What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Eggenfellner engines

Status
Not open for further replies.

TOAD

Well Known Member
I want to be very careful here. I think that the automotive engines have a future. They are very reliable. I bought a Subaru car based on the reliability of the engine. That said I want to see how Jan is treating his existing customers. I have a friend with a flying a Subaru powered RV. Ok, It is now grounded at the moment waiting the new gen III gearbox. If he gets it, and it is good I will think about recommending the Subi package. If the plane sits on the ground with the priority going to new customers I would have to question the wisdom of buying from Jan. Hey this is the obvious right? Customer support is a key element in the decision process.

Hope to be able to give a thumbs up report soon. I would very much like to see true experimental work pay off. You builders really rock. I was a bit timid myself and have the old Lyconasaurus in there. Next time I will try experimenting myself. I am impressed with what you can do if you try.
 
response from Eggenfellner Company

After requesting a refund on an order placed in January 2007 with a delivery date for Aug 2007 then Dec 2007 and now Apr 2008, I received this response from Jan Eggenfellner.

We can not operate our business this way. We invested the money you sent into your engine and the parts to build it. We do not have "lines" of customers waiting to grab your engine parts. These engines are custom built for each individual customer. Also, once the money has been spent to buy your engine parts, it has been spent. It is no longer cash money.

Jan
 
sad

Apparently the "lines" are getting shorter for Jan. Sad, as the subaru is a great looking engine and just to be different does appeal to me. I will stick with the lycosaurus. It is odd how the posts get edited like this so quickly. Hmmm. Makes one think. First time i have watched it happen over a no big deal post.
 
Where is Gary Newstead?

Be careful here... they're almost OOB!

Nuf Said...

Don't know about that but I did notice that Gary is no longer listed on Egg's site (other than some old testimonials). He seemed to be trying hard to get them through some growing pains.. One thing's for sure. When word gets out that you can't cancel a big-deposit delayed order, its going to make prospective customers a bit edgy about sending in large deposits for new product. It implies that there is nobody in the customer pipeline....

Egg is nuts for not participating more in VAF and being more in control of the discussion.
 
Please all, keep this a classified ad engine for sale thread

All,

Please understand I am only looking for someone that is interested in purchasing my Eggenfellner Subaru engine I have on order. It is at a reduced price and delivery is due in April.

avee8tor
 
Apparently the "lines" are getting shorter for Jan. Sad, as the subaru is a great looking engine and just to be different does appeal to me. I will stick with the lycosaurus. It is odd how the posts get edited like this so quickly. Hmmm. Makes one think. First time i have watched it happen over a no big deal post.

The "edited" post was deleted by the author of the post, no conspiracies at work here. :)
 
Last edited:
Don't know about that but I did notice that Gary is no longer listed on Egg's site (other than some old testimonials). He seemed to be trying hard to get them through some growing pains.. One thing's for sure. When word gets out that you can't cancel a big-deposit delayed order, its going to make prospective customers a bit edgy about sending in large deposits for new product. It implies that there is nobody in the customer pipeline....

When I cancelled my second order, Gary ASSURED me that my cancellation was no big deal as there were PLENTY of customers for the engine...didn't believe it then, I don't believe it now.:rolleyes:

Egg is nuts for not participating more in VAF and being more in control of the discussion.

Agreed. I think he would really benefit from participating...I have no doubt that he (or someone from the factory) monitors the forums on a regular basis.
 
No offence to subbie users, but better stick to a known lycasaurus quantity if your engine skills are as limited as mine. It still baffles me why so many people go with a product which has no price ,quality ,consumption or performance advantage over a Lycasaurus.
Maybe one day I will see the light.;)
 
Eggenfellner

Someone emailed me and informed me that some information on this tread was not on target. I am happy to report the facts and I am sure those that visit our facility, or have seen the many engines we build would confirm them.
We are not going out of business :) Our most frequent complaint is that we are behind on deliveries. We are behind because we are extremely busy. We are not giving refunds as freely any more. We did decide to refund Tim with a restocking fee and he has agreed. What happened to the first RV-10 was not engine related. No more info until the NTSB report. An incredible RV-10 engine is in the new 3.6L 2008 engine. Search the 2008 Tribeka to read about this new engine. We are stronger than ever but not for everyone. We are as small company and work 12-hour days. If you can't stand delays, you might be in trouble with us. But if you want to be a part of what we do, you will get personalized service through a 24 hr forum and our cell phones are always on. Those that through out random and unfounded comments have no idea of the damage they do to the community. People are trying to find out what engine to install and they should be able to make this decision based on factual information only. If you are unsure of whom we are, just come and visit. The door is open all of the time.

Jan Eggenfellner
 
I want to be very careful here. I think that the automotive engines have a future. They are very reliable. I bought a Subaru car based on the reliability of the engine. That said I want to see how Jan is treating his existing customers. I have a friend with a flying a Subaru powered RV. Ok, It is now grounded at the moment waiting the new gen III gearbox. If he gets it, and it is good I will think about recommending the Subi package. If the plane sits on the ground with the priority going to new customers I would have to question the wisdom of buying from Jan. Hey this is the obvious right? Customer support is a key element in the decision process.

Hope to be able to give a thumbs up report soon. I would very much like to see true experimental work pay off. You builders really rock. I was a bit timid myself and have the old Lyconasaurus in there. Next time I will try experimenting myself. I am impressed with what you can do if you try.

With regard to customer support, my experience has been good and it goes back to 2003. I started with a 2.5 engine and switched to the H6 after a SC failure. Jan and I each have crawled out through a broken windscreen after an engine out landing and flip and are brothers in a sense of having shared that experience. :)

That's not to say there have not been problems with the product and disappointments and disagreements along the way. GEN1 and GEN2 did not work (with the H6 in particular) and it cost down time and money. Shortly after installing GEN3, it was recalled for a thrust washer upgrade and seal replacement and since then I reported the front seal was still leaking and Jan offered to swap it out immediately. As it turns out, the seal is not leaking but a recently overhauled MT prop is swinging a minor bit of surplus grease. The point being, while I was not happy with all the problems with the PSRU's, factory support has not been lacking whenever possible. I've been to the factory by car and air 4 or 5 times and they have always dropped whatever they were doing to visit with a customer, one time we swapped out GEN1 for GEN2 and they arranged for MT to come over to balance the prop.

That being said, this an on going experimental effort. The H6 is a solid engine and if treated with a bit of care, is as reliable as any Lycoming. It is easier to check compression and mine is holding just fine burning everything from 87 mogas to 100LL. Lately I've settled on 97 mogas from Walmart because it gives a good balance of power and is a fuel the engine was designed to burn.

It is no secret, I do not like blowing these engines but to each his own. Normal aspiration is just fine for my type of flying.
 
Last edited:
The first instance is not an RV10. Neither report draws any conclusions about power loss. Fuel, ignition, mechanical failure can all cause power loss.

We saw several power loss incidents in 2007 on RVs with Lycoming power as well. Most were not core engine failures to my knowledge. EI failures, blocked induction systems etc. caused a couple I can remember here. These all result in forced landings irregardless.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20071111X01782&key=1. This one is also undetermined at this point.

Let's wait for the full reports.
 

The results are also pending on this report but it was very clear what happened from viewing the airplane / engine. Again, the information belong to the NTSB until public. Eggenfellner Aircraft has been against a dual alternator system on any installations. NTSB reports are valuable and we can learn from them.

Jan Eggenfellner
 
No offence to subbie users, but better stick to a known lycasaurus quantity if your engine skills are as limited as mine. It still baffles me why so many people go with a product which has no price ,quality ,consumption or performance advantage over a Lycasaurus.
Maybe one day I will see the light.;)


It is true that you might want to stay convensional if you are not that much into the workings of engines. However, for those that are, they have a hard time rationalizing the older designs over that of the more up to date. As far as the advantages, well, you would have to fly behind one to know. The light usually come on very quickly when we give rides :)
Jan
 
Jan, are you interested in technical discussion regarding your gearboxes and other rotating parts?
 
