Noah
Well Known Member
Getting ready to order firewall eyeballs for control cables. There are 3 varieties offered by Vans / Spruce:
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pdf/eyeballApplication.pdf
My preference is to use steel as it's lighter than the aluminum version (!) and probably going to survive fire better than aluminum at the firewall. However, in looking at these photos, I don't think it will work. Vans control cables measure about .345" dia, and the penetrations measure either .260 or .375. If you look at the photo of the steel version, it has a thinwall ID which would probably be completely removed if drilled up from .260 to .345 in. Thus it seems that only the aluminum versions will work with Vans cables. Can anybody confirm this? Is there any advantage / disadvantage to the single hole version vs. the multi-hole version?
Also, in looking at old posts on this subject, EPM-Avcorp is mentioned as having alternatives to the eyeballs. However, the web addresses for this company are no longer valid. Is there a current URL for these products?
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pdf/eyeballApplication.pdf
My preference is to use steel as it's lighter than the aluminum version (!) and probably going to survive fire better than aluminum at the firewall. However, in looking at these photos, I don't think it will work. Vans control cables measure about .345" dia, and the penetrations measure either .260 or .375. If you look at the photo of the steel version, it has a thinwall ID which would probably be completely removed if drilled up from .260 to .345 in. Thus it seems that only the aluminum versions will work with Vans cables. Can anybody confirm this? Is there any advantage / disadvantage to the single hole version vs. the multi-hole version?
Also, in looking at old posts on this subject, EPM-Avcorp is mentioned as having alternatives to the eyeballs. However, the web addresses for this company are no longer valid. Is there a current URL for these products?
Last edited: