 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Eugene Zimmerman
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 392
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2006 6:04 pm Post subject: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
 |
|
Bob,
Can you please give us your current assessment of the suzuki
performance on your Mk III?
Climb? Cruise? Fuel burn? Smoothness/ vibration?
How do you feel it compares to rotax?
Are you pleased with engine or do you have any major disappointments
or failed expectations with it?
Is there anything you would do differently if you were powering
another kolb?
I'd be interested in your current preference of reduction ratio and
prop size, as well as gear or belt drive?
As you can tell I am very interested in the geo/ suzuki engine option.
On Jun 26, 2006, at 8:39 PM, robert bean wrote:
| Quote: | BB, MkIII, suzuki G10, 53.1 hrs.
|
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
slyck(at)frontiernet.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 5:21 am Post subject: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
|
|
On 26, Jun 2006, at 10:02 PM, Eugene Zimmerman wrote:
| Quote: |
<etzim62(at)earthlink.net>
Bob,
Can you please give us your current assessment of the suzuki
performance on your Mk III?
Eugene, thought by now I had related most of what I know about it
|
but will try to make a few line comments here.
| Quote: |
Climb? Cruise? Fuel burn? Smoothness/ vibration?
Two weeks ago I had the good fortune to fly alongside (behind) Bob Erb
|
in his beautiful
FSII/503. At takeoff he outclimbs me considerably. At cruise I had to
abandon my usual
4700RPM and go to 4800 (about 85% power) to stay with him. My having
at best, 5 more HP is compensated
by his being so much lighter and cleaner. Maybe when I get the long
neglected doors
made I can cut back to 4700 again.
Fuel burn at 4700 is slightly over 2gph/ regular mogas
smoothness: pretty tough to make 3 cylinders smooth, sorta throbs like
an old radial.
sounds like one too. Think 7cyl Jacobs.
Not enough vibration to be objectionable
| Quote: | How do you feel it compares to rotax?
Never flew one
|
| Quote: |
Are you pleased with engine or do you have any major disappointments
or failed expectations with it?
Is there anything you would do differently if you were powering
another kolb?
I would use the G13 4 cylinder which is nearly identical except one
|
more cylinder.
The block weighs approximately 15 lbs more than the 3 cyl.
The suzuki engine is very well made and reports from builders don't
show any
mechanical failures (yet).
Richard Swiderski's web site has a bunch of info on the turbo version 3
cyl he is re-inventing.
My Kolb would be a little on the tame side for a lot of pilots but I'm
happy with it as it is.
I don't fly out of a high elevation area so performance is acceptable.
I went with a carb but would recommend FI to anyone else.
| Quote: | I'd be interested in your current preference of reduction ratio and
prop size, as well as gear or belt drive?
I have the cog belt drive. It is quiet and has performed reliably.
|
The reduction ratio is 2.26:1
which would be more appropriate for a trike, where most suzukis have
been installed.
The russian gear drive (Swiderski again) is reportedly well made and
has a ratio better suited
to a Kolb.
The belt drive requires some touchy adjustments and fine tuning whereas
the gear drive is
bolt on and go.
A 70" warp drive prop was too big in the 3 blade configuration and not
very smooth
with two blades. I went with a 65" powerfin.
| Quote: |
As you can tell I am very interested in the geo/ suzuki engine option.
Hope this helps, write off list for more info if you want.
|
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael Sharp
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 118
Location: Oak Grove, MO (Kansas City)
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 5:50 am Post subject: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
|
|
GREAT REPORT BOB!
I should be able to report on how the 4cyl 1.3 with FI works on a Mark III by the end of summer... (don't put that in your calendars I started with Big Lar and I"m still trudging along). I'll be using the Russian Redrive with a 66" CSG(?) 3 blade wood prop...
I'll keep ya'll posted...
Mike
Do not archive
robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> wrote:
[quote]--> Kolb-List message posted by: robert bean
On 26, Jun 2006, at 10:02 PM, Eugene Zimmerman wrote:
| Quote: | --> Kolb-List message posted by: Eugene Zimmerman
Bob,
Can you please give us your current assessment of the suzuki
performance on your Mk III?
Eugene, thought by now I had related most of what I know about it
|
but will try to make a few line comments here.
| Quote: |
Climb? Cruise? Fuel burn? Smoothness/ vibration?
