H-6 with FP prop EARLY numbers

[cjensen]

Jan shared this on the yahoo group a few days ago. These are early numbers, as the new redrive is still being tested.

By the way, I did some fixed pitch testing with the 4 blade and it is a
>great airplane in the 7. Would be even better in the 9 with more wing.
>
>I set the pitch to 1500 static and cruised at 1900 prop RPM. This gave me
>1200 fpm initial climb and 400 fpm at 12,000 feet with me and half fuel.
>
>Cruise was the same as with a constant speed at 1900 rpm or 192 mph. This makes
>the modern Subaru VERY attractive to 9 builders. get a slightly used one,
>firewall forward for $19,995, then add the 4 blade fixed at $3,200 and get
>flying. You can always use the blades in a constant speed at some later time.
>We are building 9 of these for August delivery and 3 are still available on 9
>mounts.
>
>Jan

Fairly expensive fixed pitch prop, but great cruise numbers burning 8.9gph, and much cheaper than the CS version.

[osxuser]

How much does the Electric CS 4 blade go for?

[cjensen]

Jan priced the new four blade to me for about $8000.

[gmcjetpilot]

Originally Posted by cjensen

Jan shared this on the yahoo group a few days ago. These are early numbers, as the new redrive is still being tested. Fairly expensive fixed pitch prop, but great cruise numbers burning 8.9gph, and much cheaper than the CS version.

Have you checked the weight? Jan says the H-6 is 40 lbs more than the 2.5L 4-cyl Subaru. Looking at empty weights of RV's....................

The heavy Lyc RV-9A was 1083 lbs, the heavy Subie was 1213 lbs. The simple avg of Lyc RV-9A's: 1053lbs; avg of Subie: 1162 lbs. That is over a 100 lb difference!

Also regarding W&B, fwd CG and usable payload and fuel to remain under standard Gross of 1750 lbs is a consideration, although all the Subaru RV-9A's raised the allowable max gross 100 lbs to account for the extra weight of engine/prop installation.

With a 100 lbs more already, adding the extra 40 lbs of the H-6 kind of concerns me. Plus the HP of the H-6 (alleged 220hp, but at the prop 160-180 hp) is more than Van's Aircraft intended. My conclusion is the H-6 is not a good match for the RV-9A. (Flame suite on). I just believe in following Van's recommendation. The RV-7 would be a better match, at least from a pure weight and balance point of view.


EMPTY WEIGHTS OF RV-9A's
Lycoming O-320 150 2-blade CS 1044
Lycoming O-320 160 3-blade FP 1030
Lycoming O-320 160 2-blade FP 1064
Lycoming O-320 160 2-blade FP 1063
Lycoming O-320 160 2-blade CS 1080
Lycoming O-320 160 2-blade FP 1017
Lycoming O-320 170 3-blade FP 1061
Lycoming O-320 160 2-blade FP 1050
Lycoming O-360 180 3-blade FP 1083
Eggenfellner Subaru Other Quinti 1106
Eggenfellner Subaru Other MT.... 1167
Eggenfellner Subaru Other Quinti 1213

Avg of Lycs: 1053 lbs, Avg of the Subie: 1162 lbs

G

[rv6ejguy]

I believe this is a discussion about the new 17lb. carbon fiber, 4 blade prop Egg is offering as a lighter, cheaper and less expensive alternative to the MT. Way off topic George, and I doubt too many Egg users would share your view. Egg is tailoring redrive ratios and engine rpm to limit hp in various airframes.

[gmcjetpilot]

Originally Posted by rv6ejguy

I believe this is a discussion about the new 17lb. carbon fiber, 4 blade prop Egg is offering as a lighter, cheaper and less expensive alternative to the MT. Way off topic George, and I doubt too many Egg users would share your view. Egg is tailoring redrive ratios and engine rpm to limit hp in various airframes.

I think weight and prop selection are related?

"many Egg users would share your view" Sorry what does that mean? Are you saying the extra weight does not matter? The headline is "H-6 with FP". Also WHY else would you mention the 17lb WEIGHT? Prop weight always is being talked about as a way to offset higher engine weight. The topic is H-6, and it weighs a boat load more than the smaller Subie. It needs a light prop., however I have some concern that not even a light prop will help.

You say, "Way off topic George" . I disagree, prop selection affects weight. Prop, weight and performance are all related. Weight (for what every reason) does affect the overall performance of any plane, as I'm sure any one would agree.

With the H-6's extra 40 lbs, a fixed 17 lb prop would help. I disagree with Jan's comment that empty weight of the H-6 is the same as an angle valve IO360 (200 hp) Lycoming. The smaller 2.5L Subi RV's are already as heavy or heavier as the empty weight of RV's with a IO360 Lyc. The H-6 weight is 40 lbs more than the 4-cyl Sube, per Jan's claim.

The H-6 RV's WILL BE VERY HEAVY. To stay on "topic" you will NEED a light weight FIXED prop. Even than it will still be a high empty weight RV (pushing 1200 lbs or more).

My conclusion, the H-6 is not a good match for a RV-9A which is designed for a lighter gross and lighter engine. Even with the 17 lb prop (plus bolts, spinner and extension?), The RV-9A, which was designed around a 320 Lyc, a very light engine. The H-6 installation easily will be 140 lbs more installed.


The H-6 is more suited for a RV-7(A). The dash 7 has higher gross and was designed for the IO360 angle valve. I think it's a fair, valid and reasonable comment. If you disagree I'll be glad to hear reasons and facts that dispute it. Has Jan published the installed weight of his H-6 test aircraft?

