Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 09:45:48 -0400 From: Neil Clayton Subject: COZY: Lycoming Reply I asked Lycoming tech support about using a O-360 in a pusher configuration. Here's their reply; Neil C >From: "Caldera, Mike" >To: harvey4@earthlink.net >Subject: Lycoming O-360-A4A used as pusher >Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 09:34:53 -0400 >X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) > >Dear Mr. Clayton, > >Reference your e-mail regarding the above mentioned. > >The above listed engine is approved to be used in either tractor or pusher >configuration. > >The load path of the prop thrust is transferred to the rear surface of the >crankshaft oil slinger surface when used in the pusher configuration. >If we can be of further assistance, please advise. > >Best Regards, >Mike Caldera >Field/Technical Specialist Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 21:45:14 -0400 From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Subject: COZY: Engine shock mount torgue value Neil Clayton wrote; > >When dealing with engine mounts, a correct amount of compression should be >applied to the rubber mount for it to work as designed - not too loose or >too tight. That compression will appear as a torque at the nut/bolt. The >degree of compression of the rubber mount, not tension in the bolt, will be >what sets the torque. This is all very well and good, but it's NOT the situation in the heavy duty Lord mounts used on the dynafocal mount for the O-360 engines. These mounts have a steel tube in between the inboard and outboard rubber/steel plate pieces, and when the bolt/nut is tightened, the tube is what takes the compression load - NOT the rubber. The rubber is compressed a set amount determined by the length of the tube (which comes with the mount), NOT by how hard you torque the bolt/nut. I'd be extremely surprised if any decent engine mount operated by the technique Neil described - it would be extremely poor engineering practice and would be begging for failure. -- Marc J. Zeitlin mailto:marc_zeitlin@alum.mit.edu http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz/ From: marc_zeitlin@agilent.com Subject: FW: COZY: Engine shock mount torgue value Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 07:29:25 -0600 Dennis Butler asks: > ....... If I understand you correctly, I should > continue tightening the bolts until I feel the steel insert bottom out. > Right? Right. > .... Do you recall how much bulge to expect when the insert bottoms out? There's a bit of a bulge of the rubber so that it expands to contact the circumference of the dynafocal mount. There has to be SOME compression, or else the mount can't work as designed to hold the engine in place. It's hard to describe exactly how much "bulge" there should be. If you place the two mount halves in the dynafocal cup and then place the tube into them, you can see how much you'll have to compress the halves to get the tube to be flush with the plates on either end of the mount halves. > I was a little timid when trying this for the first time, thinking that the > bulge was excessive, and never getting to the bottom out point. As long as you have the tube installed (and assuming that they sent you the right parts) then you should tighten the bolt/nut until you feel it bottom out on the tube, and then torque to the correct level. -- Marc J. Zeitlin marc_zeitlin@alum.mit.edu | http://cozy.canard.com Non Impediti Ratione Cogitantonis (C&C) From: marc_zeitlin@agilent.com Subject: COZY: Series 2700 Camlocs for Cowling attachment Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 12:13:00 -0600 People; So, while actually making progress on the engine installation, I'm trying to decide where to install camlocs for the cowling. I know that I can use camlocs on the 10 rear attach points between the top and bottom cowl, and I know that I can use camlocs on the 14 attach points between the cowlings and the wing flanges (in both these cases, the cowling is outside, and the flanges are inside). In my case, I'll need the 212-12N receptable, and the 2700-5S (or -6S) Stainless Steel stud for both of these areas. What I don't know, and what I believe I have seen comments on in the past (but can't find them) is whether it's possible to use camlocs on the cowling to fuselage attach points (15 top, 14 bottom) since the cowling is INSIDE the flange for these. Has anyone used camlocs all around? What's your experience been with mounting the cowlings with camlocs on the fuselage flanges? A t D h V a A n N k C s E -- Marc J. Zeitlin marc_zeitlin@alum.mit.edu | http://cozy.canard.com Non Impediti Ratione Cogitantonis (C&C) From ???@??? Mon May 07 21:46:34 2001 Return-Path: Received: from mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.54]) by mta05.mrf.mail.rcn.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.14 201-229-121-114-20001227) with ESMTP id <20010508002140.KJYT5256.mta05.mrf.mail.rcn.net@mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net> for ; Mon, 7 May 2001 20:21:40 -0400 Received: from alum.mit.edu ([18.7.21.81]) by mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #5) id 14wvG0-0002x6-00 for marc.zeitlin@rcn.com; Mon, 07 May 2001 20:21:40 -0400 Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@ns.betaweb.com [216.231.140.250]) by alum.mit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id UAA10210; Mon, 7 May 2001 20:21:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA19531 for cozy_builders-list; Mon, 7 May 2001 12:14:35 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@canard.com using -f Received: from barry.mail.mindspring.net (barry.