SonexBuilders.net

I have been reading several interesting conversations on two other forums - the Sonex Yahoo forum and also the VW Conversions Yahoo forum. They have been centered around engine choice - a item of great interest to me personally.

Both have been enlightening and somewhat strong willed.

Finally the folks from AeroConversions (Sonex) jumped in....

Anyone else been following this?

Lol ,well you must know by now that it's a hobby of mine.The one post that gave me hope for choosing the Aerovee was this one http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sonextalk/message/66679
It's an earlier version Aerovee( 2003) but impressive non- the- less :D

well, I have to say the more I read, the more I go back to my original decision of an AeroVee....but respect all the other opinions and certainly like reading of others experiences.

I too have found the VW conversion talk very enlightening. The one issue that keeps getting raised but I see no definitive answer on is the Force One hub vs the Aerovee Shrink Fit. According to the GP site, they have never have a failure of the Force One Hub....but as we all know there have been several failures of the shrink fit hubs (maybe due to builder error, I don't know).

I personally like the Aerovee but I wish there was a straight forward answer on the Force One hub....Sonex continues to say it adds no value...common sense would say it does. Is GP twisting the facts? If not, why wouldn't I want the extra assurance that the Force One hub provides. Am I missing something here?

Sonex1517 wrote:I have been reading several interesting conversations on two other forums - the Sonex Yahoo forum and also the VW Conversions Yahoo forum. They have been centered around engine choice - a item of great interest to me personally.

Both have been enlightening and somewhat strong willed.

Finally the folks from AeroConversions (Sonex) jumped in....

Anyone else been following this?

I've been following the conversation and found it very interesting until this post from Jeremy: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sonextalk/message/66841.
After this post people seemed a bit intimidated and the discussion died fairly quickly, the same thing has happened during previous similar discussions.
Off course Sonex has all the right to defend their (great) product, especially when they feel people are making incorrect statements about their product, so I'm certainly not criticizing them for doing so, it's just a shame that this usually ends the debate.

I think therefore sonexbuilders.net is probably a better place to have the alternate engine discussion as it is not owned by Sonex, people might feel more free to speak their minds in such debates.
(and off course the capabilities and features of this forum software are light years ahead of the yahoo groups)

falvarez wrote:..but as we all know there have been several failures of the shrink fit hubs (maybe due to builder error, I don't know).

Apparently it's true. There has never been an Aerovee shrink fit hub failure when the proper procedure is carried out.This is straight from Sonex
and I see no reason to doubt them.There has been a ton of misinformation written on the Aerovee and I for one would fly without worry behind any shrink fit Aerovee that was done properly.My only concern is if you have to remove the hub from the crank .My understanding is it can be done but if done more than once, I would now be concerned and I don't want to have to replace the crank simply because I had to take the hub off for what ever reason.My other problem with Aerovee is you can't swing the prop to get home if something goes wrong with the starter.So I still sit on the fence until I actually have to order an engine but one thing I am not worried about is shrink fit hubs.
ps; I'll never understand why Sonex doesn't just send all their engines out with the hub attached already and no I don't think it requires $295 worth of labor for them to do this.

Mike, for what it's worth, the Jabiru cannot be propped either. It has 25 BTDC fixed timing... :|

Mike53 wrote:

falvarez wrote:..but as we all know there have been several failures of the shrink fit hubs (maybe due to builder error, I don't know).

Apparently it's true. There has never been an Aerovee shrink fit hub failure when the proper procedure is carried out.This is straight from Sonex
and I see no reason to doubt them.There has been a ton of misinformation written on the Aerovee and I for one would fly without worry behind any shrink fit Aerovee that was done properly.My only concern is if you have to remove the hub from the crank .My understanding is it can be done but if done more than once, I would now be concerned and I don't want to have to replace the crank simply because I had to take the hub off for what ever reason.My other problem with Aerovee is you can't swing the prop to get home if something goes wrong with the starter.So I still sit on the fence until I actually have to order an engine but one thing I am not worried about is shrink fit hubs.
ps; I'll never understand why Sonex doesn't just send all their engines out with the hub attached already and no I don't think it requires $295 worth of labor for them to do this.

rizzz wrote:I've been following the conversation and found it very interesting until this post from Jeremy: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sonextalk/message/66841.
After this post people seemed a bit intimidated and the discussion died fairly quickly, the same thing has happened during previous similar discussions.
Off course Sonex has all the right to defend their (great) product, especially when they feel people are making incorrect statements about their product, so I'm certainly not criticizing them for doing so, it's just a shame that this usually ends the debate.

I think therefore sonexbuilders.net is probably a better place to have the alternate engine discussion as it is not owned by Sonex, people might feel more free to speak their minds in such debates.
(and off course the capabilities and features of this forum software are light years ahead of the yahoo groups)

I actually liked his post. It had more facts and while, yes, they have an inherent bias, I also think I tend to agree with a lot of their information. Some of the posts, in my humble opinion, got a bit too opinionated with less facts to back them. (if you haven't seen them, the ones in the VW conversion group *really* got going)

I am not an expert and I certainly have my own bias and opinion. Much of it is based on a lot of reading, and literally years of sitting back and waiting to see how Sonex and AeroConversions did. I first started this journey when Sonex came out and really got serious in 2002 after going to an EAA building workshop in Oshkosh.

I have waffled a bit about the engine, but keep headed back to AeroVee.

My reality is based on our finances, my comfort with the Sonex and the people there, and previous experiences owning a 1966 Cessna 150F and then a 1973 Piper Cherokee. I loved owning them, and got my instrument rating in the Cherokee.

Both ate our finances in a hurry, and one main goal is not to go through that again. So for me it is almost certainly VW conversion.

Hats off to those that can go with the Jabiru, or choose to try a Corvair engine or something else....it is the beauty of experimental aviation. And this is one reason I tend to post here much more freely. I truly enjoy this site and the different features and the feel it has compared to Yahoo. (even when confessing my ongoing....um...challenges....building)

I chose the Sonex in the first place because of its economy. Nice sporty 2 seat aircraft that could be plans built around a low cost VW engine. I have always been on a tight budget and I am a heavier person now at 270 lbs than when I started building. I started building single stick, VW Tail dragger with the idea that I was building one of those "Bubba" airplanes John mentions in the video. I knew the only passengers I would be able to carry if any were very small ones. But 3 years of building on mine, and still never could get a ride in one, because I would put them over gross. Finally at a southern Sonex flyin, I was offered a ride in Jab 3300 powered plane. I was surprised that they could give me a ride. I was told if the canopy would close, it would get off the ground. :) Needless to say I jumped at the chance, and received my first and only ride in a Sonex 2 years ago. Thanks Robert Barber! From that time, I knew the VW was not going to be sufficient for me, and I absolutely could not afford the buy in or maintainence on a Jab 3300, which is why I decided to go the Corvair route. While a little more expensive than the VW conversion, maintaince and rebuilds would be close in cost and economy, but performance close to the Jab 3300. That, and the fact that there were now quite a few flying and a proven combination and support for those installations growing, sealed the deal for me. But when I was considering a VW engine, the only deciding factor of why I was choosing a Hummel over the Aerovee or GP, was that Scott, a very experienced builder, was assembling it and testing running for very close to the same cost as the competitors kits, and bonus using force one hub. That was a bargain in my eyes. I think each companies products has strong points and some weak points, but each builder has different criteria and risk levels, which is why these companies are all still in business, and opinions on each are all over the board.

well said Vic!