What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Rotax Carb Floats

dwmillsap

Member
Greetings All,

Seems the supply of Bing Carb Floats for the Rotax 912 has now completely dried up. Lockwood is now saying eight weeks minimum for the new redesigned version and the old version are sold out. Does anyone have a set of carb floats they would sell me? I just need two for now. Please let me know.

Thanks,

Dennis

[email protected]
252-864-4230
 
I have some old floats out at the hangar. I will get them tomorrow morning when I head out that way.

I think I have four. There should be at least two serviceable floats in the bunch. You can have them, just PM me an address.
 
YOUR'E FIRED

I'll stand on my previous statement that someone at ROTAX should be fired. This was a known problem about a year ago? and Rotax still really hasn't fixed it??? What the hay? Surely, someone at Rotax knows about this problem??? If it was my company, someone would have been fires months ago - and his/her replacement too if the problem extended this long.

I have to ASSUME (you all know how this word breaks down) that someone at ROTAX with the power to make corrections to the float supply system or the production changes must know that there is a great need for the improved? floats. I'll bet that if someone in the US started selling a float that was the appropriate size and price, that Rotax would 'fix' their supply/engineering problems almost immediately. This really leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
 
I haven't seen anyone post any comments on Bing's involvement.
Rotax is the receiver not the float Mfg. Without getting into any details Bing didn't even think there was a problem.
Possibly if someone dug around they might be able to get the whole book and not just the prologue.
I would bet there is there is plenty of blame to go around for everyone.
 
I have two 912uls on my Aircam, brand new, an I need floats as well. I guess we are all have to wait.
Wish someone would come up with a fix!
Ron
 
Deja-vu all over again. Every time an owner with a grounded airplane complains that Rotax has let them down, one person comes to their defense.

Sorry, but when you spend $18,000 on an engine made by a huge manufacturing enterprise, you expect better. I expected better when my 2006 engine crankcase failed (as they were prone to doing before the redesign) and got not a single word of response from Rotax. Yes, the engine was registered. Yes, the prop was pitched correctly. Yes, the engine was maintained by a Rotax-certified mechanic. Yes, I submitted the correct paperwork. Yes, I worked with one of the major distributors.

So, I don't need to discuss Bing versus Rotax. Bing is a tiny company. Rotax is a huge company. I purchased the engine from Rotax. They need to do better.

Making excuses for Rotax, when so many owners are disappointed and inconvenienced, is just a bunch of hollow words. It doesn't comfort anyone.
 
I would have to agree. We as consumers should not have to take on the part manufacturers that Rotax has contracted with to supply their parts. That is on Rotax. When we buy a car we as the consumer rely on the car manufacturer be it Ford, GM, Toyota, etc to take care of us as the buyer/consumer. Bottom Line: Rotax needs to step up and make it right with us not Bing or anyone else.
 
I'm not defending anyone. More knowledge isn't a defense it's just information. Just thought you might want to know more facts and not speculate. I didn't intend for this to be offensive so I have deleted the post.
 
Last edited:
Sink,

I don't think anyone found you post offensive. Like you said, the more information, the better. The reaction you are seeing from the members of this list is indication of our frustration. Like I said in the other thread on this subject, I hold Rotax and Van's responsible for finding a timely solution and resolution to this problem. Van's gave me no choice on the engine for my ELSA. They should be very involved in the solution, however, there has been nothing but silence from them. Don't get me wrong. I love my airplaine and have enjoyed the great support from Van's during my building phase. Now I need their support and help to keep my airplane flying.

Alex
 
Sink, I appreciate the information you provide. Please keep it coming! I agree with Alex--no one was offended; they're just frustrated, and rightly so.
 
Sink,

I don't think anyone found you post offensive. Like you said, the more information, the better. The reaction you are seeing from the members of this list is indication of our frustration. Like I said in the other thread on this subject, I hold Rotax and Van's responsible for finding a timely solution and resolution to this problem. Van's gave me no choice on the engine for my ELSA. They should be very involved in the solution, however, there has been nothing but silence from them. Don't get me wrong. I love my airplaine and have enjoyed the great support from Van's during my building phase. Now I need their support and help to keep my airplane flying.