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.25]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA19525 for ; Mon, 7 May 2001 12:13:47 -0400 Received: from ix.netcom.com (ely-oh4-42.ix.netcom.com [206.216.59.170]) by barry.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA11091 for ; Mon, 7 May 2001 20:09:32 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3AF73911.45270F7C@ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 20:08:49 -0400 From: Carl Denk X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: cozy_builders@canard.com Subject: Re: COZY: Series 2700 Camlocs for Cowling attachment References: <28C1D35F1A45D2119A4C0008C7FA56D203EE864D@scra_nt1.SCRA.ORG> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cozy_builders@canard.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Carl Denk I use the Camloc 4002 series for the cowling, just don't install the retaining ring, then the stud and washer assembly is able to be lifted out, completely free of cowling or airframe. I am very happy with the setup and would highly recommend. The advantages are a quarter turn and its open or closed, if you drop one, its much bigger and easier to find, in particular in grass, and no loose washers to contend with. Suggest Skybolt as a dealer. From ???@??? Mon May 07 22:13:53 2001 Return-Path: Received: from mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.54]) by mta05.mrf.mail.rcn.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.14 201-229-121-114-20001227) with ESMTP id <20010508021501.MLLB5256.mta05.mrf.mail.rcn.net@mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net> for ; Mon, 7 May 2001 22:15:01 -0400 Received: from alum.mit.edu ([18.7.21.81]) by mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #5) id 14wx1h-0002yN-00 for marc.zeitlin@rcn.com; Mon, 07 May 2001 22:15:01 -0400 Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@ns.betaweb.com [216.231.140.250]) by alum.mit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id WAA28126; Mon, 7 May 2001 22:14:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA20602 for cozy_builders-list; Mon, 7 May 2001 14:11:36 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@canard.com using -f Received: from mail07a.vwh1.net (mail07a.vwh1.net [209.238.9.57]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA20595 for ; Mon, 7 May 2001 14:11:02 -0400 From: brian@deford.com Message-Id: <200105071811.OAA20595@twc2.betaweb.com> Received: from www.deford.com (209.238.133.121) by mail07a.vwh1.net (RS ver 1.0.58s) with SMTP id 012663891 for ; Mon, 7 May 2001 22:06:30 -0400 (EDT) To: cozy_builders@canard.com CC: Subject: RE: COZY: Series 2700 Camlocs for Cowling attachment Date: 07 May 2001 19:05:58 -0700 X-Mailer: NeoPlanet Version: 5.2.0.1606 X-ID: 4D5F8EE0787211D493140050BAA18C36 X-Brand: NeoPlanet X-Build: 1606 X-Loop-Detect: 1 Sender: owner-cozy_builders@canard.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: brian@deford.com > What I don't know, and what I believe I have seen comments on in the past > (but can't find them) is whether it's possible to use camlocs on the cowling > to fuselage attach points (15 top, 14 bottom) since the cowling is INSIDE > the flange for these. > > Has anyone used camlocs all around? What's your experience been with > mounting the cowlings with camlocs on the fuselage flanges? Marc, It's possible - I did it when I mounted my first cowlings that eventually became plugs for my cowling molds. It is a little difficult to remove the cowl and I've decided against doing it on my new molded cowls. I'll go the route of the screws as shown in the plans as it appears to be just as simple to remove (I've removed both Nat's and Gene Davis' cowls at different times and they use screws). It takes a little longer, but I don't plan on removing cowls all that often. Brian DeFord Cozy MK-IV, N309BD, 'bout ready to start the engine up... Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 21:33:35 -0500 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Series 2700 Camlocs for Cowling attachment Camloc 4002 series for the cowling are OK if one is very careful to match the size to the depth of the cowling and flange thickness. I was not careful enough about that minor technicality and had one come out and go through the prop. The damage was significant but repairable. Be sure they are tight when locked in. dd From ???@??? Tue May 29 22:44:14 2001 Return-Path: Received: from mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.54]) by mta05.mrf.mail.rcn.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.23 201-229-121-123-20010418) with ESMTP id <20010530014258.MII296.mta05.mrf.mail.rcn.net@mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net> for ; Tue, 29 May 2001 21:42:58 -0400 Received: from alum.mit.edu ([18.7.21.81]) by mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #6) id 154v0j-0004F6-00 for marc.zeitlin@rcn.com; Tue, 29 May 2001 21:42:57 -0400 Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@ns.betaweb.com [216.231.140.250]) by alum.mit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id VAA10104; Tue, 29 May 2001 21:42:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA14377 for cozy_builders-list; Tue, 29 May 2001 13:37:56 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@canard.com using -f Received: from mta1.rcsntx.swbell.net (mta1.rcsntx.swbell.net [151.164.30.25]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA14371 for ; Tue, 29 May 2001 13:37:32 -0400 Received: from swbell.net ([65.64.137.151]) by mta1.rcsntx.swbell.net (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with ESMTP id <0GE400JO7JZX6L@mta1.rcsntx.swbell.net> for cozy_builders@canard.com; Tue, 29 May 2001 20:26:23 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 20:29:12 -0500 From: David Domeier Subject: COZY: B&C Starter Tip To: jschuber@juno.com, "canard-aviators@yahoogroups.com" , Cozy Builders Mailing List Message-id: <3B144CE9.602C8B7C@swbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 (Macintosh; U; PPC) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Accept-Language: en,pdf Sender: owner-cozy_builders@canard.