[todehnal]

About a year ago, there was someone fitting a Jabiru 3300 to an RV-9. In fact, there were rumors that there was a firewall forward package being developed. It seems like it was our Australian friends who were undertaking that project. Does anyone have a web site of progress update?

Thanks in advance

Tom

 

[cjensen]

I know of a guy that put the Jab 5100 on his RV-9A in OZ...I have a picture of it on my other computer, but it was a 5100...not sure about a 3300 on one. Makes sense though!

 

[db1yg]

That individual was Ivan Solesberry in Australia. I talked to him several times about the combo of the 8 cylinder Jabiru with the 9a. He said it performed much like an 0320/160 in the 9 but was much smoother. I have not heard from him in several months but another on this list stays in touch---Jake do you know anything about the status of the Jab/9 combo???

Cheers,

db

 

[mullokintyre]

One engine was fitted to a 6A that Colin Critcheley flew as a test bed. It has since been sold into WA, where I believe it is for sale once again. I saw the plane fly at Bundaberg some years ago, and it certainly performed well, with a lovely rich note from the straight eight.



if you go to the followink link,
http://www.jabiru.net.au/
and slect engine packages from the menu to the side it shows fire wall forward packages for a number of aircraft including RV's for the 5100, but does not show any for the six cylinder engine for the RV's.

In my humble opinion the six cylinder Jabiru would be underpowered in an RV.

If you are serious about putting a Jab engione, then perhaps I can put you in touch with Colin.
Mick Muller in OZ

 

[todehnal]

In my humble opinion the six cylinder Jabiru would be underpowered in an RV.

If you are serious about putting a Jab engione, then perhaps I can put you in touch with Colin.
Mick Muller in OZ

I am very serious! This past weekend, I attended an RV event at South Lakeland FL. This is the home of Jay Kurtz. He is the guy that built the RV-9, with the O-235 and weighed in at 903 lbs. He has 108 hp and claims that with the Sturba prop, he is only pulling around 85 hp. It flies great because of the extremely light weight. So, 120 hp with and additional weight reduction of another 50 lbs or so, should make one wonderful flying RV!!

Thanking you in advance for your help contacting Mick Muller.

Tom

 

[N941WR]

I am very serious! This past weekend, I attended an RV event at South Lakeland FL. This is the home of Jay Kurtz. He is the guy that built the RV-9, with the O-235 and weighed in at 903 lbs. He has 108 hp and claims that with the Sturba prop, he is only pulling around 85 hp. It flies great because of the extremely light weight. So, 120 hp with and additional weight reduction of another 50 lbs or so, should make one wonderful flying RV!!

Thanking you in advance for your help contacting Mick Muller.

Tom

Tom,

I must agree with Jay's assessment. My 135 HP, 990 lb -9 just jumps off the ground and keeps climbing as high as I've ever wanted to take it (11,500).

 

[Sonic]

I'm thinking about the same thing Rv-9A with the Jabiru 3300 engine. Does anyone know if any builders have a firewall forward kit made up?

 

[todehnal]

I'm thinking about the same thing Rv-9A with the Jabiru 3300 engine. Does anyone know if any builders have a firewall forward kit made up?

One of the Jabiru dealers, here in the USA, was looking for an RV-9 to use to develop a firewall forward package, but that was about a year ago. I think that this could become a very popular package, unless Lycoming gets their act together on their light O-235, which would be a much easier build, since Van already has the engine mount and cowling for it.

Tom

 

[N941WR]

Aircraft performance has a lot to do with the weight / HP ratio. That said, you build a heavy airplane and it just won't feel as good as a light one, no matter how much HP is up front.

I just checked on the Jabiru 8, it weighs the same as the as the O-290 in my plane, 264 lbs. What I couldn't tell is if this included the starter and other accessories.

It would be good to see the W&B on a Jabiru powered RV.

 

[Phyrcooler]

Jab 5100

From their main Aussie website:

Ramp Weight: 120 kg (264 lbs) complete including exhaust, carburetor, starter motor, alternator and ignition system

Original TBO was only listed as 1,000 hours if I recall. The original users manual states that you unbolt the whole thing and ship it to them for an overhaul. I can't find a current TBO for the engine. If I recall, the other Jab engines had low TBO's until they demonstrated longevity. I believe they are at 2,000 hrs now... but not sure.

