Strange problem with Aerovee

[Sonex1517]

Dale,

your opinion of the AeroVee is clear and well known.

However, to state there is something that is not airworthy is definitely inflammatory.

What facts - not opinions - do you base this statement on please?

I respect your opinion but this is a rather strong statement to make here without any representation of actual data to back it up.

Robbie

[MichaelFarley56]

I certainly have no intention on entering a heated debate over this topic, but I would like to add that I am using an unmodified AeroInjector and an unmodified #2 needle and have no issues. When I first started flying I had to figure out how to properly set the unit up, but that's no fault of the design. With well over 100 hours on my airplane I'm very happy with it!

I've looked at the Rotec TBI and others, but LOVE the simplistic nature and ease of setup of the AeroInjector. No fuel pump, no primer, no carb heat, etc. If we want to use the KISS method (Keep It Simple Stupid!), I'd say the AeroInjector wins hands down!

If people are having issues with their AeroInjectors, perhaps they could describe the symptoms online here so we can all help isolate the issues and get the problem fixed. Ultimately, I have a feeling that the few people with "issues" are making themselves heard while hundreds upon hundreds of others are happily behind their AeroInjectors with no trouble at all. I firmly believe it's a good product and I can't wait to fly my AeroVee/AeroInjector equipped airplane to AirVenture here in a few months!

[radfordc]

There have been enough cases of people complaining about how badly there Aerocarb performs to at least be cautious. I cringed a little hearing Dale make that comment, but I understand that it's just his opinion and is entitled to it. I'm sure that the "real carb" that Dale is using is a very good performer.

Certainly, there are far more satisfied Aerocarb users than not. I will say that having had a bad case of the "burps" once it definitely will shake your confidence for a little while.

[radfordc]

If people are having issues with their AeroInjectors, perhaps they could describe the symptoms online here so we can all help isolate the issues and get the problem fixed. Ultimately, I have a feeling that the few people with "issues" are making themselves heard while hundreds upon hundreds of others are happily behind their AeroInjectors with no trouble at all. I firmly believe it's a good product and I can't wait to fly my AeroVee/AeroInjector equipped airplane to AirVenture here in a few months!

Mike, if the fuel in the line going to the carb vaporizes and causes bubbles the engine will stumble and run badly...if not stopping all together. There is no "bowl" to allow the bubbles to dissipate like on a real carb. I had it happen once and was lucky to be near the runway or I would have had to do a forced landing. The fix is of course to prevent heat build up in the fuel...lots of insulation of the lines and gascolator, maybe eliminating the gascolator, and using a less volatile fuel like 100LL.

The only other "issue" I've noticed is that in order to get the engine to run rich enough during takeoff the needle is a little too rich at idle. I compensate by pulling the mixture control lean on the ground. Not much of a problem.

[MichaelFarley56]

Thanks Charlie. I was having "burps" on takeoff but I traced it an incorrectly mounted digital fuel flow sender. Once I removed that from the system, I haven't had an issue since. I do have my stock gascolator and fuel line insulated as you stated.

I also lean out my engine on taxi and in cruise. Normally my mixture is full rich on takeoff and climb, leaned slightly in cruise, and leaned a lot for taxi. I find this to be no issue though!

[daleandee]

Dale,
your opinion of the AeroVee is clear and well known.However, to state there is something that is not airworthy is definitely inflammatory.
What facts - not opinions - do you base this statement on please? I respect your opinion but this is a rather strong statement to make here without any representation of actual data to back it up.

Robbie

Hi Robbie,

What I said was,

I had an Aerocarb and flew it 175 hours but I now personally do not consider them to be airworthy. Just my humble opinion

As for the Aerovee, I believe they are good engines and serve the Sonex community very well. I have no heartburn with VW power but my humble opinion is that in a Sonex the Aerovee works very hard and leaves the aircraft a bit under powered for two place operations on hot days. If the aircraft is light, the pilot and passenger are not large, and the OATs are not overly warm, the Aerovee performs adequately. Would I fly behind an VW power? Absolutely.

My comment was directed at the Aerocarb.

Everyone has to decide for themselves what level of risk they are willing to assume in any endeavor they undertake. Flying is no different. I purposely used the words "personally" and "my humble opinion" to make the point that for me, a decision that I have come to in my personal flying career is that I won't again fly behind an Aerocarb. That's all I meant to say.

To say that you respect my opinion and then ask for facts (not opinions) as proof of what I believe is a bit disingenuous I would think.

The concerns with the Aerocarb are well known and clearly documented on this site and all over the web. I have no desire to go through a list of reasons that I find the Aerocarb to be out of consideration for me as an aircraft carb. Many have expressed their love of the Aerocarb and no one has asked them to "prove" anything as to why they believe what they believe.