Jan, are you interested in technical discussion regarding your gearboxes and other rotating parts?

I don't think Jan will want to go there. Gen1, Gen2 are grounded per the website and a statement from Jan. Gen3's have been promised, delayed for about a year now and probably need to be redesigned too.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
reduction drives

Just a question for the engine folks. There are a pile of auto engines out there that seem to be working. The p51 mustangs replicas, the spitfire replicas etc are using suzuki, and gm/isuzu engines in them. They too are spinning in the 5-6000 rpm range. Since i think most can agree that the technology in auto engines is more advanced than lyco's, why is making a bullet proof gear box such a big deal. (there are a lot of moving things out there that have much heavier duty gearboxes that dont **** out) There are lots of planes all over the world flying on higher rpm engines. Not my thing, i will go lyco but its interesting to me. Have you ever watched some of those 24 and 48 hour endurance races where they beat the stuffing out of subaru's amount others and they are pretty tough. 48 hours full throttle up mountains, through mud...that says alot about an engine imho.
I love those spitfire kits, but they package it with a gm engine. Hmm oh ya and the kit is SEVERAL hundred thousand. Just asking.
 
Just a question for the engine folks. Why is making a bullet proof gear box such a big deal. Just asking.
Vibrations and weight.

In cars your wheels turn between 20 to 100 (low range 4x4) times than prop, plus there is suspension, tires itself and CV joints between transmission and wheels. In planes you have prop connected directly to gearbox turning roughly 2x slower than engine. Every single imbalance (also from turbulences!) shakes everything pretty badly. And on top of that you want to shave every ounce of it you can.
 
The p51 mustangs replicas, the spitfire replicas etc are using suzuki, and gm/isuzu engines in them. They too are spinning in the 5-6000 rpm range. Since i think most can agree that the technology in auto engines is more advanced than lyco's, why is making a bullet proof gear box such a big deal.

I'm going slightly OT and avoiding the debate about the Egg, but just an observation point re: the P-51 replica comment. Take a second look at the Stewart S-51 and see how many actually fly any real hours without failures. We have a nice one locally (it is drop dead gorgeous), but he doesn't fly it much. You can infer what you will from that. There was another S-51 passing thru earlier this fall and was stranded at a local airport due to a partial engine failure. Rather than fix the engine the owner, disgusted at a number of engine related issues just took the wings off and transported it back home. Sorry no details, but it just paints a picture for you.
 
<<I don't think Jan will want to go there.>>

Let's not start throwing rocks so quickly, please. Truth is, we know very little about the important details, and I for one would like to know.
 
I'm going slightly OT and avoiding the debate about the Egg, but just an observation point re: the P-51 replica comment. Take a second look at the Stewart S-51 and see how many actually fly any real hours without failures. We have a nice one locally (it is drop dead gorgeous), but he doesn't fly it much. You can infer what you will from that. There was another S-51 passing thru earlier this fall and was stranded at a local airport due to a partial engine failure. Rather than fix the engine the owner, disgusted at a number of engine related issues just took the wings off and transported it back home. Sorry no details, but it just paints a picture for you.

There has been numerous engine issues with a Stewart P-51 replica in this area too. But it sure looks good! IMO, they are the best looking kitbuilts......period!

L.Adamson
 
PSRU's are the hard part.

My PSRU has been recalled already and I haven't even really used it. My prop is also going back. But I have to give Jason Day (maker of the Vesta V8 system) credit, he is footing all the repair bills. My PSRU uses a HyVo chain system. There appears to be an issue with the hub. I am sending it up to NJ next week and I am flying up there to insure that I know what is going on inside it. I think it will take some time to get all the kinks worked out of the PSRU. I don't think it will have a catastrophic failure but will degrade over time. Slack check in the PSRU is one of the checklist items. You can tell the level of degradation by the amount of slack in the chain. I have been taking things slowly to let others who are a little in front (with their Vesta V8's of different airplanes) of me to work out the kinks. Once I get the PSRU back down here it is going to be time to fly this puppy! :)
 
Toyota engines

Just noticed this thread. Yeah, I agree that the car engines (depending of the manufacturer for sure) can be reliable.

