Hey Mike! Good job with this product profile. In some ways, I was reminded of what Dan Johnson does with his channel (Light Sport and Ultralight Flyer) but I think your take on it was executed much better. For instance, you let the guy representing his product explain his product rather than interrupt him with your own 2 cents just to show off your own knowledge of someone else's product. Also, your audio was much cleaner. I've said it before - keep doing what you're doing. Maybe do an interview or two with other aviation RUclipsrs like Flight Chops, steveo1kinevo, MzeroA etc and watch your subs shoot north of 100K before the end of the year.
Fantastic colouring on the engines. That petrol blue and yellow gold combination is very inspired - you’ve an excellent colourist. As a “special edition” you could colour the engine casings and add on just the cost of doing it to the price….. and call the edition “The Heart of Gold” - your colourist understands the “magpie factor” perfectly. As a marketing manoeuvre it could yield easier and increased sales.
It would increase reliability going to COP instead of DIS. Loose one cylinder instead of two in case of coil or driver failure. Less of a chance of backfires also.
I love your work. Very impressive indeed. I may be seeing this wrong - so spare me the rude comments, however I am not a "fan" of radiators on aircraft. Like with the Rotorway 162 F - I once heard "having a water-cooled aircraft engine is like having an air-cooled boat engine." That said, it does NOT mean that it does not work very well. Again, I am very impressed. Would love to see one on a Cessna 172 SP - With the cowling on & off... Best
What I want to know is the fitness of the prop box and the connection to the crank I'd it puts dynamic tangenial loading and it's ability to accept piston torque pulse hammer without grenading and the pull tortion of the reduction box transferrance I.E. is the prop forces are transmitted thru engine mounting or is reduction mount frame mounted ?
I would use a good "Used" Engine Block. It's already "settled" out on a molecular level. I would feel nervous about a Timing Belt on an Aircraft too. Modern Automotive Engines are mechanically able to go over a couple hundred K Miles in a Car with an Owner who does not take maintenance as required unless Lights start beeping and flashing nowadays because the Metal alloys and Parts interchangableaty due tu the tolerances from CNC finishing. Add some redundancy into the Engine management , and yeah , probably I would choose it over an antiquated , never upgraded Continental piece of Junk , well not junk , but not a $ Engine that's worth anything near $100,000.00. maybe a Porsche 911 turbo Engine would be nice too. I like Your Propeller set up..
Interesting haven’t seen regular gas at airports. Maybe I’m just not looking in the right spot. I hope you’re right really want to put one of these on an rv-10 some day.
I am considering trying to build an aircraft in the semi-distant future (hopefully about 5 years) from the Rutan family of canard aircraft (Aerocanard, velocity, Long EZ, or something of that nature), and was wondering how well this engine would work in that type of aircraft. Not simply from a space perspective, but more about cooling efficiency and exhaust/cabin heating management.
@@mrhats830 I checked out that Raptor aircraft, and unfortunately, the information gleamed from the website is of little use in my inquiry about a homebuilt like the long EZ, and this inline 4 cylinder.
@@brent1041 yeah thats it, for some reason I had diesel in my head, I thought I read or a video I watch said that but only thing I see on the page is regular gas. This can be problematic to get fuel unless you can find airports with regular?
Fenderbean1979 or carry your own fuel in a mini trailer tanker. I think there are surplus military tanker trailer that you can get for a grand( more or less)
Seems to have long intake Runners without cross bleeds within a few inches of the intake port, how are you combating reversion, or is your operating RPM on the low side? Seems to me that you're cheating yourself out of quite a bit of torque that way. Still sounds like a much better option than rotax, and I've never heard much good about the rotax. Never been impressed with them in any way shape or form. They are an adequate engine for a snowmobile. But when they break down on a snowmobile you don't fall 10,000 feet. Looks like a good concept for light aircraft. Immediately had thoughts of the Yamaha VMAX 142 horsepower motorcycle engine. I always wondered how well that would work as an aircraft engine?
