180hp 4 place EAB?

GeorgeC

GeorgeC

Administrator
Management Council Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2010
Messages
5,500
Display Name
Display name:
GeorgeC
Aside from the Velocity, is there anything in the 4 seat, 180hp, fixed gear, fixed pitch design space in the EAB world? Zodiac?
 
GeorgeC said:
Aside from the Velocity, is there anything in the 4 seat, 180hp, fixed gear, fixed pitch design space in the EAB world? Zodiac?
Click to expand...

By Zodiac, I assume you mean the CH-640? There is a video of a CH-640 carrying 4 adults
[*] with a 180 HP Superior IO-360 flying off a grass field:

[*] The adults don't appear to be western-"sized", though.
 
Zenith 801...........

Altho I am about 2.2 times your "suggested " HP..:hairraise:.....;)
 
An RV10-like aircraft designed around a 4 banger would be perfect, but doesn't exist.
 
Last edited:
kyleb said:
Bearhawk.
Click to expand...
Do you know if it makes quoted speeds? Supposedly a Bearhawk with 180 hp does145 mph, which is almost what an Arrow does with 200 hp.
 
zaitcev said:
Do you know if it makes quoted speeds? Supposedly a Bearhawk with 180 hp does145 mph, which is almost what an Arrow does with 200 hp.
Click to expand...

I don't have any first or second hand knowledge, but that speed is equivalent to what Cessna claims for a new C-172, complete with struts and a nose gear, so it isn't implausible.
 
GeorgeC said:
An RV10-like aircraft designed around a 4 banger would be perfect, but doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

Yep. And that is why us 3 or 2+2 mission working stiffs fly piper arrows, grumman tigers and mooney F from decades ago and eat the cost of certified kabuki. ExAB dismissed us as a market segment. Makes sense, empty nesters have all the money and they don't need 4 seats. It is what it is. I'm hopeful primary non-commercial will bring some maintenance cost reprieve to our overburdened certified spam can parts and maintenance costs.
 
Perhaps I missed something here, but why the fixation on 180hp? Why not pick up an RV10 and just pull back the power to the 180hp output point for the same fuel burn?
 
airguy said:
Perhaps I missed something here, but why the fixation on 180hp? Why not pick up an RV10 and just pull back the power to the 180hp output point for the same fuel burn?
Click to expand...

An engine with X HP generally weighs less and costs less than one with Y HP where Y > X.

Flipped the other way - why the fixation on the RV10?
 
airguy said:
Perhaps I missed something here, but why the fixation on 180hp? Why not pick up an RV10 and just pull back the power to the 180hp output point for the same fuel burn?
Click to expand...


180 HP in the "magic" number for the potential upcoming FAA class..
 
airguy said:
Perhaps I missed something here, but why the fixation on 180hp? Why not pick up an RV10 and just pull back the power to the 180hp output point for the same fuel burn?
Click to expand...

Because the true motivation behind the inquiry is to price compete with certificated options that run for about the purchase cost of a real dogged out RV-6/4 i.e. under-60K, but have a true 3/2+2 mission cape. That's why.

To be complete honest, if I had the dough to capitalize an RV-10 I probably wouldn't care about overpaying for certificated maintenance kabuki of a mooney ovation or Airplains conversion R-182. It's a rounding error at that point. It is because I can't capitalize an RV-10 that exAB maintenance allowances sway me the experimental way. I know for a fact Cessna Mooney and Piper built a better airplane than I can, even back in '73.

LSA/RV prices are the embodiment of an irony.
 
Jim Logajan said:
An engine with X HP generally weighs less and costs less than one with Y HP where Y > X.

Flipped the other way - why the fixation on the RV10?
Click to expand...

None at all, it's just a good available airframe with plenty of room for the requested mission type.

N801BH said:
180 HP in the "magic" number for the potential upcoming FAA class..
Click to expand...

See there? That's the answer to the question Jim... no need to hate on the RV's...
 
N801BH said:
180 HP in the "magic" number for the potential upcoming FAA class..
Click to expand...

What upcoming class? I hope you don't mean "primary non-commercial", because that's not correct. Gross weight is the magic number, not horsepower.
 
This is mainly the thought experiment of an engineer's mind obsessed with efficiency and simplicity. My mission is largely fictional at this point.

The above constraints are to facilitate comparison, as many such planes were built in the 70s.

I suppose the real question is, given the above constraints, can EAB do any better than 130-140kts at 9gph? That is, does EAB confer any additional capability in this space, or just lower cost?

It looks like only the Velocity can substantially outperform a Tiger or DA40FP, at the expense of runway length.

I must admit that the TR-4 looks cool, in particular, its pitot cover.
 