Go to http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/ select "watch videos" from lower left corned. New window opens, from there under Stunts select "Indestructible truck" to see how much stress Toyota can take...

Same video, or at least parts of it, can be found from many video services.
 
IMO the best PSRU out there is the geareddrives PSRU for the Chevy. It uses a centrifugal clutch which allows the PSRU to slip and disengages the prop for starting. The geareddrives PSRU is the only unit that ever has gotten the attention of this die-hard Lycoming guy.
 
IMO the best PSRU out there is the geareddrives PSRU for the Chevy. It uses a centrifugal clutch which allows the PSRU to slip and disengages the prop for starting. The geareddrives PSRU is the only unit that ever has gotten the attention of this die-hard Lycoming guy.

This PSRU was on a plane that crashed. What was the cause of the crash?
 
The gearbox design just has to be right to begin with. As I've mentioned before, there have been far more piston aircraft engines made with gearboxes than without, obviously it can work just fine. It's all in the details.

This is a learning process for those involved as Todd and others have pointed out. There are new designs coming out soon which will be fully tested and validated for the higher hp market, building on previous experience.

I think the discussions on VAF here (thanks Dan) have prompted PSRU designers to look at the whole big picture. That can only be a good thing. Obviously there have been many PSRUs with issues over the last 20 years. Let's learn and improve.
 
Last edited:
Just a question for the engine folks. There are a pile of auto engines out there that seem to be working. The p51 mustangs replicas, the spitfire replicas etc are using suzuki, and gm/isuzu engines in them. They too are spinning in the 5-6000 rpm range. Since i think most can agree that the technology in auto engines is more advanced than lyco's, why is making a bullet proof gear box such a big deal. (there are a lot of moving things out there that have much heavier duty gearboxes that dont **** out) There are lots of planes all over the world flying on higher rpm engines. Not my thing, i will go lyco but its interesting to me. Have you ever watched some of those 24 and 48 hour endurance races where they beat the stuffing out of subaru's amount others and they are pretty tough. 48 hours full throttle up mountains, through mud...that says alot about an engine imho.
I love those spitfire kits, but they package it with a gm engine. Hmm oh ya and the kit is SEVERAL hundred thousand. Just asking.

Today in the replica fighter kit arena, auto engines are now becoming recommended choices by the manufacturers. Titan has the Mini Merlin (Suzuki V6) and is working on two other auto conversions to be used in their aircraft. The existing aircraft engines have either become too expensive (914) or do not fit stock cowling contours. Titan is working on mods to improve the belt PSRU and Autoflight in NZ is building a spur gear box to be used on the T51 in place of the belt drive. This should be flying soon.

Lots of new stuff happening in the PSRU and auto engine world.:)
 
Last edited:
Titan is working on mods to improve the belt PSRU and Autopower in NZ is building a spur gear box to be used on the T51 in place of the belt drive. This should be flying soon.

Hey Ross...give me some insight into this. Has the belt redrive on the Mini-Merlin proven unsatisfactory? Details? Is Belted Air Power the supplier of this redrive? Is Belted Air involved in the redesign?

Despite Jess Meyer's aversion to internet Torsional Vibration discussions I remain very interested in their Chevy Vortech package for the RV-9A. Any insight into their redrive is valued.

Thanks
Dan
Chicago
RV-9A empennage
 
Thunder Mustang

There has been numerous engine issues with a Stewart P-51 replica in this area too. But it sure looks good! IMO, they are the best looking kitbuilts......period!

L.Adamson

The Thunder Mustang being built locally may not be quite as good looking in the metal department (it is all carbon fibre) but it is the best looking in the engine department with a custom Falconair V-12 Mini-Merlin replica engine.

All 12 of the exhaust stacks are real...:)

gil A
 
Hey Ross...give me some insight into this. Has the belt redrive on the Mini-Merlin proven unsatisfactory? Details? Is Belted Air Power the supplier of this redrive? Is Belted Air involved in the redesign?

