Pietenpol-List: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

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

Pietenpol-List: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: glenschweizer(at)yahoo.com
A few months ago I voiced my idea to try a jeep 134 flathead motor for a powersource for my pietenpol project. I know it has been hashed over before and Igot a few thumbs up and a few thumbs down. I decided to keep my mouth shut untilI had a little more info. So I overhauled an engine and built a prop hub,and today it got it's first prop start. I had started it earlier with the flywheelon using the starter because it was too tight to prop. After about tenminutes run in time, I re-installed the prop and finally got it running... It is swinging an old junk wood prop that was on a cub or champ and it seemedto have no problem. Now I have only ran it about half throttle so far but I hopeto rig a tach on it and see what it will turn up static. More later.I will try to link the youtube video , but if that doesn't work and you still wantto see it go to youtube type in Kenny crider and check out my channel video two.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Ken Bickers
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "taildrags"
Now who's the curmugine???? :-)ClifOld age and treachery will beat youth and enthusiasmevery time. Someone> Oscar, you're slipping a bit.> Looks like you missed a few other details.> It's almost as though the photo wasn't taken exactly on the centerline of > the plane.>> BC________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "taildrags"
Ken;Watched the video. That is very interesting! The engine seems to run very smoothly.Sure does look tight though, and you just about wore out the starter gettingit to fire up ;o)--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By:> cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca
I know that 2200 cc will fly a Pietenpol because I just had a ride in one in New Zealand. It needed 3000 rpm to get enough power and was an overhead valve engine. It was from a Toyota Hilux. As for weight=2C published weights are usually misleading.As for your general points=2C they are valid questions and worthy of consideration. Brian
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By:> > cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca
I think that somebody already suggested that the published wt. for the Wileys included the transmission, which, of course, would not be included.On Mar 8, 2014, at 11:00 AM, Brian Kenney wrote:> I know that 2200 cc will fly a Pietenpol because I just had a ride > in one in New Zealand.> It needed 3000 rpm to get enough power and was an overhead valve > engine. It was from a Toyota Hilux.>> As for weight, published weights are usually misleading.>> As for your general points, they are valid questions and worthy of > consideration.>> Brian>
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Brian Kenney
Your right, In researching further another siteturned up that didn't the first time. They saythe go devil engine itself weighs 148 lb.That NZ Piet, was it operating with or withouta reduction unit? Jim Malley's Piet has a 98hp Ford Fiesta init but with a psru.Clif ----- Original Message -----
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca
It is direct drive. The guy that did it has three of them in different types of airplanes and there are two others on Air Campers down under. I saw one but didn't get to talk to the owner who was out of town.
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: brian.kenney(at)live.ca
By the way Clif I believe that a model A engine in a Piet produces more power than the rated horsepower stated by Ford. I think it is at least 50 horsepower or perhaps a little more. This is due to better breathing and perhaps the aluminum head. It has to produce more because of the way it performs. Some folks that have used higher rpm likely have even more but it is always the power versus reliability trade-off to consider. That 200 cu in is hard to beat.
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "Gary Boothe"
a 134 cu in jeep engine sans manifolds and sans flywheel weighs #245 pounds withiron head according to the scale in my friends milk barn however, i would becarefull to compare it to the oft quoted weight of #241 lbs with magneto forthe model A because i know none of you guys has actually done it. just my twocents________________________________________________________________________________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Brian Kenney
Kenny, I watched the Youtube clip several times, and I think you are doing somethingpretty neat. I have been a life long fan of flatheads, Grace and I have a littlecollection in the hangar.I read all the notes, and for my 2 cents, I think that you have a power plant thatwill work within limitations, (just as all engines do). I was headed overto my neighbors with the scale, but Mr. Mdw, covered this, and effectively showedboth the weight is comparable to a Ford, and also how unreliable internetdata can be. I think most people miss that there are both L-134's and OHV F-134's.Scale in a milk barn always beats the internet for useful data,Clif listed the displacements and rpm ranges of several engines, and to it I wouldlike to add the consideration of compression ratio. We have been testing thisfor a year, back to back, same airframe, etc, and it is surprising the differencebetween 8.0 and 10.25 to one. The relationship holds true with most engines.I am sure that an O-200 with 8:1 and OHV can be tuned to make more powerat any given rpm than a 200 cid Ford. Displacement alone is an incomplete picture.On 'tight' motors: If everything else is set right, it is ring drag on the surfacefinish of the bores that makes it hard to prop. In my experience, 10 hoursof ground runs at 50-60% power has the same smoothing effect as one takeoff andclimb to 3,000' at wot. 280 finish on bores is better than 220, but it is timeat wot that helps.An optical tach like a Proptach 2545 and a ground adjustable prop are a good 'comparative'Dyno. Get the prop in the test range, check the static rpm, make thechange and compare rpm. I have loaner WD props, (in both rotations), glad tosend one to you for testing.If Oz's chart is good, targeting 3000 rpm instead of 2500 will buy you a 28% hpincrease. The loss of prop efficiency will be in the single digits, and you willhave a large net thrust increase. Test this with the loaner prop, you willbecome convinced.You will have plenty of people tell you it will/won't work. Their belief is basedon stories, and since every Pietenpol is a 'snowflake' unto itself, much ofthe commentary does not apply. You should be able to use The Ford weight andBalance data we collected. My website tells how to get this directly from DocMosher.I do not think the success of Fords is because they make 'more than 50 hp' TheW&B tests showed that the Ford guys build lighter planes than many A-65 guys.The Ford guys also use better matched props on average. They go into their buildknowing they don't have weight or power to waste. It is the opposite attitudeof a guy who thinks 'I have a light motor, I don't have to care'.Last thought: There will never be any psru that will be as light, reliable noras cheap as a 12 pound, $500 new turbocharger. I am not kidding, they are veryeasy to plumb on flatheads, they don't stress engines, they function as mufflers,and 134 cid at 36" MAP is 200 cid of airflow. Look up the turbo testing onmy webpage, email me direct or call anytime.-ww.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

> Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By:> WilliamTCA(at)aol.com
Compression ratio increases can be impractical in a L head because cross section area reduction as the head gets shaved. The engine breathes less (intake and exhaust) as the area get smaller. Therefore the more practical way to increase power is to compress the intake charge by super or turbo charging as William suggests. Turbocharging has one danger in that hot exhaust gets compressed too and therefore the consequences of an exhaust leak increase as a result. Just thoughts to ponder.> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

> Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By:> WilliamTCA(at)aol.com
I think Frank L. from the Milwaukee area put a turbo or supercharger on his Funk? engine. You are probably correct that the exhaust pressure may not be that high but there is still the concern that the exhaust piping and flanges need to be made carefully as most factory turbos are piped with alloy tubing and rightfully so. I personally would not want to fly in a turbo engine aircraft in a tight cowled aircraft with homemade exhaust piping and maybe not even with factory piping because a crack could/would mean a fire. That is just my fear limitation.Flat heads are not that much of a penalty on a slow turning engines and why auto engines don't need overhead cams in direct drive applications on airplanes. The point I was making that to go more power the right direction is to pressurize the intake not to modify it internally. Don't take my comments as a challenge to your knowledge but really to validate what you said and to educate others that might not be so acquainted with the all the limitations. I confess that I don't know much about the engine in question. What will the increased rpm and/or power do to the bottom engine or to the breathing of the engine? I think it has a chance=2C the question more relates to whether the end result is a one or two seater. > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Steven Dortch
Tomorrow it may get to 60 degrees here. I am hoping to begin to glue the fuse sidestogether. I looked at a lot of pictures on westcoastpiet and it appearspeople start all over the place. I think the front two connectors are not putinto place because of the addition of the engine mount later? Some add the 3/8'splywood floor before adding the additional connectors while others add theconnectors first then lay the flooring on top. What should I not do when connectingthe fuselage together that would cause problems later?Thanks, John--------John FrancisRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2014 21:01:55 -0500Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Steven Dortch
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

> Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "Douwe Blumberg"
> > > According to the Flying and Glider Piet article the Ford> A weighs 244lb.> According to this Wikipedia article the Willys weighs> in at 470 lb!> We just told a certain propmaker that he couldn't use> his VW engine because it's too small and revs too high.> It's 2500cc. The Willys is 2200cc.> The c-65 is 2830cc and the Corvair starts at 2700cc.> The Ford is a wopping 3400cc! and 128 ft-lb torque.> The c65 has 148lb torque. The little Willys? 114 ft-lb.> The Corvair appears to be 155 but at 2800 rpm.> > So=2C perusing the above=2C in direct drive=2C will the Willys> be able to pull it off?> > I think nostalgia is colouring perceptions here.> Nothing wrong with nostalgia but as Mark Twain said=3B> "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble.> It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."> > But=3B> "Life is trying things to see if they work." (Ray Bradbury)> > OK=2C I'll stop now.> > Bad Clif> > A crank is a very elegant device. It's small=2C> it's strong=2C it's lightweight=2C energy efficient> and it makes revolutions.> E F Schumacher> > > >> > By the way=2C I found a dyno simulation for the L134 engine that produced > > the power and torque curves in the graph that I've attached. It may be> > possible to make this work=2C just looking at the curves. At "normal" prop > > speeds of 2200-2300 RPM=2C the power looks to be about 36-37HP (solid red > > curve). Run it up to 2400-2500 and it climbs into the 40-42HP range=2C> > which is comparable to the Ford "A" engine. Run it at 3000 RPM with a> > ground-adjustable 68" Warp Drive like the Corvair uses and it might put> > out 50HP.> >> > The dry weight of the engine is given in the Willys specs as 365 lbs. but > > people on the Jeep CJ chat sites say it weighs about the same as a > > small-block Chevy. The Ford A engine weighs about the same=2C I think... > > specs that I found show weight of engine and transmission to be 475=2C so > > the engine alone should be about the same weight as the Willys.> >> > --------> > Oscar Zuniga> > Medford=2C OR> > Air Camper NX41CC &quot=3BScout&quot=3B> > A75 power> >> >> >> >> > Read this topic online here:> >> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 861#419861> >> >> >> >> > Attachments:> >> > http://forums.matronics.com//files/dyno ... ll_894.jpg> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > -----> > No virus found in this message.> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com> > > > ============================================> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

> > Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Brian Kenney
> >> >> >> > According to the Flying and Glider Piet article the Ford> > A weighs 244lb.> > According to this Wikipedia article the Willys weighs> > in at 470 lb!> > We just told a certain propmaker that he couldn't use> > his VW engine because it's too small and revs too high.> > It's 2500cc. The Willys is 2200cc.> > The c-65 is 2830cc and the Corvair starts at 2700cc.> > The Ford is a wopping 3400cc! and 128 ft-lb torque.> > The c65 has 148lb torque. The little Willys? 114 ft-lb.> > The Corvair appears to be 155 but at 2800 rpm.> >> > So, perusing the above, in direct drive, will the Willys> > be able to pull it off?> >> > I think nostalgia is colouring perceptions here.> > Nothing wrong with nostalgia but as Mark Twain said;> > "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble.> > It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."> >> > But;> > "Life is trying things to see if they work." (Ray Bradbury)> >> > OK, I'll stop now.> >> > Bad Clif> >> > A crank is a very elegant device. It's small,> > it's strong, it's lightweight, energy efficient> > and it makes revolutions.> > E F Schumacher> >> >> > >> > > By the way, I found a dyno simulation for the L134 engine that > produced> > > the power and torque curves in the graph that I've attached. It > may be> > > possible to make this work, just looking at the curves. At > "normal" prop> > > speeds of 2200-2300 RPM, the power looks to be about 36-37HP > (solid red> > > curve). Run it up to 2400-2500 and it climbs into the 40-42HP > range,> > > which is comparable to the Ford "A" engine. Run it at 3000 RPM > with a> > > ground-adjustable 68" Warp Drive like the Corvair uses and it > might put> > > out 50HP.> > >> > > The dry weight of the engine is given in the Willys specs as 365 > lbs. but> > > people on the Jeep CJ chat sites say it weighs about the same as a> > > small-block Chevy. The Ford A engine weighs about the same, I > think...> > > specs that I found show weight of engine and transmission to be > 475, so> > > the engine alone should be about the same weight as the Willys.> > >> > > --------> > > Oscar Zuniga> > > Medford, OR> > > Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"> > > A75 power> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > Read this topic online here:> > >> > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 861#419861> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > Attachments:> > >> > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/dyno ... ll_894.jpg> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > -----> > > No virus found in this message.> > > Checked b=====================> >======> >> >> >>>________________________________________________________________________________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: =0A
=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AYour right=2C In researching further another =0Asite=0Aturned up that didn't the first time. They =0Asay=0Athe go devil engine itself weighs 148 =0Alb.=0A =0AThat NZ Piet=2C was it operating with or =0Awithout=0Aa reduction unit? =0A =0AJim Malley's Piet has a 98hp Ford Fiesta =0A in=0Ait but with a psru.=0A =0AClif=0A =0A =0A=0A ----- Original Message ----- =0A
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca
=0A=0A=0AIt is direct drive. The guy that did it has three of them in different types of airplanes and there are two others on Air Campers down under. I saw one but didn't get to talk to the owner who was out of town.
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: =0A
=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AYour right=2C In researching further another =0Asite=0Aturned up that didn't the first time. They =0Asay=0Athe go devil engine itself weighs 148 =0Alb.=0A =0AThat NZ Piet=2C was it operating with or =0Awithout=0Aa reduction unit? =0A =0AJim Malley's Piet has a 98hp Ford Fiesta =0A in=0Ait but with a psru.=0A =0AClif=0A =0A =0A=0A ----- Original Message ----- =0A
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Brian Kenney
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com> >> > Brian=2C> You are correct on the limits of compression increase on flatheads. The point I was trying to make is that Kenny's HP per cubic inch at 6.5:1 should be better than the Ford HP per cubic inch at 4.25 to 5.25:l. The limits for increasing on the Jeep may be higher still=2C as it has a wildly under square bore and stroke ratio.> > Manifolds on flatheads are on the same side and short=2C good for compact turbo installation. The exhaust pressure is less than you may suspect=2C the energy of the exhaust gasses is primarily heat. In an enclosed compartment always a concern=2C especially with a lot of joints=2C but I was kind of picturing it out in the slipstream. I am pretty sure someone brought a turbocharged Piet to Brodhead in the last decade=2C but I can't remember who it was.> > Part of the reason why I am optimistic about Kenny's project is thinking about A-37 and A-40 Continentals. They are flatheads also=2C they have less cubic inches. They are maybe 80 pounds lighter=2C but they did fly a lot of stuff like J-3s on floats with light people.-ww> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 056#420056> > > > > > > ============================================> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: DNA analysis please

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "M. Zeke Zechini"
>> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com> >> WilliamTCA(at)aol.com>> >> > Brian,> > You are correct on the limits of compression increase on flatheads. The> point I was trying to make is that Kenny's HP per cubic inch at 6.5:1> should be better than the Ford HP per cubic inch at 4.25 to 5.25:l. The> limits for increasing on the Jeep may be higher still, as it has a wildly> under square bore and stroke ratio.> >> > Manifolds on flatheads are on the same side and short, good for compact> turbo installation. The exhaust pressure is less than you may suspect, the> energy of the exhaust gasses is primarily heat. In an enclosed compartment> always a concern, especially with a lot of joints, but I was kind of> picturing it out in the slipstream. I am pretty sure someone brought a> turbocharged Piet to Brodhead in the last decade, but I can't remember who> it was.> >> > Part of the reason why I am optimistic about Kenny's project is thinking> about A-37 and A-40 Continentals. They are flatheads also, they have less> cubic inches. They are maybe 80 pounds lighter, but they did fly a lot of> stuff like J-3s on floats with light people.-ww>> >> >> >> >> > Read this topic online here:> >> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 056#420056> >> >> >> >> >> > =============> >> >> >>> *>>> *>>________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: DNA analysis please
Locked