Siezed low-time neglected turbocharger

[tljones42]

Check out this turbo web site and the info on bearing lube. It supports several of my concerns about the Sonex installation.

http://www.turbos.bwauto.com/products/t ... ystem.aspx

Another interesting site is https://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobyg ... ooling.pdf

Tom Jones
Onex Turbo (maybe)

[pfhoeycfi]

I was just going to suggest the same...

https://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobyg ... r_plumbing

Water.

peter h
doylestown
waiting for my B

[Bruce593SX]

an A&P friend of mine on the field was musing the possibility of running oil through the coolant ports with an electric pump just for shutdown.... just musing....

[WaiexN143NM]

Hi gordon, all,
I agree with you gordon. Sonex with the redesign with the b model. With the wider cowling & firewall , if they offered a mount for the O-200 , and O-233/235 this would have taken the design to a much more mature footing and standing. If this could be done it would be great. Builders would be on their own fwf, but if at least a mount would be avbl, (maybe the universal cowl would work also with minor mod) . Kudos to them offering mounts for the rotax912 & UL motors, legacy & b model. I have the plans 'b' for kit 183. I dont have the conversion kits, not sure if im gonna due it. $-10,000. BUT if a reliable legacy engine like a cont./lyc were able to be used, i'd order the kits tommorrow. Again along the lines of selling more airframe kits , with more engine options. I think most people want to move on and forward from a vw base engine. Light weight starter , alt., mags. To keep the weight down , who else would like to see this offered?
Happy w waiex143 jab 3300 / rotec tbi
The onex is just begging for more engine options. Again at least a mount.

Michael

[daleandee]

Sonex with the redesign with the b model. With the wider cowling & firewall , if they offered a mount for the O-200 , and O-233/235 this would have taken the design to a much more mature footing and standing. If this could be done it would be great.

I would have thought the new B model would have included the lighter O-200 engine as it meets the FWF weight, is air cooled so it doesn't violate the K.I.S.S. that they are known for, and is readily available for those with plenty of cash to put on the nose of the airplane.

Kudos to them offering mounts for the rotax912 & UL motors, legacy & b model. I have the plans 'b' for kit 183. I dont have the conversion kits, not sure if im gonna due it. $-10,000. BUT if a reliable legacy engine like a cont./lyc were able to be used, i'd order the kits tommorrow.

Hope I don't get excoriated (again) for giving MHO, but my personal taste prefers the looks of the legacy (Model A) far more than the newer B model. Of course I really adore the look of the "C" model Cleanex with the bold cowling and large spinner up front. 8~) As for engines choices ... all of the new engine offerings have been mounted to the legacy models before. Engines on the legacy models included many not approved by the company but builders have the right to do such things in the experimental aircraft world.

Again along the lines of selling more airframe kits , with more engine options. I think most people want to move on and forward from a vw base engine.

For the basic budget builder I do think the Aerovee is a good beginners option. No doubt the little VW engine works very hard in a two up environment but the original intent (at least I believe) was to build a light weight tail dragger airplane that had good performance on reasonable power. Now that we are building them with so many wonderful things we like and they are closer to 700 lbs empty than the 600 or less that was intended ... we fault the little engine that could and want something larger. I stand guilty as charged. My 650 lbs nose roller needed more than the VW could provide. The tail wheel with 120 horses is a blast to fly. Of course it's not welcomed anywhere near a company represented function but I'm OK with that.

I'm just thankful that John Monnett has designed such a wonderful air frame and wish them a lot of success going forward.

Dale Williams
N319WF @ 6J2
Myunn - "daughter of Cleanex"
120 HP - 3.0 Corvair
Tail Wheel - Center Stick
Signature Finish 2200 Paint Job
166.7 hours / Status - Flying
Member # 109 - Florida Sonex Association

[Gordon]

RE: MORE ENGINE OPTIONS

Further to my comments yesterday..........Sonex is in the same "market place" as Van's Aircraft, Zenith and Kitfox. If Sonex wants a bigger piece of that market they need to provide more engine options for the (potential) customer. I don't like the Zenith aircraft for various reasons however they do offer a wide range of engine options (Continental and Lycoming included) along with the required cowl and engine mount. Kitfox does the same.

Van's only offers Lycoming as the engine choice (Rotax for the RV-12) and that has not hurt them in sales (10,000 are flying). I personally know a half dozen guys that would have built a Sonex but balked at the non-traditional aircraft engine........so they turned to Van's.....with no regrets I might add.

Maybe Sonex is more concerned (pre-occupied??) with their drone/military endeavor?