Two weeks ago I had the good fortune to fly alongside (behind) Bob Erb
|
in his beautiful
FSII/503. At takeoff he outclimbs me considerably. At cruise I had to
abandon my usual
4700RPM and go to 4800 (about 85% power) to stay with him. My having
at best, 5 more HP is compensated
by his being so much lighter and cleaner. Maybe when I get the long
neglected doors
made I can cut back to 4700 again.
Fuel burn at 4700 is slightly over 2gph/ regular mogas
smoothness: pretty tough to make 3 cylinders smooth, sorta throbs like
an old radial.
sounds like one too. Think 7cyl Jacobs.
Not enough vibration to be objectionable
| Quote: | How do you feel it compares to rotax?
Never flew one
|
| Quote: |
Are you pleased with engine or do you have any major disappointments
or failed expectations with it?
Is there anything you would do differently if you were powering
another kolb?
I would use the G13 4 cylinder which is nearly identical except one
|
more cylinder.
The block weighs approximately 15 lbs more than the 3 cyl.
The suzuki engine is very well made and reports from builders don't
show any
mechanical failures (yet).
Richard Swiderski's web site has a bunch of info on the turbo version 3
cyl he is re-inventing.
My Kolb would be a little on the tame side for a lot of pilots but I'm
happy with it as it is.
I don't fly out of a high elevation area so performance is acceptable.
I went with a carb but would recommend FI to anyone else.
| Quote: | I'd be interested in your current preference of reduction ratio and
prop size, as well as gear or belt drive?
I have the cog belt drive. It is quiet and has performed reliably.
|
The reduction ratio is 2.26:1
which would be more appropriate for a trike, where most suzukis have
been installed.
The russian gear drive (Swiderski again) is reportedly well made and
has a ratio better suited
to a Kolb.
The belt drive requires some touchy adjustments and fine tuning whereas
the gear drive is
bolt on and go.
A 70" warp drive prop was too big in the 3 blade configuration and not
very smooth
with two blades. I went with a 65" powerfin.
| Quote: |
As you can tell I am very interested in the geo/ suzuki engine option.
Hope this helps, write off list for more info if you want.
|
[quote]
On Jun 26, 2006, at 8:39 PM, robert bean wrote:
> BB, MkIII, suzuki G10, 53.1 hrs.
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________
The air up there in the clouds is very pure and fine...And why shouldn't it be?-
--It is the same the angels breathe.
Mark Twain,
Roughing it' 1886
Mike |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
slyck(at)frontiernet.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:39 am Post subject: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
|
|
Two more comments:
The G10, IMO, would be a great match for a FSII
I did fly a Rotax, I was thinking 2 stroke in my report. I got to fly
Thom Riddle's 912 powered Allegro. This plane has both great climb
and cruise. -and a floater too. If the engine quit you would still
have time
to eat a baloney sandwich on the way down.
Hey Thom! Trade you even?
do not archive
On 27, Jun 2006, at 9:49 AM, Michael Sharp wrote:
| Quote: | GREAT REPORT BOB!
I should be able to report on how the 4cyl 1.3 with FI works on a Mark
III by the end of summer... (don't put that in your calendars I
started with Big Lar and I"m still trudging along). I'll be using the
Russian Redrive with a 66" CSG(?) 3 blade wood prop...
I'll keep ya'll posted...
Mike
Do not archive
robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net> wrote:
>
> On 26, Jun 2006, at 10:02 PM, Eugene Zimmerman wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Bob,
> >
> > Can you please give us your current assessment of the suzuki
> > performance on your Mk III?
> Eugene, thought by now I had related most of what I know about it
> but will try to make a few line comments here.
> >
> > Climb? Cruise? Fuel burn? Smoothness/ vibration?
> Two weeks ago I had the good fortune to fly alongside (behind) Bob Erb
> in his beautiful
> FSII/503. At takeoff he outclimbs me considerably. At cruise I had to
> abandon my usual
> 4700RPM and go to 4800 (about 85% power) to stay with him. My having
> at best, 5 more HP is compensated
> by his being so much lighter and cleaner. Maybe when I get the long
> neglected doors
> made I can cut back to 4700 again.
>
> Fuel burn at 4700 is slightly over 2gph/ regular mogas
> smoothness: pretty tough to make 3 cylinders smooth, sorta throbs like
> an old radial.
> sounds like one too. Think 7cyl Jacobs.
> Not enough vibration to be objectionable
> > How do you feel it compares to rotax?
> Never flew one
> >
> > Are you pleased with engine or do you have any major disappointments
> > or failed expectations with it?