DJ

 

[videobobk]

I've always been interested in the Jabiru's. Anybody know the price on the 5100?

Bob Kelly

 

[WilburD2]

Jabiru pricing

Got this off the Jab website in Fresno.. no price given for the 5100

http://www.jabirupacific.com/specs/3300.htm

 

[Phyrcooler]

Weak Dollar

Unfortunately, I think the Jab runs into the same problem we are seeing with the Rotax - weak dollar/exchange rates = higher cost imports.

Cost is probably comparable to a Lyclone O-320. Now is the lighter weight, bit more HP worth it? Not in my mind... but I'm on the conservative end of the whole "experimental" thing. Once they get a few up in the air, without recalls... and hitting a comparable (2,000 hr) TBO... then I'd be looking at it for a RV-9. Oh... BTW, one other thing I like about both engines is the lower compression ratio. (8:1 for 3300 / 8.5:1 for 5100). Both engines show Avgas as being recommended... but barring any other conflicts, I am sure they will run well on a 91 - 93 octane Mogas or avgas replacement.

I'd sure like to see VAN's hook up the 3300 for a non-LSA higher performance RV12!

DJ

 

[todehnal]

Swapping Horses

I think that this post has, somehow, changed horses! The post title clearly stated "3300". That is a 6 cylinder 120 hp engine that more closely fits in as a replacement for the 108 to 118 hp Lycoming O-235. The 3300 weighs in at 81 kilo or 178 lbs. and ready to run. Compare that to an O-235. There have been several O-235 powered RV-9s that are touting superb handling, due to the light weight and respectable performance. How, and why, did we get moved up to the 8 cylinder?

I agree, if you were to compare the Jabiru 8 cylinder with the O-290, Lycoming would be the better choice, but not in the 120 hp range. It all depends on your mission.

Tom

 

[Phyrcooler]

Switching horses...

LOL... yeah, it did kind of get off topic from your original question. And it pretty much did that from the beginning.

I think either Jab would make a good motor for the -9. The 3300 for the lightweight/low hp version as Van envisioned, while the 5100 would give you close to O-360 power in a package lighter than an O-320. As I mentioned above - I wouldn't be doing a 5100 until they are proven, but my understanding is the 3300 is well proven - with early bugs worked out. Another nice thing is the design and inclusion of their own "Ram-air cooling ducts" which eliminates one of the FWF headaches of baffles and such.

Now... back to the discussion of 3300's...

DJ

 

[todehnal]

I'd sure like to see VAN's hook up the 3300 for a non-LSA higher performance RV12!

DJ

Yeah, DJ. I agree with you 100%. I think that the 3300 would make a fantastic fit in the RV-12! Also, I guess I never thought about the 5100 offering O-320 performance in a nine. But, I'm with you. I would like to see more of a proven product first. You just can't beat an O-320 for service and performance.

Tom

 

[Sonic]

I currently fly a Jabiru J160 with the 2200 engine and it is sweet. Going to start an RV project this year. Am thinking about the -9A with a Jab 3300 engine. Anyone on this forum actually seen one or built one? Jab factory in Australia already has engine mounts and full FWF kits for this config.

I'm surprised there aren't more of -9s using this engine. Could it be that not many pilots step up from LSA, where the Jab is widely known and used, to GA Experimental?

 

[rv12iS-builder]

Sonic,

Are you sure the Jab factory has engine mounts and FWF kits for the Jab 3300 for the 9A? I believe they have them for their larger 8 cylinder engine. I've emailed Jabiru several times about using the 3300 in an RV-9A, but I have never received a reply.

 

[Sonic]

Jabiru 3300 for -9A

Hi RV9Builder,

Yes, I got an email reply from them saying they could make the mount for me and supply a FWF kit.

I think the most important is the mount. The rest can be figured out relatively easily.