Gordon..........Onex.......Hummel 2400

[NWade]

I have many thoughts about the turbo (mine is preparing for its first flight and I've been looking long and hard at all of the turbo issues over the last year); but for now I wanted to address the "non-traditional aircraft engine" comments being sprinkled in this thread:

People who think an engine has to have "Lycoming" or "Continental" in the name are just being ignorant. Now, I'll state there _is_ a difference between an engine that is designed and built for aircraft use, and a "conversion" engine. A conversion engine (i.e. Aerovee/VW, Corvair, Viking, etc) is always going to require some extra parts and setup to ensure maximum longevity and reliability because it is, by definition, being adapted from its original purpose and there are different engineering goals and challenges in the aircraft environment.

HOWEVER, there are plenty of engines that are designed for Aircraft use that are not Lycomings or Contis. Look at the Jabiru, Rotax, Rotec, and UL for example. And its worth noting that Sonex *does* support the Rotax now on the B-model aircraft.

Its also worth noting that there's nothing magical about Lycomings or Continentals in terms of their reliability or engineering, when compared to other engines. Just look through the ADs and service bulletins for either manufacturer and you'll find _plenty_ of issues! Many caused safety-of-flight issues and some are incredibly expensive to fix!

But I think that most people with a Lycoming or a Continental simply drop their engine off with an A&P, and then pay the resulting bill. This masks the labor and issues involved in maintaining those engines, and holds them at arms' length from the owner. By contrast, people with a conversion engine tend to do *all* of the maintenance themselves and are therefore much "closer" to the issues, feel the impact of the labor and the tinkering much more directly, and talk/complain about it more-openly. Afterall, for a mechanic he's just doing his job; for an owner he's having to spend time on the ground instead of flying! :-)

--Noel

[Bryan Cotton]

How about a 9.6 oz, 12V, 700 ma pump?
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0196WL55G

[kmacht]

People who think an engine has to have "Lycoming" or "Continental" in the name are just being ignorant

--Noel

I don't thonk.it is ignorance but more a matter of trust. A lycoming or continental are known commodities with known failure rates and modes. The aerovee has neither of those. The fact still remains that Sonex has had a turbo and non turbo aerovee fail in their factory aircraft killing two and seriously injuring two others. To date no explanation or plausible theory has been provided by sonex and probably never will be. It makes flying behind an aerovee even if you believe it to be as safe as a lycoming, not so much fun. If i were building again I would be looking for an airframe that supports engines with a better and known track record.

Keith
#554

[WaiexN143NM]

Hi noel, keith, all,
Thanks keith very much concur. Noel, i do not believe it is ignorance, its just an informed choice, that everyone is entitled to make from our life and aviation experiences . I agree with a post kip made a long time ago. We both run jab 3300's. Both of us like the motors and have had good experiences with them. I was bummed when camit went under, they had some nifty upgrades to a good motor. What kip had said if given the choice he'd take a Cont. O-200 over the jabiru. I'd do the same. I'd take the higher weight, and 20 less horsepower. Why? Trust. Reliability. Track record. Yes all engines have failures, but again, its my $, my choice.
Please be careful as you fly. Were all looking forward to you getting into the air and enjoying all your hard work. We all are pulling for your success. For yourself, us the sonex community, the sonex brand.
Please dont discount that two prominent people in our community have removed their turbos. These are smart people. One flys for a living. Another person didnt fly all summer, head scratching until he finally got some help from the factory. Other turbo drivers that post on here, brett, gary, carl.
The quality of vw parts seems to be in question. Better quality control at the factory before shipping has been mentioned. This has been brought up before.
Revmaster and hks had press releases a few years ago about turbo versions. Dont know if they still developing them, they have not been released for sale.
Kudos to sonex for offering the mount for both legacy and b for the rotax 912. Jake has been flying his trigear sonex w aerovee for a few years, now upgrading to a rotax. Maybe he can give an update.
Again , as a suggestion, like zenith and kitfox and panther, they offer a more traditional aircraft engine to the builders, i think sonex should take a look if an O-200 would work for the b model. At least a mount. Along the lines of selling more airframes to a wider audience. People are going to look for other manufactures that satisfy their need.
Viking motors. Jan E. From suburu fame. Gary motley who built a sonex w aerovee, built a zenith cruzer(im building one also, already have an O-200 ready factory fwf) just got his cruzer flying. After 32 hours hes pulling out his viking. Gave up threw in the towel. Looking to go jab 3300 or UL350 factory supported fwf. I like the UL motors, but if you loose your electrical your toast. No spark. Viking drivers be careful. Don, and max.
Again its experimental so you are free to do as you please. Your $ , blood, sweat, and tears.,
Im not a vw guy. Ive never flown in a vw plane. Never will. My choice. Your choice.
Oh and one more thing, since it was brought up about the factory crashes. Its a whole new thread, but my intuition that these were both low fuel situations.
Happy new year,

WaiexN143NM
Michael