> > Is there anything you would do differently if you were powering
> > another kolb?
> I would use the G13 4 cylinder which is nearly identical except one
> more cylinder.
> The block weighs approximately 15 lbs more than the 3 cyl.
> The suzuki engine is very well made and reports from builders don't
> show any
> mechanical failures (yet).
> Richard Swiderski's web site has a bunch of info on the turbo version
> 3
> cyl he is re-inventing.
>
> My Kolb would be a little on the tame side for a lot of pilots but I'm
> happy with it as it is.
> I don't fly out of a high elevation area so performance is acceptable.
>
> I went with a carb but would recommend FI to anyone else.
> > I'd be interested in your current preference of reduction ratio and
> > prop size, as well as gear or belt drive?
> I have the cog belt drive. It is quiet and has performed reliably.
> The reduction ratio is 2.26:1
> which would be more appropriate for a trike, where most suzukis have
> been installed.
> The russian gear drive (Swiderski again) is reportedly well made and
> has a ratio better suited
> to a Kolb.
> The belt drive requires some touchy adjustments and fine tuning
> whereas
> the gear drive is
> bolt on and go.
> A 70" warp drive prop was too big in the 3 blade configuration and not
> very smooth
> with two blades. I went with a 65" powerfin.
> >
> > As you can tell I am very interested in the geo/ suzuki engine
> option.
> Hope this helps, write off list for more info if you want.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jun 26, 2006, at 8:39 PM, robert bean wrote:
> >
> >> BB, MkIII, suzuki G10, 53.1 hrs.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> >
|
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eugene Zimmerman
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 392
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 4:37 pm Post subject: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
|
|
Thanks for the info. Bob.
Now I'm eager to here from others using the Suzuki.
From reports I've heard the 4 cylinder matches the 912 rotax
performance real close.
On Jun 27, 2006, at 9:20 AM, robert bean wrote:
| Quote: |
On 26, Jun 2006, at 10:02 PM, Eugene Zimmerman wrote:
>
> <etzim62(at)earthlink.net>
>
> Bob,
>
> Can you please give us your current assessment of the suzuki
> performance on your Mk III?
Eugene, thought by now I had related most of what I know about it
but will try to make a few line comments here.
>
> Climb? Cruise? Fuel burn? Smoothness/ vibration?
Two weeks ago I had the good fortune to fly alongside (behind) Bob
Erb in his beautiful
FSII/503. At takeoff he outclimbs me considerably. At cruise I
had to abandon my usual
4700RPM and go to 4800 (about 85% power) to stay with him. My
having at best, 5 more HP is compensated
by his being so much lighter and cleaner. Maybe when I get the
long neglected doors
made I can cut back to 4700 again.
Fuel burn at 4700 is slightly over 2gph/ regular mogas
smoothness: pretty tough to make 3 cylinders smooth, sorta throbs
like an old radial.
sounds like one too. Think 7cyl Jacobs.
Not enough vibration to be objectionable
> How do you feel it compares to rotax?
Never flew one
>
> Are you pleased with engine or do you have any major
> disappointments or failed expectations with it?
> Is there anything you would do differently if you were powering
> another kolb?
I would use the G13 4 cylinder which is nearly identical except one
more cylinder.
The block weighs approximately 15 lbs more than the 3 cyl.
The suzuki engine is very well made and reports from builders don't
show any
mechanical failures (yet).
Richard Swiderski's web site has a bunch of info on the turbo
version 3 cyl he is re-inventing.
My Kolb would be a little on the tame side for a lot of pilots but
I'm happy with it as it is.
I don't fly out of a high elevation area so performance is acceptable.
I went with a carb but would recommend FI to anyone else.
> I'd be interested in your current preference of reduction ratio
> and prop size, as well as gear or belt drive?
I have the cog belt drive. It is quiet and has performed
reliably. The reduction ratio is 2.26:1
which would be more appropriate for a trike, where most suzukis
have been installed.
The russian gear drive (Swiderski again) is reportedly well made
and has a ratio better suited
to a Kolb.
The belt drive requires some touchy adjustments and fine tuning
whereas the gear drive is
bolt on and go.
A 70" warp drive prop was too big in the 3 blade configuration and
not very smooth
with two blades. I went with a 65" powerfin.
>
> As you can tell I am very interested in the geo/ suzuki engine
> option.
Hope this helps, write off list for more info if you want.