GeorgeC said:
This is mainly the thought experiment of an engineer's mind obsessed with efficiency and simplicity. My mission is largely fictional at this point.

The above constraints are to facilitate comparison, as many such planes were built in the 70s.

I suppose the real question is, given the above constraints, can EAB do any better than 130-140kts at 9gph? That is, does EAB confer any additional capability in this space, or just lower cost?

It looks like only the Velocity can substantially outperform a Tiger or DA40FP, at the expense of runway length.

I must admit that the TR-4 looks cool, in particular, its pitot cover.
Click to expand...

A 180 HP Velocity can easily hit those speeds on 9 GPH. I typically cruise at 162 KTAS on 9.5-10 GPH but on 200 HP. If I was to throttle back to 140 that would put me around 6 GPH. A Cozy will provide even better numbers.

Another aircraft not mentioned because typically they use the Continental 210 HP, is the White Lightning. They're not made anymore but there are two for sale in Trade A Plane. Having personally flown N444WL, I can attest to seeing a ground speed of 215-220 in level flight without even pushing it. Seen it on radar several times doing over 230 kts descending into his airfield. I imagine fuel burn at those speeds was around 10 GPH. If I wasn't already strapped with airplanes and getting an overhaul on the Velocity, I'd buy N444WL in a heartbeat.

Edit: Man, it looks like someone already bought it.
 
Last edited:
Here is an Express with an IO360...
 

Attachments

  • express.gif
    express.gif
    47.8 KB · Views: 95
GeorgeC said:
Here is an Express with an IO360...
Click to expand...

Panel and interior look like they need work but I'd say that's still a heck of a price for an Express. With the money left over that could be made into a really nice aircraft.
 
I've seen that plane multiple times up at 1K1...it's a nice airplane...
 
Why the focus on experimental? There are a world of certificated aircraft that fit those criteria.
 
See post #24.
 
What are the build time comparisons on a Velocity vs the Cozy MK IV. I am seriously considering starting a project and am torn between the two.
 
ki4lzk said:
What are the build time comparisons on a Velocity vs the Cozy MK IV. I am seriously considering starting a project and am torn between the two.
Click to expand...

The Velocity will take half the overall time to complete that a Cozy will. On the Velocity airframe, you're joining premade parts, rather than scratchbuilding everything from plywood, foam, and fiberglass.
 
kyleb said:
The Velocity will take half the overall time to complete that a Cozy will. On the Velocity airframe, you're joining premade parts, rather than scratchbuilding everything from plywood, foam, and fiberglass.
Click to expand...

It is building the airframe from scratch that actually interests me. My only concern is my present skill level creating fiberglass parts. I have looked into taking a few classes at the local VoTech to learn fiberglass techniques. This coupled with bouncing questions off a few friends that have done similar projects in the past should help obtain the prerequisite knowledge.

How detailed are the plans for the Cozy? Tonight I went ahead and purchased the starter information kit through the spruce.
 
ki4lzk said:
It is building the airframe from scratch that actually interests me. My only concern is my present skill level creating fiberglass parts. I have looked into taking a few classes at the local VoTech to learn fiberglass techniques. This coupled with bouncing questions off a few friends that have done similar projects in the past should help obtain the prerequisite knowledge.

How detailed are the plans for the Cozy? Tonight I went ahead and purchased the starter information kit through the spruce.
Click to expand...

90% of composite projects ( a stat I pulled out of my exhaust pipe) were one time projects by people who'd never worked with foam and glass before. So that shouldn't be a problem. You start off with easy stuff, and there are plenty of tech counselors and online help, in addition to free seminars at SnF and Oshkosh, plus pay to play EAA workshops throughout the year.

I haven't seen the plans, per se, but I've read a lot of the material on various canard boards. I don't remember seeing a single complaint about plans, which is impressive.

My suggestion to you is read everything you can online. There are several canard forums, and the old issues of the RAF newsletter are also available online. You'll learn a lot by taking advantage of all of that published information.
 
ki4lzk said:
It is building the airframe from scratch that actually interests me. My only concern is my present skill level creating fiberglass parts. I have looked into taking a few classes at the local VoTech to learn fiberglass techniques. This coupled with bouncing questions off a few friends that have done similar projects in the past should help obtain the prerequisite knowledge.

How detailed are the plans for the Cozy? Tonight I went ahead and purchased the starter information kit through the spruce.
Click to expand...

UH OH......

You got the fever now......:wink2:......
 
Well, I have been thinking about it a while. I was searching the forums last night and apparently I asked a similar question in 2011. I think to learn how to glass I am going to first build my future/in utero son an airplane peddle car.
 
I've done some glass work on boats, it's super easy to learn. I'm going to start practicing it... because I have a hankerin to build something in the next few years after I have some flight hours under my belt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top