 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Guy Buchanan
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 1204
Location: Ramona, CA
|
 Posted: Mon May 04, 2015 12:32 pm Post subject: Stol perf of Larger Kitfoxes w certified engines ? |
 |
|
A heavy aircraft with a forward CG is not a recipe for best short field performance. Nor rough field. (Nose-over?) However, I can say after some years driving a 582 powered IV that it's also rather limiting at the higher altitudes short fields are often found. (Great at low altitude, though.) Perhaps a 582 powered I or II, built very light, would suffice if you were alone. The very best is a 914 powered IV, since it has the best power / weight ratio, and best performance at altitude. Can't honestly say I've ever seen one, though. Best I've seen is the many 100hp 912S powered IV's, and they rock at short field.
Guy Buchanan
Ramona, CA
Kitfox IV-1200 / 912-S / Warp 3cs / 500 hrs. and grounded
Now a glider pilot, too.
On 5/4/2015 12:55 PM, TURBO T wrote:
[quote] p { margin: 0; }
What is the general thought on STOL perf of the larger Foxes with "certified" engines ?
Thinking about a Mod 5 Outback with Lyc 0-235 125 HP , 925 empty weight.
My main need is STOL perf for rough short field situations, would a earlier version with 2 stroke better suit my needs ?
Cruise speed is of little importance as am not wanting to travel long distances, just local exploring.
Purchase price is about double for the Mod 5 compared to earlier versions with 2 strokes.
Any thoughts welcome.
[b]
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-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?Kitfox-List |
|
_________________
Guy Buchanan
Deceased K-IV 1200
A glider pilot too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mdkitfox(at)aol.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon May 04, 2015 12:49 pm Post subject: Stol perf of Larger Kitfoxes w certified engines ? |
|
|
I can confirm the 912S performs great. I get 1100-1200 fpm on a typical hot humid day here in central Florida, also 300-400 foot takeoffs are normal. Its powering a Model V Speedster (hah) that cruises about 115. BTW: The Grove gear is trouble free. Fun machine!
Rick Weiss
Spruce Creek, FL
2009 Series V Speedster, 912S/ Warp Drive/ Dynon 10 SkyView with all the extras except touch/ Grove Gear
RV-7A in development
On May 4, 2015, at 4:32 PM, Guy Buchanan <gebuchanan(at)cox.net (gebuchanan(at)cox.net)> wrote:
| Quote: | A heavy aircraft with a forward CG is not a recipe for best short field performance. Nor rough field. (Nose-over?) However, I can say after some years driving a 582 powered IV that it's also rather limiting at the higher altitudes short fields are often found. (Great at low altitude, though.) Perhaps a 582 powered I or II, built very light, would suffice if you were alone. The very best is a 914 powered IV, since it has the best power / weight ratio, and best performance at altitude. Can't honestly say I've ever seen one, though. Best I've seen is the many 100hp 912S powered IV's, and they rock at short field.
Guy Buchanan
Ramona, CA
Kitfox IV-1200 / 912-S / Warp 3cs / 500 hrs. and grounded
Now a glider pilot, too.
On 5/4/2015 12:55 PM, TURBO T wrote:
| Quote: | What is the general thought on STOL perf of the larger Foxes with "certified" engines ?
Thinking about a Mod 5 Outback with Lyc 0-235 125 HP , 925 empty weight.
My main need is STOL perf for rough short field situations, would a earlier version with 2 stroke better suit my needs ?
Cruise speed is of little importance as am not wanting to travel long distances, just local exploring.
Purchase price is about double for the Mod 5 compared to earlier versions with 2 strokes.
Any thoughts welcome.
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
|
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-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?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
michaelgibbs(at)cox.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon May 04, 2015 2:41 pm Post subject: Stol perf of Larger Kitfoxes w certified engines ? |
|
|
My Model IV-1200 Speedster with 912S could get off the pavement in 125 feet with just me in the plane under ideal conditions.
Mike G.
Phoenix, AZ
Kitfox IV-1200 Speedster, Series 6
[quote] On May 4, 2015, at 1:48 PM, Rick Weiss <mdkitfox(at)aol.com> wrote:
I can confirm the 912S performs great. I get 1100-1200 fpm on a typical hot humid day here in central Florida, also 300-400 foot takeoffs are normal. It’s powering a Model V Speedster (hah) that cruises about 115. BTW: The Grove gear is trouble free. Fun machine!
Rick Weiss
Spruce Creek, FL
2009 Series V Speedster, 912S/ Warp Drive/ Dynon 10” SkyView with all the extras except touch/ Grove Gear
RV-7A in development
> On May 4, 2015, at 4:32 PM, Guy Buchanan <gebuchanan(at)cox.net> wrote:
>
> A heavy aircraft with a forward CG is not a recipe for best short field performance. Nor rough field. (Nose-over?) However, I can say after some years driving a 582 powered IV that it's also rather limiting at the higher altitudes short fields are often found. (Great at low altitude, though.) Perhaps a 582 powered I or II, built very light, would suffice if you were alone. The very best is a 914 powered IV, since it has the best power / weight ratio, and best performance at altitude. Can't honestly say I've ever seen one, though. Best I've seen is the many 100hp 912S powered IV's, and they rock at short field.
>
> Guy Buchanan
> Ramona, CA
> Kitfox IV-1200 / 912-S / Warp 3cs / 500 hrs. and grounded
> Now a glider pilot, too.
>
>
>> On 5/4/2015 12:55 PM, TURBO T wrote:
>> What is the general thought on STOL perf of the larger Foxes with "certified" engines ?
>>
>> Thinking about a Mod 5 Outback with Lyc 0-235 125 HP , 925 empty weight
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-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?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| 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