I too wonder about the connector tube. Aircraft engines usually rotate at fairly low rpm, but if they're small capacity they must have a gear reduction drive becuse they won't make 100hp from 1300cc at 2700rpm as small engines need rpms to pump the same amount of air as a larger engine at lower rpm (using the air pump model as an indicator of power production). Props can't go too much faster than 2800rpm (depends on diameter) because the tips go supersonic. This is why 350hp engines are 520-540cubic inch 6 cylinder, 100hp engines are 4 cylinder and 200cubic inches and 400hp 8cyl 720 cubic inches. Turbos are used, but mostly in turbo normalized applications rather than true boost as you get in automotive use - however there are quite a few true boosted aviation engines but more in the sport and private categories rather than in commercial. Turbo normalizing offers huge advantages since the moment you start going up in altitude the power of the engine decreases due to lower air density. The plane itself actually starts moving across the ground much faster for the same speed on its airspeed indicator but this great effect is wasted if the engine stops producing good power, so they put a turbo on it and it restores the engine's performance and the plane picks up a lot of extra speed for free meaning the time to destination is much less therefore the fuel burn is much less, meaning they can offload fuel for payload, since carrying fuel doesn't make you as much money as carrying freight or passengers. In a twin engine plane a turbo normalized engine may actually allow you to fly on one engine for a bit. In some naturally aspirated twins, if you lose an engine you need to land immediately.
As one who was an early snowmobiler using Skiroules with their Rotax engines noted for quitting regularly I wholeheartedly agree. running for four hours but repairing for 16 is fine for ground confined engines... but in the air..not so much.
@@brustar5152 excellent point, I would find it exceedingly difficult to pull over on the side of the road to do a minor engine adjustment at 12,000 feet in the air. Remember, that the word experimental on the side of an aircraft is defined as " Fly at your own risk."
Nice g series blocks. Once built a g20 to about 250hp and dropped it into my 92 geo Metro. Kinda wondering if I can drop in he dual cam head and turbo with mfi on a kitfox
The problem with doing stuff like that is, when you do that in a car, it runs at 10% of power output most of the time, with occasional stints above that, while in an aircraft you have long stints of 100% power and high power output after that as well much higher than automotive applications. And this is why typically no automotive engine is going to be well suited to aviation. You can polish these engines all you like but it still is not a purpose designed aviation engine. That said if I were going to do an alternative engine 1/2 VW with harly heads and cylinders is pretty interesting as they are lightweight, fairly reliable with EFI, and probably the easiest engine to work on in the 80-100hp range. I really wish there was a affordable twin prop pusher plane kit out there....
@@Wingnut353 I would never have guessed that 1/2 VW with the Harley parts could put out that kind of power. The only 1/2 VW l ever saw up close was in a freshly built scaled down Cub. It was a beautiful plane. I asked around the airstrip and found people who said it flew as well as it looked.
This guy has not said anything that would make his engines better. Air plane base engines are better than car base engines. 4:45 he is lying his ass off.
Haven’t seen any light sport that can hold a candle to the L600 legend from Aeropilot. Almost as good as a 182 and definitely makes that stupid moronic 162 skycatcher a complete overpriced joke. It’s 50,000$ less than a new 162.
Hey Mike! Good job with this product profile. In some ways, I was reminded of what Dan Johnson does with his channel (Light Sport and Ultralight Flyer) but I think your take on it was executed much better. For instance, you let the guy representing his product explain his product rather than interrupt him with your own 2 cents just to show off your own knowledge of someone else's product. Also, your audio was much cleaner. I've said it before - keep doing what you're doing. Maybe do an interview or two with other aviation RUclipsrs like Flight Chops, steveo1kinevo, MzeroA etc and watch your subs shoot north of 100K before the end of the year.
Fantastic colouring on the engines. That petrol blue and yellow gold combination is very inspired - you’ve an excellent colourist. As a “special edition” you could colour the engine casings and add on just the cost of doing it to the price….. and call the edition “The Heart of Gold” - your colourist understands the “magpie factor” perfectly. As a marketing manoeuvre it could yield easier and increased sales.
It would increase reliability going to COP instead of DIS. Loose one cylinder instead of two in case of coil or driver failure. Less of a chance of backfires also.