Alex

I know it may sound a bit callous, but you had the choice whether to purchase an RV-12 or be a customer of another company. That in it self is a choice.

No one could have foreseen this type of issue, so I am not sure how having another engine choice would have made a difference other than that people that did choose Rotax would not have someone else to point the blame at (I am not pointing a finger at anyone in particular.... it is just something our society has evolved in to... hence our totally twisted legal system).

The notion that Van's should be doing something because they have leverage with Rotax is false. Yes, Van's buys a lot of engines compared to other US kit and S-LSA manufacturers, but when factored in to the world wide production volume, it is a very small percentage.
We sympathize with your frustrations, because we are in the same boat. We get no price breaks on replacement or maintenance parts (we buy from Lockwood or CPS) and have the same frustrations over the high part prices, price fixing and sometimes poor availability.
Even with some of these frustrations, there is not another engine that comes close to the power / weight, and level of engineering and support that the Rotax 912 has (if there was it would be considered as an alternative).
 
Hi Scott,

Thanks for your reply. I realize I had a choice in what kit I purchased. I made my decision based on the reputation of the kit manufacturer, the quality of the kit and the flying qualities of the airplane. The availability of ongoing support was yet another factor that influenced my decision.

That said, I'm afraid that you have completely missed my point. Let's assume you just purchased a new Chevy truck. Two months after the purchase, the rear differential blows up. It is manufactured by Dana Spicer. Further, the gears inside the housing are manufactured by yet another company under sub contract to Spicer. So, when you tow your new truck into the Chevy agency, do they tell you that you need to work with Dana Spicer directly, or worse, the third party to procure the repair parts? That is not the way we treat customers here in the US.

I understand that no one foreseen this issue. That has no bearing on what needs to be done to mitigate it. As you know we, as the end user of the engines, do not have the ability to contact Rotax or Bing directly. They have isolated themselves quite well from their customers. Their dealers do not seem at all interested in helping with the issue. All we get from them are excuses and finger pointing, and no commitment as to when our replacement parts will arrive.

Thanks for your offer of sympathy, but I expected a bit more from a company with Van's reputation. Specifically, I was looking forward to some help. It's unfortunate that this potential avenue also appears to be a dead end.

I'm lucky in the sense that a local mechanic on my field was able to loan me four used but serviceable floats. I'm back in the air for now. I feel for the owners of the airplanes that might be grounded as a result of this mess.

Alex
 
That said, I'm afraid that you have completely missed my point. Let's assume you just purchased a new Chevy truck. Two months after the purchase, the rear differential blows up. It is manufactured by . Further, the gears inside the housing are manufactured by yet another company under sub contract to Spicer. So, when you tow your new truck into the Chevy agency, do they tell you that you need to work with Dana Spicer directly, or worse, the third party to procure the repair parts? That is not the way we treat customers here in the US.

I do get your point, but I don't think it is a valid comparison.

Example:
I imagine that Dana Spicer actually has very few different customers. But they do a huge (100's of thousands of assemblies) volume to each of the few customers that they do have, and each of those is probably custom built to the customers specifications.
I agree that that puts their customer (Chevy) in a good position for having lots of leverage in negotiating.

Vans buys 100-150 engines per year. That is a very small portion of the 50,000+ that have now been produced.
I hope you can see that there is no comparison between your example and the position Van's is in when dealing with Rotax.
 
If you buy a new G1000 Cessna 182T (now available again after the problems with the diesel), the airframe warranty lies with Cessna, the engine with Lycoming and the avionics with Garmin.

Aeroplanes and the various responsibilities are not like automobile world.

Oh, and at work we've been waiting for nearly two months for a pair of new Bendix mags (to fit onto a standard Lycoming IO-360) through the UK TCM dealer - who can't get them out of TCM....

Sink - thanks for posting the info - and please carry on the good work.
 