Despite Jess Meyer's aversion to internet Torsional Vibration discussions I remain very interested in their Chevy Vortech package for the RV-9A. Any insight into their redrive is valued.

Thanks
Dan
Chicago
RV-9A empennage

There have been some problems with the V6 belt drive. This is not a Belted Air unit. A snap ring has been added to prevent a bearing from walking and there were some machining problems on some resulting in belt misalignment. Some have had good success, others have had premature belt problems.

Some people just don't like belt drives so Autoflight is making a gear drive for those operators. The T51 is a popular design so they could sell many units.

I prefer gears myself but there are some very well proven belt drives out there like the RFI designs. Again, it's in the details.

Maybe we can post some of these comments on a PSRU and other engines thread instead of this one on Eggenfellner engines?
 
Last edited:
The crash was an off airport landing after a fire caused by a broken fuel line. The crash had nothing to do with the PSRU.

I didn't think it was PSRU or the engine that caused the crash. It was such shame though! That plane was beautiful and sounded really good also!
 
Since i think most can agree that the technology in auto engines is more advanced than lyco's, why is making a bullet proof gear box such a big deal.

I for one certainly do NOT agree.

The oft quoted argument that auto engines are more advanced than Lycomings is totally misleading. And it is the one single argument that most encourages experimental builders (and mechanically illiterate non gear heads in particular) to instal auto engines.

In reality the zenith of the piston engine was WW2 when literally billions of dollars were thrown at engine development and massive research and development was undertaken by all the major protagonists.

Virtually every "innovative" development that appeared in auto engines decades later appeared on aircraft piston engines during WW2. I refer to multiple valves per cylinder, turbo charging, super charging, intercoolers, over head camshafts, etc etc etc.

The reason that the Lycoming doesn't have these features is purely because it doesn't need them. The Lycoming is not a dinosaur...it is a crocodile. It is perfectly adapted technologically for it's environment.

The Lycoming is not outdated because it does not have 4 valves per cylinder. It doesn't NEED four valves per cylinder. At a steady 2300 to 2700 RPM 4 valves per cylinder will not improve performance....it would simply introduce a greater parts count and increase risk of failure for no gain.

The same can be said of complex engine management systems based on the integrated circuit which runs your electronic fuel injection system on your car. Do I want, or NEED these things on my Lycoming at a steady 2400RPM...no way. What I want is a simple and redundant ignition system which implies 2 plugs per cylinder. Does a car engine give you this.

There are now 3 major competitive players in the Lycoming/Lyclone market and they are all struggling to find any way to make any truly significant technical improvement to the basic engine.

The Lycoming is not an outdated product....it is a VERY refined product, and nothing else on the market in the horsepower range offers anything like the power to weight ratio or reliability (not to mention ease of maintenance).
 
Last edited:
Very well said, Bob! You should re-post this in the engine section under a title of it's own so it doesn't get lost in this Egg posting. Every gearhead needs to read and consider this information while trying to decide how to power their RV.
 
PSRU choices

... Titan is working on mods to improve the belt PSRU and Autopower in NZ is building a spur gear box to be used on the T51 in place of the belt drive. This should be flying soon.

Lots of new stuff happening in the PSRU and auto engine world.:)
Hi Ross,

Do you have any links to Autopower or other PSRU manufacturers? I'm faced with the Gen3 upgrade on my Eggenfellner engine, and I'd like to see if I have some choices in the PSRU department.

Thanks,
Mickey
 
Hi Ross,

Do you have any links to Autopower or other PSRU manufacturers? I'm faced with the Gen3 upgrade on my Eggenfellner engine, and I'd like to see if I have some choices in the PSRU department.

Thanks,
Mickey

All the other drives under development are offset and either spur gear or internal spur gear setups making them unsuitable for replacing non-offset PSRUs directly without changing engine mounts.

That was a mistake on the name I made. Autoflight is here: http://www.autoflight.co.nz/reduction/

Hans Teijgeler in Holland will be testing the new drive being developed in the US but this is quite heavy, being designed for 250-300hp class engines with hydraulic props. Search Flysoob under redrives for some info on this one.