Surprised to see what looks like Plasti-gage being used on a precision built crank and rod assembly.
woulkd have been nice to get an idea of price, and some contact info might be good as well!
Nice work ! Good option for my gyro build.
I love your work. Very impressive indeed.
I may be seeing this wrong - so spare me the rude comments, however I am not a "fan" of radiators on aircraft. Like with the Rotorway 162 F - I once heard "having a water-cooled aircraft engine is like having an air-cooled boat engine."
That said, it does NOT mean that it does not work very well.
Again, I am very impressed. Would love to see one on a Cessna 172 SP - With the cowling on & off...
Best
I heard you ,Mr. K ., over the ROTEX loud speaker., and there is nothing wrong with having , more than one supplier. Arizona
What I want to know is the fitness of the prop box and the connection to the crank I'd it puts dynamic tangenial loading and it's ability to accept piston torque pulse hammer without grenading and the pull tortion of the reduction box transferrance
I.E. is the prop forces are transmitted thru engine mounting or is reduction mount frame mounted ?
I would use a good "Used" Engine Block. It's already "settled" out on a molecular level. I would feel nervous about a Timing Belt on an Aircraft too. Modern Automotive Engines are mechanically able to go over a couple hundred K Miles in a Car with an Owner who does not take maintenance as required unless Lights start beeping and flashing nowadays because the Metal alloys and Parts interchangableaty due tu the tolerances from CNC finishing. Add some redundancy into the Engine management , and yeah , probably I would choose it over an antiquated , never upgraded Continental piece of Junk , well not junk , but not a $ Engine that's worth anything near $100,000.00. maybe a Porsche 911 turbo Engine would be nice too. I like Your Propeller set up..
Interesting haven’t seen regular gas at airports. Maybe I’m just not looking in the right spot. I hope you’re right really want to put one of these on an rv-10 some day.
Looking to build a Kitfox series 7. Any problems setting me up with a mount and cowling?
Do any or all of these engines have dual ignition sysyems?
Has anyone placed this engine in a sling 4? For example instead of having a rotax 915. Have an AeroMomentum engine?
Exactly my thoughts
I think video of building the engine on someone's living room floor is perhaps not the best way to go.
I was thinking the same as you : wooden floor doesn't look «professional». He should have made a video on a clean, more appropriate room
I am considering trying to build an aircraft in the semi-distant future (hopefully about 5 years) from the Rutan family of canard aircraft (Aerocanard, velocity, Long EZ, or something of that nature), and was wondering how well this engine would work in that type of aircraft. Not simply from a space perspective, but more about cooling efficiency and exhaust/cabin heating management.
Skyfighter64 check out the Raptor. They are using a Audi Diesel engine with a canard shape aircraft.
@@mrhats830 I checked out that Raptor aircraft, and unfortunately, the information gleamed from the website is of little use in my inquiry about a homebuilt like the long EZ, and this inline 4 cylinder.
How much bro per engine?
Very nice, do they have any diesel engines?
Would love to put a 200 horsepower in my Cessna 150
Following these guys since I saw a video lat year,
I plan to put their 260HP diesel on an RV-10
What diesel?
Your thinking the Hyundai based turbo gas 2L engine rated at 260hp. But it's not a diesel
@@brent1041 yeah thats it, for some reason I had diesel in my head, I thought I read or a video I watch said that but only thing I see on the page is regular gas. This can be problematic to get fuel unless you can find airports with regular?
Fenderbean1979 or carry your own fuel in a mini trailer tanker. I think there are surplus military tanker trailer that you can get for a grand( more or less)
Impossible to do on a cross country trip.
Seems to have long intake Runners without cross bleeds within a few inches of the intake port, how are you combating reversion, or is your operating RPM on the low side? Seems to me that you're cheating yourself out of quite a bit of torque that way.
Still sounds like a much better option than rotax, and I've never heard much good about the rotax. Never been impressed with them in any way shape or form. They are an adequate engine for a snowmobile. But when they break down on a snowmobile you don't fall 10,000 feet.