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: David Domeier Terry @ CSA, This past week end I had to cancel a flight (I don't hand prop an 0360) when the B&C starter failed. The starter gear would spin but it would not engage the ring gear. This is a symptom of low voltage but that was not the problem as we jumped the starter direct from a car battery and the same thing happened. I consider removing the unit over the week end but decided to wait until I talked to B&C after the holiday. It's a good thing I did. The fix was to hit the solenoid housing with a hammer. It worked. Evidently there are a couple sets of points in the unit and the symptoms indicated one set was not where it should be (don't know if that meant open or closed) but the hammer trick worked. I asked if I should be changing parts and the answer was no. The points get stuck sometimes perhaps due to unusual voltages. It has happened before where guys have removed the starter only to have it work just fine on the bench after banging it about removing it. David Domeier Cozy MKIV N10CZ From ???@??? Mon Jun 04 22:43:36 2001 Return-Path: Received: from mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.54]) by mta01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.23 201-229-121-123-20010418) with ESMTP id <20010605023825.HVYE4003.mta01.mrf.mail.rcn.net@mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net> for ; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 22:38:25 -0400 Received: from alum.mit.edu ([18.7.21.81]) by mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #6) id 1576jh-0000u7-00 for marc.zeitlin@rcn.com; Mon, 04 Jun 2001 22:38:25 -0400 Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@ns.betaweb.com [216.231.140.250]) by alum.mit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id WAA29980; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 22:37:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA28550 for cozy_builders-list; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 14:40:15 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@canard.com using -f Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.61]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA28544 for ; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 14:37:54 -0400 Received: from 207-172-102-56.s310.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com ([207.172.102.56] helo=zeitlin-1.rcn.com) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #6) id 1576bH-00064X-00 for cozy_builders@canard.com; Mon, 04 Jun 2001 22:29:43 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010604222223.00ab85d0@pop.rcn.com> X-Sender: marc.zeitlin@pop.rcn.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 22:30:16 -0400 To: Cozy Builders Mailing List From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Subject: COZY: Fuel Line fittings Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-cozy_builders@canard.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Marc J. Zeitlin" People; Just thought I'd let you know of a non-standard useful fitting I came across. Due to the engine mount business of a while ago, and my engine ending up 1.5" higher than I thought it was going to be (and is now in the right place), one of my fuel lines was just a bit tight. The picture in Chapter 21, page 8 (or Chapter 15, page 2 - take your pick) shows a short straight stretch of tubing coming out just to the left of the electric fuel pump. I needed to shorten this piece, but couldn't, due to the nature of the flaring tool. Skybolt has a very short FEMALE-FEMALE coupler which performs the same task, but is about 1" shorter than the part I made, and is a lot stiffer (since there's no aluminum tube). For the "-6" size (3/8" tubing), the part number is FCM2915, and is shown on their web site at: http://www.skybolt.com/ in the catalog (page 92, IIRC). It's about $12. -- Marc J. Zeitlin mailto:marc_zeitlin@alum.mit.edu http://users.rcn.com/marc.zeitlin/ From ???@??? Tue Jun 05 23:20:52 2001 Return-Path: Received: from mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.54]) by mta05.mrf.mail.rcn.