My 912 s/n is below the SB s/n range, but due to overflowing carb bowl I had both floats sunk in rt carb and one sunk in lt carb. Ordered mine from Lockwood in mid-April, and as of last phone call to Lockwood, probably won't get them for another 3-6 weeks. Very very frustrating. Per Lockwood, they have been ordering enough to meet demand, but have been getting only minimal shipments.
 
If you buy a new G1000 Cessna 182T (now available again after the problems with the diesel), the airframe warranty lies with Cessna, the engine with Lycoming and the avionics with Garmin.

Aeroplanes and the various responsibilities are not like automobile world.

Oh, and at work we've been waiting for nearly two months for a pair of new Bendix mags (to fit onto a standard Lycoming IO-360) through the UK TCM dealer - who can't get them out of TCM....

Sink - thanks for posting the info - and please carry on the good work.

And thanks to RVBuilder2002 for being a consistent resource for RV'ers. I am also a frustrated Rotax owner but I hope we can keep from taking our frustrations out on each other.
 
Mturnerb - I was by no means attacking Scott, Vans or any other contributor to this site. Just looking for some help. I appreciate Scott's opinion and his contributions on this site. Sometimes I do not agree, but that's life. We are all entitled to differences in opinion.

Aerofurb - Good point and reality check.

Alex
 
Scott,

I am sure your numbers are correct regarding the fraction of production Vans consumes, but I think you under estimate the impact of a very public expression of Vans' dissatisfaction with Rotax. You guys are the gold standard in homebuilts, and what you say has impact.

Rich
 
floats

I ordered floats from Lockwood's March 26th and received notice of shipment Thu. Not yet in my hands, but just maybe supplies are increasing. I have not flown yet, been working too much. My original floats are still "floating" but I will have the peace of mind installed before first flight........ hopefully in August. If not for work, this float thing could have grounded me. I guess soldered brass floats cost too much to manufacture, too old school. Holley's and Mikuni's used to have them and didn't have much trouble with them. I've thought about making some Bing brass floats...... but the liability would be too high. Maybe a mechanical fuel injection system......... I made my own for my racecar that worked well but aircraft fuel system testing is not something I'm willing to attempt. I'll stick with the Bing and deal with the hiccups and maybe next year we'll have nearly forgotten this episode.
 
And thanks to RVBuilder2002 for being a consistent resource for RV'ers. I am also a frustrated Rotax owner but I hope we can keep from taking our frustrations out on each other.

Absolutely - Scott puts a lot of his own time into commenting here and it should be remembered that posting here isn't the appropriate means of contacting Van's Tech department for advice (or complaint).

Whilst I admit Scott and I sometimes have differences of opinion that doesn't mean to say I don't value his input at all.

Regarding warranties, I should point out that it isn't just Cessna that split the warranty responsibilities - most aircraft manufacturers do it this way.

On the subject of Van's buying power - no doubt Van's is probably one of the (if not the) major worldwide player in the sales of new Lycomings, this is not the case with the Rotax.

The Rotax 91x series is, I would think, by far and above the most popular engine installed in GA aircraft manufactured outside the USA - and these days that is a lot of aircraft.
 
Rotax is owned by Bombardier a Canadian company which may not even know about the gross failures of customer service and marketing that their Austrian employees are making.

PS: I too am very, very tired of people defending Rotax for this stuff. They need their butts kicked hard!

EBB
 
Rotax is owned by Bombardier a Canadian company which may not even know about the gross failures of customer service and marketing that their Austrian employees are making.

PS: I too am very, very tired of people defending Rotax for this stuff. They need their butts kicked hard!

EBB

Much as I hate to say it, EBB, but you're wrong - Bombardier sold off Bombardier Recreational Products in April 2003 and that in turn became rebranded as BRP in June 2004.

I'd hate you to waste a phone call to the wrong company when you let them in on the secret....

One other thought - over the years, how many float designs and manufacturing materials have there been in Marvel-Schebler/Precision carbs?

