichRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Thanks for the encouragement

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: dnboyd1(at)comcast.net
I think it was Dan who sent me a message about glueing the under side of the wing to get the fabric to stick to the concave shape until rib stitching. Dan, if that was you maybe you should send it to Dave before he gets carried away and tightens everything up before the under side is done. ----- Original Message -----
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

RE: Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Yes a 0 time C85 is possible for under 6K, including generator and starter.JackDSM _____
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "kevinpurtee"
My observations (and they are just that - observations) at the Brodhead Pietenpolgatherings are that the majority of Piets that attend tend to be powered by"traditional" aircraft engines - mostly Continentals. Over the last seven orso gatherings that I've attended, I can probably count on one hand the aircraftthat were powered by Corvair engines (although they are increasing in numbersof late). Ford Model A powered Piets have been slightly more common than theCorvairs. However, in following this List, it certainly seems that a majority of new builderstalk about powering their craft with Corvairs. Only time will tell how manywill complete their projects, and of those that complete, how many will followthrough with the Corvair choice. I know of several builders (myself included)who originally planned to use Corvair power, and changed that plan mid-stream(for various reasons).For years, one of the big drawing cards for the Corvair was its simplicity andlow cost. Now, with the introduction of the recommended fifth bearing, the Corvairis a little more complicated and definitely a bit more expensive. On theother hand, the fifth bearing seems to have eliminated a lot of the reliabilityissues. Peace of mind is worth a LOT of dollars.The choice is yours.Bill C.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Rick Holland
Here are a couple pix of my old Sky Scout. I bought it as a project, later soldit to Dennis Hall (Brodhead) who finished it into one of the nicest looking planesI have ever seen. Dennis' work was flawless!--------PAPA MIKERead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/100_ ... ______Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 13:34:46 -0700Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair Engine
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Jack
Jack, I've been having some trouble getting the list to recognise that my posts are legit. I'll see if this goes through. If it does, let me know where I can get a 0 time C85 for $6K and I will probably dance at your next wedding! ----- Original Message -----
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: KM Heide CPO/FAAOP
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Rick Holland
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Engine
Locked