I hope that this site does not become such a place that a man cannot state a personal opinion. If you feel comfortable flying behind an Aerocarb you have the right to do so and come here and share that.

My question to you is; how many hours have you personally flown behind and Aerocarb? Would it be too much to ask you to give me your experiences with the Aerocarb?

Respectfully,

Dale Williams
N319WF @ 6J2
Myunn - "daughter of Cleanex"
120 HP - 3.0 Corvair
Tail Wheel - Center Stick
64.0 hours / Status - Flying
http://kitplanes2.com/blog/2013/12/ownerbuilder-2/
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC49h6Qijc17_Ebfz0CbRFtg

[Sonex1517]

Whoosh. Flame on indeed.

You know exactly what you said and "airworthy" is a strong word with specific meaning. We live in a society where words do carry weight, and this is exactly the tone we are trying to avoid here on a technical forum. Stick to facts.

If I'd meant to censor you I would have done so. I am a moderator. Your opinion is fine. But the words have meaning my friend....and that was a strong statement to make.

I have never claimed to have any experience with an AeroVee. Nor have I said I do.

Robbie Culver
Sonex 1517
Chicagoland
Tails and Wings complete - finishing fuselage.
N1517S reserved

[rizzz]

Whoosh. Flame on indeed.

You know exactly what you said and "airworthy" is a strong word with specific meaning. We live in a society where words do carry weight, and this is exactly the tone we are trying to avoid here on a technical forum. Stick to facts.

If I'd meant to censor you I would have done so. I am a moderator. Your opinion is fine. But the words have meaning my friend....and that was a strong statement to make.

I have never claimed to have any experience with an AeroVee. Nor have I said I do.

Robbie Culver
Sonex 1517
Chicagoland
Tails and Wings complete - finishing fuselage.
N1517S reserved

Hi Robbie,

I'm sorry but I must disagree,
Yes, that was a strong statement but it was stated clearly as an opinion, not as a fact, and if this is how Dale feels about the product I think he should be allowed to express that opinion and I don't see how he could word it differently or why he should even do so.
Others might disagree with this opinion and choose to respond (as they have here), and so the topic might turn into a debate, but as long as we can keep it civilized, debate is good, people get a good idea about the different opinions of actual customers of the product, and yes, some very strong opinions, but that does not mean they should not be heard.

Just my opinion :D

[kmacht]

Can we get away from the chest thumping and back to the facts again? Dale said that after flying behind an aerocarb for 175 hours he now doesn't feel like it is airworthy anymore. Without everyone getting all emotional about it I would like to hear from Dale as to why he feels this way. I am assuming that he had some experience that is driving this belief and would like to know what it is. I am getting close to a first flight and want to hear the good as well as the bad so I know what to expect, what to look out for, and maybe what to do or not to do since my engine has the aerocarb installed. Without time behing an aerocarb myself I am reliant on other peoples experiences to help form my own opinion as to what is or isn't safe and airworthy. Yes there are many other people who are probably flying behind the aerocarb trouble free. Nobody is forcing you to make form an opinion based on on one persons experience but the more information that is out there the more there is to consider. So.. Dale if you don't mind can you please explain the issues you had with the aerocarb and why you feel the way you do. To the others. Please let him state his case withou jumping all over him. The last thing we want is for this forum to get the reputation of being hostile to anyone that may have had a problem with a sonex product. Let's keep the personal attacks to a minimum.

Keith
#554

[Sonerai13]

I had an Aerocarb and flew it 175 hours but I now personally do not consider them to be airworthy. Just my humble opinion ... please no flames!

Geez Dale, you blast away at the AeroCarb/AeroInjector and then you plead for no flames. What's up with that?? :) Seriously, though, I would be interested in WHY you have the opinion that the AeroCarb/AeroInjector is "unairworthy". That's a pretty strong statement, even if it is an opinion. To have that strong of an opinion, you must have some reason. Inquiring minds want to know!

with almost 500 aircraft flying in the Worldwide Sonex Aircraft fleet, the vast majority of which using AeroCarbs or AeroInjectors, plus many AeroCarbs/AeroInjectors flying on other experimental aircraft with all types of engines, I think the airworthiness speaks for itself. Heck, I have nearly 200 hours flying behind AeroInjectors myself! I certainly wouldn’t use the term “unairworthy” when talking about the AeroInjector. And I’m sure there are people reading this forum who have a lot more time behind an AeroInjector than I do. I don’t think the word “unairworthy” comes to their minds either.

So, let us know why you feel so strongly. I, for one, would really appreciate it.

Thanks!