>
> On Jun 26, 2006, at 8:39 PM, robert bean wrote:
>
>> BB, MkIII, suzuki G10, 53.1 hrs.
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
> http://wiki.matronics.com
>
www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
wiki.matronics.com
|
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CaptainRon1(at)cox.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:07 pm Post subject: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
|
|
I am also going to power my M3X with a Suzuki, its a 16 valve DOHC. I have been told various values for the HP from 105 to 120 hp. I am not sure what it will end up being. I am pretty deep into it right now. The good thing is that I can choose just exactly how I want it built. So far I am under 1K including the engine core and accessories. I am sure that will change as the reduction drive alone will run about 1.7K So far so good. If I will convert another later I'll be able to do it very quickly. Its a great motor I am more impressed with it all the time. I was over at the engine shop today and the fellow there said it looks good as new. The pistons that I was planning on replacing after cleaning look as though they just came out of the wrapping paper. So far this little used engine is just fantastic in terms of its durability. It did look like hell from the outside when I first got it. They build them good. I will need to modify the cage on the Kolb and that's for sure. The oil sump needs to sit right where that engine mount tube is at. My solution is two parallel tubes cradling the motor in between. I still don't know why the factory didn't do it that way to begin with. Surely by now they need to consider that due to the tremendous cost of the Rotax 912 very few will be able to afford it. You can buy an entire Suzuki automobile for the cost of one Rot 912, it can't be that expensive to produce.
Anyway the Suzuki conversion looks like a better deal all around.
I would if I were you get the Suzuki 1.3 16V Sohc, it has a bit less Hp but its usually less expensive and much more abundant.
Ron
Arizona
====================
[quote]--> Kolb-List message posted by: Eugene Zimmerman <etzim62(at)earthlink.net>
Thanks for the info. Bob.
Now I'm eager to here from others using the Suzuki.
performance real close.
On Jun 27, 2006, at 9:20 AM, robert bean wrote:
| Quote: | --> Kolb-List message posted by: robert bean <slyck(at)frontiernet.net>
On 26, Jun 2006, at 10:02 PM, Eugene Zimmerman wrote:
| Quote: | --> Kolb-List message posted by: Eugene Zimmerman <etzim62(at)earthlink.net>
Bob,
Can you please give us your current assessment of the suzuki performance on your Mk III? |
Eugene, thought by now I had related most of what I know about it
but will try to make a few line comments here. | Quote: |
Climb? Cruise? Fuel burn? Smoothness/ vibration? |
Two weeks ago I had the good fortune to fly alongside (behind) Bob Erb in his beautiful
FSII/503. At takeoff he outclimbs me considerably. At cruise I had to abandon my usual
4700RPM and go to 4800 (about 85% power) to stay with him. My having at best, 5 more HP is compensated
by his being so much lighter and cleaner. Maybe when I get the long neglected doors
made I can cut back to 4700 again.
Fuel burn at 4700 is slightly over 2gph/ regular mogas
smoothness: pretty tough to make 3 cylinders smooth, sorta throbs like an old radial.
sounds like one too. Think 7cyl Jacobs.
Not enough vibration to be objectionable | Quote: | | How do you feel it compares to rotax? |
Never flew one | Quote: |
Are you pleased with engine or do you have any major disappointments or failed expectations with it?
Is there anything you would do differently if you were powering another kolb? |
I would use the G13 4 cylinder which is nearly identical except one more cylinder.
The block weighs approximately 15 lbs more than the 3 cyl.
The suzuki engine is very well made and reports from builders don't show any
mechanical failures (yet).
Richard Swiderski's web site has a bunch of info on the turbo version 3 cyl he is re-inventing.
My Kolb would be a little on the tame side for a lot of pilots but I'm happy with it as it is.
I don't fly out of a high elevation area so performance is acceptable.
I went with a carb but would recommend FI to anyone else. | Quote: | | I'd be interested in your current preference of reduction ratio and prop size, as well as gear or belt drive? |
I have the cog belt drive. It is quiet and has performed reliably. The reduction ratio is 2.26:1which would be more appropriate for a trike, where most suzukis have been installed.
The russian gear drive (Swiderski again) is reportedly well made and has a ratio better suited
to a Kolb.
The belt drive requires some touchy adjustments and fine tuning whereas the gear drive is
bolt on and go.