I'm very, very tired too - of those who can't see the bigger picture.... ;)
 
Last edited:
Mr. Parr (Chief Engineer),

Here is the big picture from this side of the Atlantic:

There are well over four thousand engines out there with potentially defective (and recalled) floats if I just count the 912UL and ULS series. To that you can add the 914's and all the carburetor float replacements since 2012.

It has been approximately six months since Rotax issued the SB, and floats have just now started trickling in. Many Rotax owners such as myself have been left completely in the dark by Rotax and their distributors/dealers. I ordered my floats five months ago. Despite taking my money, I have yet to receive any official communication or a delivery date despite my countless inquiries.

Perhaps this is the norm for customer service in Europe. I'm glad your customers readily accept having an airplane grounded for six months. But since the bad news comes from an engineer instead of a lowly mechanic, it must make it credible and palatable.

I guess we in the US are narrow minded since we expect better customer service than this. That is a expectation that I will live with.

Alex
 
Alex

I presume by the 4000 engines statement, you're talking worldwide? No, that isn't a great situation and no, arguably not acceptable - in the USA or the rest of the world.

As Sink posted (but sadly, later deleted) there is more to it simply being the problem of Rotax - they don't actually make the floats.

How many aircraft have actually been grounded for the 6 months you quote?

In our hangar we have a Lycoming powered aircraft that has been grounded for two months waiting for a pair of TCM magnetos to arrive from TCM. That's not acceptable either and we can get no accurate delivery date from the UK TCM dealer.



I'm not entirely sure what you are alluding to with the snidey 'engineer' comments but that might be a language thing. Over here in the UK, my job title is indeed 'Chief Engineer' - that is my role/position in the company I work for and the licence I hold is an equivalent of an A&P/AI. My licence authorises me to release aircraft to service following maintenance inputs and is termed an engineer's licence by the regulating authority. I'm sorry if you don't like that term.

Keep smiling.
 
Last edited:
Dear Aerofurb:
Sorry that I was wrong about Bombardier.

But....what kind of "bigger picture" do you want?....mabye TWO years instead of ONE with no new non sinking floats. I still think Rotax needs its butt kicked up between its shoulder blades.

EBB
 
So When???

There is no argument that Rotax has dropped the ball - the only question is do they give a darn? It comes to mind that Rotax introduced a newer and better 912 engine recently - was it last year - don't remember but it is fuel injected and doesn't have a carburetor - hmmmm. I know that the SLING ELSA/SLSA uses that engine and they reportedly are a very nice engine.

I wonder why come enterprising company somewhere in the world hasn't produced an 'aftermarket' float for the 912 ULS? Just wondering.
 
If you want to read up on BRP you can do that here: http://www.brp.com/en-us/engines/rotax-aircraft-engines

BRP may stand for "Bombardier Recreational Products" although their web page doesn't mention that nor does it say anything about Bombardier "selling" their recreational products to BRP in 2007 as Aerofurb announced here.

BRP's pages are full of the standard "corporate BS" and "vision statements" we get from almost any company these days....even the very big one where I was an officer. BRP's products include such items as Ski-Doos and Johnson outboards among others.

The company appears to be so big that if you kick it in the butt the head may feel the pressure in about ten years.

I look forward to Aerofurb and others similarly afflicted attempting to defend the gross failure of customer focus and service that their handling of the "mandatory" SB on carb floats is. A smaller and better company would have either responded by now or it would have been eaten up by competitors.

EBB
 
The history came from here:

BRP History

2003
Bombardier sells its Recreational Products division
In April, Bombardier Inc. announces the sale of the Bombardier Recreational Products division.


.......

2004
The BRP brand is born
In mid-June, BRP launches its new brand and signature: leveraging a rich heritage of entrepreneurial spirit and innovation with a renewed focus on providing consumers worldwide with uniquely crafted products that inspire passion and enthusiasm.



Note: There was a typo in my previous post with a 2014 date instead of the correct 2004 - now amended.

Now off to the hangar to stroke my beautiful Rotax.... ;)
 
Back
Top