I have been building RV's since 1988. I have flown light ones and heavy ones; I like the "FEEL" of a light ones. I also have flown fixed and constant speed; I like constant speed (hydraulic). Not everyone is already hard core Sube or Lyc folks. Many new folks need the data, facts to make decisions. I am right on target and topic, respectfully submitted.

Eggenfellner needs to get the weight down, drag down and cost down. They are making steady improvements, but that weight issue is a hard one.

Cheers George


No offense to anyone, I am trying to provide useful data to everyone, not just people who only want a Subaru. Any opinion is my own and represents my experience in RV's, engineering and as an airman. No comment was intended to disparage or demean, facts and opinon are noted as such. Subaru is a nice engine, but just too heavy in my opinion, light prop or not.

[rv6ejguy]

George,

I'll join the rank of others in last week like Darwin who will leave you to your opinions. Fly safe.

[cjensen]

I've pretty much stopped reading your posts George, but for some reason, I did read this one. You are correct that this thread is about the H-6, but I NEVER said anything about weight. It's about the H-6 and PERFORMANCE with the FP version of the VERY light 4 blade prop.

Frankly, the weight of the engine is somewhat beneficial to me anyway, as I am building a -7 and I plan to keep the airplane as light as possible in other areas. You keep saying that the H-6 is 40 pounds heavier than the 2.5. Yup, it is. I'm not comparing the 2.5 to the H-6. I'm comparing the H-6 to a 360. -9 builders have more of a decision to make since the H-6 does weigh more than the 2.5 and a 320, but the power output is being dealt with by limiting RPM.

Your comments on weight related to Subies can be turned just as easily on ANY engined airplane. There's a lot more to empty weight than the engine (panel, interior, paint, primer). You know that, right?

One more thing...how can you "disagree" with Jan and his comments about comparing the weights of the H-6 and the IO-360? Have you weighed both engines full firewall forward as he has??? Just wondering since you are always right on target and topic.

At this point, I too will join the others, and leave you to your opinions. Enjoy!

[cawmd82]

FWIW: I went today and visited Jan and looked over his new wares. I have heard,read, and listened to all that are the naysayers of anything not emanating from Lyco etal. Coming away from all that and sitting in a hotel near MCO I am glad I went to see the H6 run and really wish that they had several--or even one-- plane(s) with 500ish hours floating around to prove up what APPEARS to be some really good design and engineering work.

Having said that, I simply do not understand the price structure. It is hard enough to argue that the Sub is as good, much less better than a Lyco for an RV-anything. Weight is a big issue that is glossed over and covered with talk of quiet, smooth,etc...............

Back to price----Why--exactly--do we get to pay $5-7 k beyond Lyco clone-Hartzell prices to be "Chief Test Pilot--Egg RV8"

Unlike some non-Lycophobes, I really believe Jan is on to something VERY good. I simply need a legit track record on the specific stuff I am being asked to buy before I sign up.

Chuck Wallace Dallas Texas

[gmcjetpilot]

Originally Posted by cjensen

I've pretty much stopped reading your posts George, but for some reason, I did read this one. You are correct that this thread is about the H-6

That is real nice of you. I answer you comments in the following post, but I am going to address rv6ejguy first.

Originally Posted by rv6ejguy

George, I'll join the rank of others in last week like Darwin who will leave you
to your opinions. Fly safe.

Well that's fine, I would prefer you don't read them because your replies are
rude. Darwin is scary.

Talk about off topic, you bring up a thread on composites, sets an all time
record for off topic post, plus your other comment is devoid of any
usefulness, just a lame personal attack. I guess when you got nothing smart
to say.....


As far as Darwin, aka, RV7guy, here is the thread, you all be the judge:
I have "considerable" experience" (I love composites)

When you start a thread off by saying, "I'm an expert let me tell you and
Van's Aircraft", it's hard to take criticism I guess. Read the thread.

Darwin/RV7guy suggested some composite prep or "processes" that I think
are counter productive, and many agreed with me. He got angry, singling me
out, like you are, went into a huff. That's too bad. Fortunately people ignored
him and continued to make excellent post's we all benefited from; He had
started this thread about how he felt Van ignored his suggestions and that a
gel coat cowl or saturate layup would be better! I disagree because I worked
with both cowl types. Read the thread and decide. It's a great thread with
good info and different ideas. There's no one way or one right opinon, but
Darwin and rv6ejguy don't feel that way apparently.

What I said: Darwin likes Gel Coat Cowls and Acetone, A LOT!

Don't worry about Darwin, he sent me an unsolicited e-mail out-of-the-blue
10 days later, after my post on his thread I totally forgot about. In his email
he called me a fraud, made a vague threat and something about an oil leak?
Up till then I had no issue with him, but that don't fly. I guess he takes his
fiberglass seriously? Nice guy I'm sure. Now I know a little of what
it's like to have a stalker.

That's OK, I worked with composites for 20 years and my master?s degree in
engineering was in advanced composites. RV7guy has got some issues but it
ain't me. I block this noise out. Read the thread you tell me. I am sure he is
an expert and knows more than I ever will. Well I know he told me so and he
was "upper management". Upper management of what, don't know. So
rv6ejguy, get in line, good luck.

Its OK to have an opinion a politely disagree, even with an expert. I get many
thanks from people that I help or like reading my post. Can't make everyone
happy. rv6ejguy take the initiative and block viewing any of my post. Don't
talk about it, do it, please. I would prefer it, especially if you're going to be
rude.

I hope others find THIS and following post useful and helpful. That's all that
counts, and whining and personal comments are a waste time and totally
OFF TOPIC.

My momma told me if you can't say anything nice.... so I'll stick to the facts;
you can't go wrong. My opinion is the H-6 is a bit too heavy for the RV-9A, deal with it.

Cheers George