Originally Posted by Z-EDD
I don't think vans have changed this, I think your blurry copy of the plans actually reads 65 25/32. As you point out 1 1/32 is an odd increase, but it is also way too much to resolve the minor discrepancies that have been reported. Mine were slightly short at the dimension shown on the plans, but I was planning on adding around 1/4 to resolve this. 1 inch could almost make them too long. Another clue is that 26/32nds should resolve to 13/16ths. Don't think Vans would make this kind of error.
You may be right, but it sure looks like 66 26/32 doesn't it? As for that dimension making them too long, I suspect you're right.
I called builder support when they opened for business yesterday morning and they thought it looked like the bigger dimension on their end as well. Their suggestion was to measure the rod ends and then do the math to determine what tube length was actually needed to get to the overall dimension of 69 9/32. When I did that, I discovered that a 66 26/32 tube is would cause the rod ends to be bottomed out on the jamb nuts to achieve this, leaving me with the ability to adjust it longer, but not shorter. Who knows, maybe that's what they intended?
I need one of these tubes at least temporarily installed to check clearance for my pitot lines. I have a heated pitot with a min length requirement for the hard lines coming off of it and the previous owners of these wings cut the hole for the pitot mast 1 bay inbd of the bell crank. The skin is just clecoed on, so now is the time to change this if there's interference with the tube.
At this point I'm just going to finish one end so I can do a trial fit for clearance and leave them long with the cockpit side unfinished until I mate the wings on down the road and can determine a real world length.