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.23 201-229-121-123-20010418) with ESMTP id <20010605162715.WACL296.mta05.mrf.mail.rcn.net@mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net> for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 12:27:15 -0400 Received: from alum.mit.edu ([18.7.21.81]) by mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #6) id 157Jfn-0006Pa-00 for marc.zeitlin@rcn.com; Tue, 05 Jun 2001 12:27:15 -0400 Received: from mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.51]) by alum.mit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id MAA04103 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 12:27:14 -0400 (EDT) From: aerocad@att.net Received: from webmail.worldnet.att.net ([204.127.135.40]) by mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id <20010605162644.LDDO2154.mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net>; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 16:26:44 +0000 Received: from [12.94.9.162] by webmail.worldnet.att.net; Tue, 05 Jun 2001 16:26:44 +0000 To: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Cc: Cozy_builders@canard.com Subject: Re: COZY: engine mount news Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 16:26:44 +0000 X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (May 2 2001) Message-Id: <20010605162644.LDDO2154.mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> Marc and builders; AeroCad received Marc's engine mount that he purchased months ago to locate why Marc could not install the mount to his O-360 engine. We first sent it back to Velocity to check our welding jigs bolting up the mount to make sure things had not changed or got damaged in shipping. We also checked to see if the wrong style ring assemble was used. Then, AeroCad Located an IO-360 engine to use for testing the mount that was made for Marc's Cozy MKIV - O-360. We installed heavy-duty isolators and carefully started one bolt at a time. You must make sure that engine mount is pressed againt each isolator and against the case of the engine before trying to start the next bolt. After ALL 4 bolts went in, I used a ratchet to push the bolts the rest of the way. In no way could I not get the 4 bolts to go in. Conclusion: When installing your engine mount to any engine mount, please be patient and insure that these steps have been followed. If you are unsure of these types of procedures, have an A&P mechanic come and assist you on the installation. We at the factory never drill the firewall before installing the engine or mount before you receive one. The mounting holes could be up to 1/8" off from side to side. We mount the engine to the mount and then lower the the set to the firewall and then check the location of the placement of the prop flange to make sure that the cowling is centered to the flange. The MKIV uses a square 1"x1" hardpoint for the engine mount bolts to go through. If for some reason you are not perfectly in the center of the hardpoint, it will not cause any structural problem if drilling is slightly offset on the aluminum. This gives you a custom drill job for a custom mount. The mount is used for the drilling jig. The wings are also drilled the same manner to make sure that you have the correct clearance and close to the correct distance per the drawings. Our wings that our built and drilled for our airplane will not bolt up to any other airplane because they are custom drilled. We hope this clears up any misunderstandings on what we resell as parts. -- Jeff Russell/AeroCad Inc Website: http://www.AeroCad.com 2954 Curtis King Blvd. Ft. Pierce, FL 34946 #561-460-8020 Sponcer: http://www.canard com > People; Snip > Due to the engine mount business of a while ago, From ???@??? Tue Jun 05 23:21:06 2001 Return-Path: Received: from mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.54]) by mta02.mrf.mail.rcn.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.23 201-229-121-123-20010418) with ESMTP id <20010605210654.CVTC27331.mta02.mrf.mail.rcn.net@mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net> for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 17:06:54 -0400 Received: from alum.mit.edu ([18.7.21.81]) by mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #6) id 157O2Q-0001bh-00 for marc.zeitlin@rcn.com; Tue, 05 Jun 2001 17:06:54 -0400 Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@ns.betaweb.com [216.231.140.250]) by alum.mit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id RAA15416; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 17:06:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA05351 for cozy_builders-list; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 09:01:25 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@canard.com using -f Received: from msgbas1.cos.agilent.com (msgbas1x.cos.agilent.com [192.6.9.33]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA05345 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 08:59:04 -0400 From: marc_zeitlin@hsgmed.com Received: from msgrel1.cos.agilent.com (msgrel1.cos.agilent.com [130.29.152.77]) by msgbas1.cos.agilent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3A38821 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 14:50:45 -0600 (MDT) Received: from axcsbh4.cos.agilent.com (axcsbh4.cos.agilent.com [130.29.152.145]) by msgrel1.cos.agilent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95449187 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 14:50:45 -0600 (MDT) Received: by axcsbh4.cos.agilent.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 14:50:45 -0600 Message-ID: <730B703AE680D311A13C00902754022C03317CA6@axand01.and.agilent.com> To: cozy_builders@canard.com Subject: COZY: engine mount news Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 14:50:37 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-cozy_builders@canard.