A 70" warp drive prop was too big in the 3 blade configuration and not very smooth
with two blades. I went with a 65" powerfin. | Quote: |
As you can tell I am very interested in the geo/ suzuki engine option. |
Hope this helps, write off list for more info if you want.
www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
wiki.matronics.com
|
Kolb-List Email Forum -
> > - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
> - List Contribution Web Site -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JetPilot
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1246
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 10:04 am Post subject: Re: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
|
|
The Suzuki engine seems like a really great alternative for the Kolbs. They are cheap to get, parts are cheap and plentiful, and fuel consumption is very low. It will be neat to see how they work out on the MK-3's and how their reliability is.
If the 4 cylinder weighs only 15 pounds more than the 3 cylinder engine, I would think that the 4 cylinder would be better even for the Firestar. A lot more power and a lot less vibration for only 15 pounds seems like a real bargain to me.
Mike
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HShack(at)AOL.COM
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 7:46 pm Post subject: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
|
|
In a message dated 6/28/2006 2:10:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, orcabonita(at)hotmail.com writes:
| Quote: | The Suzuki engine seems like a really great alternative for the Kolbs. They are cheap to get, parts are cheap and plentiful, and fuel consumption is very low. It will be neat to see how they work out on the MK-3's and how their reliability is.
If the 4 cylinder weighs only 15 pounds more than the 3 cylinder engine, I would think that the 4 cylinder would be better even for the Firestar. A lot more power and a lot less vibration for only 15 pounds seems like a real bargain to me.
Mike |
Geez, about 4 years ago I checked out the 3 cyl. to go on my FS II & determined it was just too heavy. The 4 cyl. must run close to 150+ lbs. Besides the weight, at somewhere around 70 hp, youd hacw to beef up the cage.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
slyck(at)frontiernet.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:13 am Post subject: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
|
|
I agree with the 4 cylinder being inappropriate for the FSII.
-and even the 3 cylinder would look a bit conspicuous sticking up tall.
There is a lay down sideways version available that would have
a better cosmetic effect.
You have to consider though, that you could carry 5 gallons of gas
instead of 10 for a savings of 30 lbs.
-BB, southern weather up here now but thankfully at the perimeter
of the deluge.
On 28, Jun 2006, at 11:43 PM, HShack(at)aol.com wrote:
| Quote: | In a message dated 6/28/2006 2:10:03 PM Eastern Standard Time,
orcabonita(at)hotmail.com writes:
> The Suzuki engine seems like a really great alternative for the
> Kolbs. They are cheap to get, parts are cheap and plentiful, and
> fuel consumption is very low. It will be neat to see how they work
> out on the MK-3's and how their reliability is.
>
> If the 4 cylinder weighs only 15 pounds more than the 3 cylinder
> engine, I would think that the 4 cylinder would be better even for
> the Firestar. A lot more power and a lot less vibration for only 15
> pounds seems like a real bargain to me.
>
> Mike
Geez, about 4 years ago I checked out the 3 cyl. to go on my FS II &
determined it was just too heavy. The 4 cyl. must run close to 150+
lbs. Besides the weight, at somewhere around 70 hp, youd hacw to beef
up the cage.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
|
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael Sharp
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 118
Location: Oak Grove, MO (Kansas City)
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 5:12 am Post subject: MkIII, suzuki G10 |
|
|
I'm in the middle of the conversion, Zuki 1.3L 4cyl. The engine block less intake, exhaust and flywheel weighs in at 118# I'm figuring that the all in weight is going to be about 175# give or take...
Mike
HShack(at)aol.com wrote:
| Quote: | In a message dated 6/28/2006 2:10:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, orcabonita(at)hotmail.com writes:
| Quote: | The Suzuki engine seems like a really great alternative for the Kolbs. They are cheap to get, parts are cheap and plentiful, and fuel consumption is very low. It will be neat to see how they work out on the MK-3's and how their reliability is.
If the 4 cylinder weighs only 15 pounds more than the 3 cylinder engine, I would think that the 4 cylinder would be better even for the Firestar. A lot more power and a lot less vibration for only 15 pounds seems like a real bargain to me.
Mike |
Geez, about 4 years ago I checked out the 3 cyl. to go on my FS II & determined it was just too heavy. The 4 cyl. must run close to 150+ lbs. Besides the weight, at somewhere around 70 hp, youd hacw to beef up the cage.
Howard Shackleford
FS II
SC
|
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________
The air up there in the clouds is very pure and fine...And why shouldn't it be?-
--It is the same the angels breathe.
Mark Twain,
Roughing it' 1886
Mike |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