 

[mike109g6]

FWF

www.usjabiru.com shows FWF kits for 9 & 9A. 5100 currently not in production. FWF for a CH601 looks like around $22-23K, probably about the same for a 9/9A.
Mike H 9A/8A

 

[rv12iS-builder]

Yes, I got an email reply from them saying they could make the mount for me and supply a FWF kit.

Hi Sonic,

Thanks for the update. Keep us posted should you decide to go down this path. Any idea how much a Jab-powered 9A would weigh? My guess is that you would come in about 75-100 lbs. less than an O-235 powered 9A.

 

[rv6ejguy]

It looks like the Jab would be 60-70 lbs lighter if you can believe the 180 lb. dry weight for the 3300 published. This would give a bit of a C of G issue with a light prop, even with a heavy battery on the firewall. Might have to move the engine forward and make a new cowling. Lots of work for the first one to do it.

 

[Rick6a]

It looks like the Jab would be 60-70 lbs lighter if you can believe the 180 lb. dry weight for the 3300 published. This would give a bit of a C of G issue with a light prop, even with a heavy battery on the firewall. Might have to move the engine forward and make a new cowling. Lots of work for the first one to do it.

Maybe. Maybe not. It is almost always easier to add weight rather than remove it. The builder should be able to adjust the CG by simply bolting lead ballast to the firewall or even the engine mount. At first blush, doing so would seem to save an awful lot of work by not having to redesign and modify the engine mount and/or cowling. Consider this factoid: McDonnell-Douglas added five hundred pounds of lead ballast to the forwardmost bulkhead of early F-15's to bring the CG within limits. Given contractual commitments, a total redesign of the F-15 airframe was not a viable option and even it it were would have been an enormously expensive undertaking.

 

[Mel]

It looks like the Jab would be 60-70 lbs lighter if you can believe the 180 lb. dry weight for the 3300 published.

I've worked with the Jabiru 3300 on both the Indus Thorpedo and the Legend Cub. The 178 lbs. for the engine is a good number. This weight includes exhaust, carb and cooling shrouds.

 

[rv6ejguy]

I've worked with the Jabiru 3300 on both the Indus Thorpedo and the Legend Cub. The 178 lbs. for the engine is a good number. This weight includes exhaust, carb and cooling shrouds.

Good to have an independent number. Thanks Mel. What has your experience been lately with the Jabirus as far as reliability and longevity goes? They've had at least 3 major re-designs of the heads over the last 5-7 years. Are those problems solved?

I wouldn't want to add lead to an RV- why not just bolt in the O-235 and be done with it? Why dump the weight advantages of this engine by doing that? You've got to do a new mount anyway so it is no big deal to make it 3-4 inches longer. I added a 2.5 inch foam ring to my cowling aft of the spinner for the Subaru and was able to retain the factory cowling.

 

[Sonic]

weight advantage

You're right. The reason to go with the 3300 engine is the weight savings for better performance. That was my intention.
Is it confirmed that putting the prop in the same position as if using an O-235 will put the CG out of whack?

 

[Mel]

Good to have an independent number. Thanks Mel. What has your experience been lately with the Jabirus as far as reliability and longevity goes? They've had at least 3 major re-designs of the heads over the last 5-7 years. Are those problems solved?

The cooling problems of the original engine seem to be solved. However, having said that, the early engines do fine with a little work on the cooling. As a matter of fact, I'm going to use one of the earlier engines in my bi-plane. This engine has accumulated about 250 hrs. on a Legend Cub. The only thing I'll have to deal with is adjusting the valves periodically. The cooling issues have already been addressed on this particular engine.

 

[rv6ejguy]

You're right. The reason to go with the 3300 engine is the weight savings for better performance. That was my intention.
Is it confirmed that putting the prop in the same position as if using an O-235 will put the CG out of whack?

I would say that C of G would be a concern with a wood or composite prop and the 3300. You'd have to move the engine forward a few inches almost certainly as the battery is already forward. I think are are differences in the engine mount length even on normal and A models to compensate for the nose gear weight. Remember the airframe is designed to take an O-320 or even O-360. These are way heavier than the Jab.