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: marc_zeitlin@hsgmed.com Jeff Russell wrote: > ...... We also checked to see if the wrong style > ring assemble was used.........After ALL 4 bolts went > in, I used a ratchet to push the bolts the rest of the > way. In no way could I not get the 4 bolts to go in. > > Conclusion: > When installing your engine mount to any engine mount, > please be patient and insure that these steps have been > followed. Since the conclusion you state implies that I did NOT follow these procedures, let me state for the record that I did, in fact, do EXACTLY as you recommend. There was NO WAY that mount was going onto that engine. No matter how patient I was, and how many ways I tried to get the dynafocal mount points to line up between the mount and the engine, the bolts did not even come CLOSE to lining up, and neither did the shock absorbers in the cups. On the other hand, the FIRST (RANS) mount you sent me had no problem lining up with the engine, and neither did the third (Brock) mount I now have - I have installed both mounts (RANS and Brock) on the engine more than 6 times now, without any alignment issues. The second mount (made by Velocity) is clearly different than the RANS and Brock mounts, and does NOT fit my engine. Let me postulate a different "conclusion". There are, in fact, TWO different dynafocal mounts for Lycoming engines: "Type 1" - the standard, 30 degree mount "Type 2" - a far rarer, 18 degree mount A mount made for one engine will NOT fit an engine with another. I believe that I've got an O-360 A2A with the "Type 1" mount, so another POSSIBLE reason for the lack of fit is that the dynafocal ring was set up for a "Type 2" mount. It's possible that a subset of the IO-360 engines use a different "Type" mount than the O-360's. It's also POSSIBLE that there's some weird combination of things going on that allows the mount to go onto Jeff's engine, but not mine. I don't know what the reason is, but I know that two out of three mounts have fit my engine with no problem, so it's clearly not a case of technique. Blaming the customer in a public forum is never a good publicity device, especially when there are multiple possible explanations for the problem, most of them stemming from vendor quality control issues. > We at the factory never drill the firewall before > installing the engine or mount before you receive one. And once again, this was EXACTLY what I did. I used the first (RANS) mount I received (which was 1.5" low) to match drill the firewall holes. Therefore, they lined up perfectly with that mount. Had the first mount not been incorrect, I wouldn't have had to try to use the same holes for the second (Velocity) mount, which did NOT line up. Interestingly enough, the third (Brock) mount lined up with the first set of holes (from the RANS mount) within 1/64". It was only the Velocity built mount that didn't meet the specs with respect to the firewall or the engine. > We hope this clears up any misunderstandings on what we > resell as parts. I can't imagine that it would - I don't think there are any misunderstandings. In this case, the product was defective (twice). You were completely honorable and refunded my purchase price when I requested it without any arguments - for that I thank you. But there are no misunderstandings. -- Marc J. Zeitlin marc_zeitlin@alum.mit.edu | http://cozy.canard.com Non Impediti Ratione Cogitantonis (C&C) From ???@??? Tue Jun 05 23:21:06 2001 Return-Path: Received: from mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.54]) by mta03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.23 201-229-121-123-20010418) with ESMTP id <20010605211936.CNTS16109.mta03.mrf.mail.rcn.net@mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net> for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 17:19:36 -0400 Received: from alum.mit.edu ([18.7.21.81]) by mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #6) id 157OEi-0005iC-00 for marc.zeitlin@rcn.com; Tue, 05 Jun 2001 17:19:36 -0400 Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@ns.betaweb.com [216.231.140.250]) by alum.mit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id RAA18659; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 17:19:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA05523 for cozy_builders-list; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 09:21:49 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@canard.com using -f Received: from msgbas1.cos.agilent.com (msgbas1x.cos.agilent.com [192.6.9.33]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA05517 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 09:19:28 -0400 From: marc_zeitlin@hsgmed.com Received: from msgrel1t.cos.agilent.com (msgrel1t.cos.agilent.com [130.29.152.157]) by msgbas1.cos.agilent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F72E15ED for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 15:10:47 -0600 (MDT) Received: from axandbh3.and.agilent.com (axandbh3.and.agilent.com [130.30.32.200]) by msgrel1t.cos.agilent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCC89502 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 15:10:46 -0600 (MDT) Received: by axandbh3.and.agilent.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 17:10:46 -0400 Message-ID: <730B703AE680D311A13C00902754022C03317CA7@axand01.and.agilent.com> To: cozy_builders@canard.com Subject: FW: COZY: engine mount news Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 17:10:43 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-cozy_builders@canard.