VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

  #11  
Old 03-15-2016, 08:51 AM
Kahuna's Avatar
Kahuna Kahuna is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Gold Hill, NC25
Posts: 2,400
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by woodmanrog View Post
Guys,
, why bother? .
Because the "why" matters to homebuilders. Keep asking why. Im reminded of the times when the little boy keeps asking "but why daddy?" until there is no further use. Keep asking why. The why matters.
In order to be successful as a homebuilder, knowledge, understanding, reasoning, critical thinking, and critical decisioning all come from being inquisitive to gain knowledge and understanding. Why the 2 different lengths is a very good question, and the responses were quite useful I thought. My 2 cents worth too.
__________________
Kahuna
6A, S8 ,
Gold Hill, NC25
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-15-2016, 11:54 AM
GigAir GigAir is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Gig Harbor, WA & Kailua Kona, HI
Posts: 56
Default

Thank you to every one of you for contributing to my better understanding of prop choices. I too, enjoy the little nuggets of knowledge that surface in a discussion like this. And I agree with Kahuna.

Greg Novotny
Moving forward on 140209
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-16-2016, 01:32 PM
TimO TimO is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 612
Default

I went with the slightly longer prop because...

First of all, the prop is only 1" different in ground clearance...so it's not highly significant unless clearance is a major issue or is minimal.

When I called Van's about it, they gave me the ground clearance they have with the prototype and the shorter prop. I compared that to my ground clearance that my RV-10 prop has and even with the longer prop, I'd have more clearance than my RV-10 has today.

Then I called Hartzell and talked it out with them. The longer prop should make me marginally happier from a performance standpoint. Either way isn't a big deal. But, they did say that if you ding a tip on the longer prop, you can file away and remove some of the tip to fix it. But, with the shorter prop, you have less margin that you can fix dings in the tip also. At any rate, if ground clearance wasn't critical, they seemed to think that with the added Cu.in. that the IO-390 has, the longer prop would make a great companion for the engine.

So I really don't see it as a big deal either way, if you're building the "A" model of the RV-14.
__________________
Tim Olson - CFI
RV-10 N104CD - Flying 2/2006 - 1400+ hours http://www.MyRV10.com
RV-14 N14YT - Flying 6/2016 - 350+ hours http://www.MyRV14.com
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:42 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.