Tom Webber wrote:
Ken, Whats the different solution? My wife has expressed concern
of
having a second seat. Looks like it may be a -4 instead of the
-3.
Tom,
If your considering moving up from an RV-3 to an RV-4, I'd recommend
taking another step forward and look at the RV-8. In my view the RV-4
is
only a 2 place airplane for short hops and sport flying. For cross
country
work the 4 is a 1 1/2 place airplane, limited by baggage capacity due
to cg
considerations. In fact you can reach the aft limit with a large
passenger
and no baggage. The RV8 solves these problems by providing a second
baggage
space forward. Because the 8 is larger firewall forward, the space
available for a 13B installation is also much easier.
Mike Wills (RV-4 builder)
Tom,
I would also recommend the -8. Lot's more room under the cowl to place
stuff. I decided to build the -4 because it is a little lighter and
just so darn good looking (yeah, not very scientific but what can I
say!). Note that with this mount configuration I will have room for the
radiator and the oil cooler under the engine. This mount would also
work well with the LongEZ and other narrow firewalls. Pictures are
attached.
Ken Powell
ken.powell@alltel.com
The AirCraft Rotary Engine NewsLetter. Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site. http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/
Copyright 1998-2002 All world wide rights reserved.
From: kenpowell@alltel.net
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 5:01 PM
To: Powell, Ken
Subject: (Fwd) Cantilevered RV-4 Engine Mount weights
------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date sent: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 17:42:45 -0800
From: ACRE NL <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Cantilevered RV-4 Engine Mount weights
BCC to:
Well, after months of rebuilding motor mount pieces and lots of
input from the guys here on the list, I am finally finished with
my RV-4 motor mount. Note that this mount is for a PP motor so
I had a little more flexibility on the left side of the engine
since there is not a 4 or 6 port intake manifold to make things
more difficult. Special thanks to Paul, Mike Wills and Monty
Roberts for their input. The advantages of this mount is that
for a narrow single place or tandem aircraft there is much more
room under the engine for radiators and exhaust; the value of
this cannot be underestimated unless you have tried to fit all
of this stuff in a 24" wide cowling! Pictures are attached.
Ken Powell
Looks like it will work fine Ken. Glad to see you supported the
upper truss in the vertical plane. Good way of doing it. The only
thing I can see to watch is a little local bending in the
connection between the rubber bushing brackets and the rectangular
cross tube. Got any detail sketches on that? What does it weigh?
Paul Lamar
The original conical mount from Van's weighed 11 lb 6 oz. The
new mount
weighs 13 lb 3 oz, or 1 lb 12 oz more. Lot's of extra .75" tubing
there!
The engine adapter mounts weighed a total of 5 lb 12 oz. The
lower mount
weighed 2 lb 12 oz, the right upper weighed 1 lb 11 oz and the upper
left mount weighed 1 lb 12 oz. The three adapter mounts were
weighed together as well as individually to eliminate rounding
errors. Note that the upper adapter mounts (on both sides) tie the
front and rear of the engine together to eliminate extra loads on
the tension bolts.
Ken Powell
The AirCraft Rotary Engine NewsLetter. Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site. http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/
http://www.linux.org
------- End of forwarded message -------