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: marc_zeitlin@hsgmed.com To follow up on my previous posting regarding engines and mounts: Jeff wrote: > ring assemble was used. Then, AeroCad Located an IO-360 > engine to use for testing the mount that was made for > Marc's Cozy MKIV - O-360. The following Lycoming engines have "Type 2" dynafocal mounts (the rest have either "Type 1" dynafocals or conicals, which are immediately distinguishable): IO-320-A1A IO-320-B1A HO-360-A1A IO-360-D1A IO-360-E1A HIO-360-C1A If the engine that was used to create the Velocity mount was based on any of these, that would explain the difference in mounting capability. -- Marc J. Zeitlin marc_zeitlin@alum.mit.edu | http://cozy.canard.com Non Impediti Ratione Cogitantonis (C&C) From ???@??? Tue Jun 05 23:21:26 2001 Return-Path: Received: from mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.54]) by mta05.mrf.mail.rcn.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.23 201-229-121-123-20010418) with ESMTP id <20010605231810.GTRJ296.mta05.mrf.mail.rcn.net@mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net> for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 19:18:10 -0400 Received: from alum.mit.edu ([18.7.21.81]) by mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #6) id 157Q5S-00003l-00 for marc.zeitlin@rcn.com; Tue, 05 Jun 2001 19:18:10 -0400 Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@ns.betaweb.com [216.231.140.250]) by alum.mit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id TAA16178; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 19:18:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA06604 for cozy_builders-list; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 11:20:43 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@canard.com using -f Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA06598 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 11:18:22 -0400 Received: from phloyd.riley.net ([64.164.245.155]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with ESMTP id <0GEH00EOMBQN0H@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for cozy_builders@canard.com; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 15:56:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 15:59:31 -0700 From: Richard Riley Subject: Re: COZY: engine mount news In-reply-to: <730B703AE680D311A13C00902754022C03317CA6@axand01.and.agile nt.com> X-Sender: berkut@pop.loop.com To: marc_zeitlin@hsgmed.com, cozy_builders@canard.com Message-id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010605152637.022403e0@pop.loop.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-cozy_builders@canard.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Richard Riley At 02:50 PM 6/5/2001 -0600, marc_zeitlin@hsgmed.com wrote: >Let me postulate a different "conclusion". There are, in fact, TWO >different dynafocal mounts for Lycoming engines: > > "Type 1" - the standard, 30 degree mount > "Type 2" - a far rarer, 18 degree mount It's the most likely explanation I can come up with, but there are so few type 2 engines out there that it seems very unlikely. IIRC, the type 2 mounts are only on 320 B1A's from the Piper Twin Comanche A local distortion of space/time seems more probable. I'm just brainstorming, Jeff, can you find another engine to check it against? Or is it possible there's something wrong with the isolators? From ???@??? Tue Jun 05 23:42:26 2001 Return-Path: Received: from mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.54]) by mta05.mrf.mail.rcn.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.23 201-229-121-123-20010418) with ESMTP id <20010606033437.MCOO296.mta05.mrf.mail.rcn.net@mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net> for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 23:34:37 -0400 Received: from alum.mit.edu ([18.7.21.81]) by mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #6) id 157U5d-0003iP-00 for marc.zeitlin@rcn.com; Tue, 05 Jun 2001 23:34:37 -0400 Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@ns.betaweb.com [216.231.140.250]) by alum.mit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id XAA02782; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 23:34:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA09172 for cozy_builders-list; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 15:38:30 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@canard.com using -f Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.60]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA09166 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 15:36:11 -0400 Received: from 207-172-216-35.s543.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com ([207.172.216.35] helo=zeitlin-1.rcn.com) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #6) id 157Tz4-0001BT-00 for cozy_builders@canard.com; Tue, 05 Jun 2001 23:27:51 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010605232644.00ac1550@pop.rcn.com> X-Sender: marc.zeitlin@pop.rcn.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 23:29:16 -0400 To: Cozy Builders Mailing List From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Subject: COZY: engine mount news Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-cozy_builders@canard.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Richard Riley wrote: >It's the most likely explanation I can come up with, but there are so few >type 2 engines out there that it seems very unlikely. IIRC, the type 2 >mounts are only on 320 B1A's from the Piper Twin Comanche As I stated in my second response, it's more than just that engine. The list I got was from: http://www.prime-mover.org/Engines/index.html Which is engine guru Greg Travis' web site. >A local distortion of space/time seems more probable. Ya think? If so, it would be a far easier way to travel from place to place then spending 6.5 years building a dang airplane. Let me at that black hole with my superstring...... :-). -- Marc J. Zeitlin mailto:marc_zeitlin@alum.mit.edu http://users.rcn.com/marc.zeitlin/ From ???