For non-offset units, Tracy Crooks RWS planetary ones are the most proven and available. He has Soob adapters.
 
PSRUs

All the other drives under development are offset and either spur gear or internal spur gear setups making them unsuitable for replacing non-offset PSRUs directly without changing engine mounts.

That was a mistake on the name I made. Autoflight is here: http://www.autoflight.co.nz/reduction/

Hans Teijgeler in Holland will be testing the new drive being developed in the US but this is quite heavy, being designed for 250-300hp class engines with hydraulic props. Search Flysoob under redrives for some info on this one.

For non-offset units, Tracy Crooks RWS planetary ones are the most proven and available. He has Soob adapters.
Thanks, Ross, for the info.

Mickey
 
Rotax Service Bulletin

Quote from Avweb: "Rotax has issued a manadatory service bulletin (PDF) affecting specific 912 and 914-series engine gearboxes after a fault was found with the material used in making the gears. Under severe operating conditions, it's possible for gear teeth to break. The fix calls for replacement of the gears but the good news is that Rotax is paying the shot. Removal and replacement of the gearbox, the gear set and the installation of the new gears is all covered, as is the freight."

As I recall, Eggenfellner customers with Gen I or Gen II gearboxes had to pay several thousand dollars to replace their gearboxes, which are not flyable after 12/31/07. Why is there such a discrepancy in customer treatment between Rotax and Eggenfellner?
 
As I recall, Eggenfellner customers with Gen I or Gen II gearboxes had to pay several thousand dollars to replace their gearboxes, which are not flyable after 12/31/07. Why is there such a discrepancy in customer treatment between Rotax and Eggenfellner?


I'm guessing, that Rotax being a subsidiary of Bombardier, which is very diversified, can withstand a loss of a half million or so. Perhaps they can go back on the material supplier too.

To in cure these types of losses, would put Eggenfellner out of business; and then there would be no customer treatment, what soever.

The only other option, is to add thousands of dollars up front, which isn't the best business decision either.

L.Adamson
 
Let's not forget that the Rotax 912 is a type certificated engine and is utilized by several certificated airframe manufacturers. They must appease the warranty administrators at these companies or risk the loss of their business.
 
Let's not forget that the Rotax 912 is a type certificated engine and is utilized by several certificated airframe manufacturers. They must appease the warranty administrators at these companies or risk the loss of their business.
If these manufacturers of certificated aircraft wanted to dump Rotax, what other engine company could they go with? I don't think there are any other certificated engines in the same power and weight range. Plus, it is very expensive to change engine models on a type-certificated aircraft.

Rotax could play a lot more difficult if they wanted to, and they would still get the business. They deserve credit for picking up the tab here, when other companies, with more competition (ie. Lycoming and Continental) haven't in the past.
 
The reason I asked the question originally is that I am planning to build an RV-12 after that happy day when Van announces that the RV-12 kit is available:). In the November, 2007 edition of Sport Aviation in the classified section under engines, the Eggenfellner ad lists the RV-12 as an aircraft for which an Eggenfellner engine and PSRU is available. I've visited the Eggenfellner web site and can't find any information that identifies the engine and PSRU that is intended for the RV-12 nor can I find any readily useful information on cost, weight and envelop for the engine (I haven't greped the site yet). It would be useful to have data to enter into a trade-study matrix to make a choice, but with only data on the Rotax 912, there's only one choice.
 
As far as I know, the planned Honda based 4 cylinder for LSA aircraft is not being pursued any longer by Jan for economic reasons and the dilution of service to current customers and markets that the R&D program would require.

The Jabiru is the only relatively proven engine close in weight and performance to the 912S. If you search the forum, you'll find a few other links to other auto based possibilities but all are less proven and heavier than the 912S.

The new Conti O-200 is substantially heavier than the Rotax but was chosen by Cessna for their Skycatcher instead of the Rotax possibly for supply reasons, familiarity to A&Ps and price with the present currency situation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top