Looks like a good concept for light aircraft. Immediately had thoughts of the Yamaha VMAX 142 horsepower motorcycle engine. I always wondered how well that would work as an aircraft engine?
I too wonder about the connector tube.
Aircraft engines usually rotate at fairly low rpm, but if they're small capacity they must have a gear reduction drive becuse they won't make 100hp from 1300cc at 2700rpm as small engines need rpms to pump the same amount of air as a larger engine at lower rpm (using the air pump model as an indicator of power production).
Props can't go too much faster than 2800rpm (depends on diameter) because the tips go supersonic. This is why 350hp engines are 520-540cubic inch 6 cylinder, 100hp engines are 4 cylinder and 200cubic inches and 400hp 8cyl 720 cubic inches. Turbos are used, but mostly in turbo normalized applications rather than true boost as you get in automotive use - however there are quite a few true boosted aviation engines but more in the sport and private categories rather than in commercial. Turbo normalizing offers huge advantages since the moment you start going up in altitude the power of the engine decreases due to lower air density. The plane itself actually starts moving across the ground much faster for the same speed on its airspeed indicator but this great effect is wasted if the engine stops producing good power, so they put a turbo on it and it restores the engine's performance and the plane picks up a lot of extra speed for free meaning the time to destination is much less therefore the fuel burn is much less, meaning they can offload fuel for payload, since carrying fuel doesn't make you as much money as carrying freight or passengers.
In a twin engine plane a turbo normalized engine may actually allow you to fly on one engine for a bit. In some naturally aspirated twins, if you lose an engine you need to land immediately.
As one who was an early snowmobiler using Skiroules with their Rotax engines noted for quitting regularly I wholeheartedly agree. running for four hours but repairing for 16 is fine for ground confined engines... but in the air..not so much.
@@brustar5152 excellent point, I would find it exceedingly difficult to pull over on the side of the road to do a minor engine adjustment at 12,000 feet in the air. Remember, that the word experimental on the side of an aircraft is defined as " Fly at your own risk."
Nice g series blocks. Once built a g20 to about 250hp and dropped it into my 92 geo Metro. Kinda wondering if I can drop in he dual cam head and turbo with mfi on a kitfox
The problem with doing stuff like that is, when you do that in a car, it runs at 10% of power output most of the time, with occasional stints above that, while in an aircraft you have long stints of 100% power and high power output after that as well much higher than automotive applications. And this is why typically no automotive engine is going to be well suited to aviation. You can polish these engines all you like but it still is not a purpose designed aviation engine. That said if I were going to do an alternative engine 1/2 VW with harly heads and cylinders is pretty interesting as they are lightweight, fairly reliable with EFI, and probably the easiest engine to work on in the 80-100hp range. I really wish there was a affordable twin prop pusher plane kit out there....
@@Wingnut353 I would never have guessed that 1/2 VW with the Harley parts could put out that kind of power. The only 1/2 VW l ever saw up close was in a freshly built scaled down Cub. It was a beautiful plane. I asked around the airstrip and found people who said it flew as well as it looked.
What about ze gear box or is it direct drive?
There is a gearbox with these engines as they run about 5800 max and 5000 cruise.
I have worked on a air cooled 2 liter VW type 4 engine but never an aircraft engine.
That said I have been up in a small single engine airplane!
Please make a video of cheap brand new airplane ... Cessna
Give me price for 75 hp please
This guy has not said anything that would make his engines better. Air plane base engines are better than car base engines. 4:45 he is lying his ass off.
Relax, your doing fine!
Does this guy actually know anything?
Haven’t seen any light sport that can hold a candle to the L600 legend from Aeropilot. Almost as good as a 182 and definitely makes that stupid moronic 162 skycatcher a complete overpriced joke. It’s 50,000$ less than a new 162.
OMG, dynamometer not dynanometer..!! You're trashing your credibility.
Means the same thing, different people word it differently
@@zuestoots5176 Yes. Smart people and idiots spell it differently. Dynanometer is not a word. Even RUclips's spell check knows that.
he should have hired someone to do this, he sounds like a snake oil salesmen.
Nah thats the guy trying to flog the veloce 600
Earlygang
2nd viewer