@??? Sat Jun 30 23:12:00 2001 Return-Path: Received: from mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.54]) by mta04.mrf.mail.rcn.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.23 201-229-121-123-20010418) with ESMTP id <20010701030800.UVUJ672.mta04.mrf.mail.rcn.net@mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net> for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:08:00 -0400 Received: from alum.mit.edu ([18.7.21.81]) by mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.30 #2) id 15GXaa-0001gx-00 for marc.zeitlin@rcn.com; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:08:00 -0400 Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@ns.betaweb.com [216.231.140.250]) by alum.mit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id XAA19280; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:07:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA10836 for cozy_builders-list; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 15:10:45 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@canard.com using -f Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.61]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA10823 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 15:08:25 -0400 Received: from 207-172-255-171.s1187.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com ([207.172.255.171] helo=zeitlin-1.rcn.com) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.30 #2) id 15GXV0-00061n-00 for cozy_builders@canard.com; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:02:15 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010630213326.00acc010@pop.rcn.com> X-Sender: marc.zeitlin@pop.rcn.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 21:39:31 -0400 To: Cozy Builders Mailing List From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Subject: Fwd: Re: COZY: Oil cooler Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-cozy_builders@canard.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Marc J. Zeitlin" John Slade asks; >....... From the picture it looks as though your oil cooler mounts >directly to the bottom cowl with a fiberglass duct. No bracket to the >cowling lip, per Nat's suggestion. Is that right? Yes. The bottom cowl seems more than strong enough, and with the fiberglass "duct" is very stiff in that area too. If I need to take the bottom cowl off, I just need to remove 4 AN-3 bolts and the cooler comes off. >..... Also it looks as though >the outlet is under the oil cooler in the lower cowl. Isn't this a high >pressure area? Wouldn't it better to have the outlet in the upper cowl? As Nat and Dave have pointed out, a number of oil cooler locations work, and positioning and airflow is idiosyncratic at best :-). While you're right that the bottom of the wing is "high pressure", it's only high in relation to the top of the wing - most of the time, both the top and bottom of the wing have lower static pressures than ambient (over most of the surface, but certainly not all) - since it's the delta that matters, our planes still fly :-). Nat surmises that the internal cowling high pressure also helps, and I'd even argue that that's a much larger pressure difference than the airflow induces lower pressure, so as long as the plane's flying, you'll have a large pressure difference across the oil cooler. On the ground, yeah, you'd probably get slightly better airflow across the cooler with updraft cooling (through the cooler), but I'd bet a lot of money that it's a negligible difference at low power levels (which is what you've got on the ground). My belated $0.02 (after a nice vacation on Cape Cod). -- Marc J. Zeitlin mailto:marc_zeitlin@alum.mit.edu http://users.rcn.com/marc.zeitlin/ From ???@??? Mon Jul 02 20:25:07 2001 Return-Path: Received: from mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.54]) by mta01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.23 201-229-121-123-20010418) with ESMTP id <20010701223735.BPDS18432.mta01.mrf.mail.rcn.net@mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net> for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 18:37:35 -0400 Received: from alum.mit.edu ([18.7.21.81]) by mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.30 #2) id 15GpqR-0001Z0-00 for marc.zeitlin@rcn.com; Sun, 01 Jul 2001 18:37:35 -0400 Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@ns.betaweb.com [216.231.140.250]) by alum.mit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id SAA00843; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 18:37:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA19898 for cozy_builders-list; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 10:37:44 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@canard.com using -f Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.62]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA19885 for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 10:35:22 -0400 Received: from 207-172-216-39.s547.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com ([207.172.216.39] helo=zeitlin-1.rcn.com) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.30 #2) id 15GpiD-0006V5-00 for cozy_builders@canard.com; Sun, 01 Jul 2001 18:29:05 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010701172720.00ac2970@pop.rcn.com> X-Sender: marc.zeitlin@pop.rcn.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2001 17:33:45 -0400 To: Cozy Builders Mailing List From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Subject: COZY: Oil cooler Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-cozy_builders@canard.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Marc J. Zeitlin" John Slade writes; >Thanks for the explanation, Marc. Still doesn't say why you went with under >if over would be "slightly better". Perhaps aesthetics and the potential for >rain etc. going in the cowl? Ummm, yeah, that's the ticket..... Actually, the rain issue was one thing - my plane will probably be parked outside, so I'd just as soon minimize the # of holes on the top. Also, the top cowl comes off a lot more often than the bottom one, so I figured that attaching it to the bottom would be less of a headache. Sometimes, easier is better than better :-). -- Marc J. Zeitlin mailto:marc_zeitlin@alum.mit.edu http://users.rcn.com/marc.zeitlin/ From ???@??? Sat Aug 11 15:38:32 2001 Return-Path: Received: from mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.54]) by mta02.mrf.mail.rcn.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.23 201-229-121-123-20010418) with ESMTP id <20010811190153.DNMK22680.mta02.mrf.mail.rcn.net@mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net> for ; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 15:01:53 -0400 Received: from alum.mit.edu ([18.7.21.81]) by mx05.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.32 #2) id 15Ve1B-0004uH-00 for marc.zeitlin@rcn.com; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 15:01:53 -0400 Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@ns.betaweb.com [216.231.140.250]) by alum.mit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id PAA25401; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 15:01:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA09065 for cozy_builders-list; Fri, 11 Aug 2000 15:01:25 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@canard.com using -f Received: from rcsntx.swbell.net (mta5.rcsntx.swbell.net [151.164.30.29]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA09053 for ; Fri, 11 Aug 2000 14:58:43 -0400 Received: from swbell.net ([64.123.59.73]) by mta5.rcsntx.swbell.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 (built May 7 2001)) with ESMTP id <0GHW000IBNDL3N@mta5.rcsntx.swbell.net> for cozy_builders@canard.com; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 08:12:58 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2001 08:19:27 -0500 From: David Domeier Subject: COZY: Re: [c-a] Improved Cooling/Performance w/OIL COOLER RELOCATION? To: Cozy Builders Mailing List Cc: canard-aviators@yahoogroups.com Message-id: <3B7530E0.244BDF63@swbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 (Macintosh; U; PPC) Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-Accept-Language: en,pdf References: Sender: owner-cozy_builders@canard.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: David Domeier An oil cooler mounted at the aft baffle will work better because that's probably the high pressure area in the compartment. Intake air seems to jam up in that location. This jam is the reason #1 and #2 CHT's generally run cooler than #3 and #4. Good oil cooling will help keep CHT's within limits so the location is a win win situation, except for one factor. My oil cooler is located above the filter with the exit out the top of the cowling. This location has the advantage of venting the accessory section after shut down. But it does steal air from #3 and #4 cylinders exasperating the result of the jam of air in the aft part of compartment. Oil temperature and CHT's are within limits except on very hot days, however, the difference in CHT from front to aft is considerable. I've tried 3 different arrangements of up slope ramps on the inside of the bottom cowl, but not enough air is making it to #3 to #4 to make a difference. So this week I tried something different. The first experiment involved stealing air at the intake via 2 inch CEET and directly it at #3 and #4 cylinders individually. Due to space limitations, the #3 duct intake was straight to incoming air on the left side of the NASA intake but the #4 duct intake was about 90° to and above the the incoming air on the right. The results were not at all what one would expect. With an OAT of 95°F and a climb to 8500', #1 CHT was hottest, #2 and #3 were about the same and #4 was coolest by a long shot. Evidently the 90° intake to incoming air was ramming more air to #4 than the straight shot going to #3. It doesn't make sense but that's what happened. Perhaps, when air comes into the engine compartment, it makes a radical turn upward? I don't know. I then removed the #4 CEET ducting leaving only #3 with direct air to the cylinder. (#3 had always been the hottest) The results were quite satisfactory in that the CHT's are now within 30° of each other. #1 cylinder is running much cooler again because #4 is not hogging so much air. My personal conclusion is that there is much going on with incoming air flow that we do not fully understand and the only way to achieve satisfactory results is to experiment. Certainly a configuration in the LEZ will be different than in the Cozy due to space limitations, and as such, these results with my machine cooling the 0360 and are offered for what they are worth. dd Cozy MKIV N10CZ