Date: Thu, 01 Jan 1998 10:42:46 -0600 From: Will Chorley Subject: COZY: Prop Extensions I have just installed my 0-320 on a Brock "heavy" mount and found that a 6" prop extension is too short! It would appear that an 8" extension would place the aft face of the extension about 1 1/4" behind the aft edge of the cowling. What is the "idea" gap between the cowling and the prop mounting surface? Does this gap make any real difference to perfromance? Is it OK to use an 8" extension on an 0-320? Should I trim the cowling back to fit a 6" extension (looks like I'd need to trim about 1 1/2" minimum)? Any ideas would be welcome. Thanks in advance for your help and suggestions. Will From: "Fred I. Mahan" Subject: Re: COZY: Prop Extensions Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 14:16:00 -0500 8" extensions are used on O-320's and O-360's on the Defiant. Fred in Florida ---------- > From: Will Chorley > To: cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com > Subject: COZY: Prop Extensions > Date: Thursday, January 01, 1998 11:42 AM > > I have just installed my 0-320 on a Brock "heavy" mount and found that a > 6" prop extension is too short! It would appear that an 8" extension > would place the aft face of the extension about 1 1/4" behind the aft > edge of the cowling. What is the "idea" gap between the cowling and the > prop mounting surface? Does this gap make any real difference to > perfromance? Is it OK to use an 8" extension on an 0-320? Should I > trim the cowling back to fit a 6" extension (looks like I'd need to trim > about 1 1/2" minimum)? Any ideas would be welcome. > > Thanks in advance for your help and suggestions. > > Will Date: Fri, 02 Jan 1998 16:42:08 -0800 From: Stet Elliott Subject: Re: COZY: Prop Extensions Will Chorley wrote: > I have just installed my 0-320 on a Brock "heavy" mount and found that > a > 6" prop extension is too short! It would appear that an 8" extension > would place the aft face of the extension about 1 1/4" behind the aft > edge of the cowling. What is the "idea" gap between the cowling and > the > prop mounting surface? Does this gap make any real difference to > perfromance? Is it OK to use an 8" extension on an 0-320? Should I > trim the cowling back to fit a 6" extension (looks like I'd need to > trim > about 1 1/2" minimum)? Any ideas would be welcome. > > Thanks in advance for your help and suggestions. > >From the Central States Newsletters, 3.5" is the minimum gap between the prop and cowling that you should have. I had 1.5" gap for the first 80 hours, and experienced significant cowling shake because the prop pressure wave was impinging on the cowling. I installed an 8" on my O-320 which provided a 4" gap between cowl and prop. Not only did the shake go away, I also gained 9 kts in top speed, probably because the prop is now working in cleaner air. Yes, an 8" extension is fine on an O-320. Saber Manufacturing makes excellent extensions. In fact, they make the extensions now sold by Ken Brock. Talk to Judy Woofter at Saber. She's been making extensions for over 10 years, and probably knows more about the subject than anyone else. Saber's number is 954-436-9496. -- Stet Elliott flyez@earthlink.net Long-EZ N321EF From: "Fred I. Mahan" Subject: Re: COZY: Prop Extensions Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 23:06:35 -0500 Stet, that's Judy Saber at Woofter-Saber engineering! Yes, she does top-notch work and is a great person, too. She also makes the extensions sold by Van's Aircraft, Aircraft Spruce, and others. Fred in Florida ---------- > From: Stet Elliott > To: cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com; The Canard Aviator's mailing list > Subject: Re: COZY: Prop Extensions > Date: Friday, January 02, 1998 7:42 PM > > Will Chorley wrote: > > > I have just installed my 0-320 on a Brock "heavy" mount and found that > > a > > 6" prop extension is too short! It would appear that an 8" extension > > would place the aft face of the extension about 1 1/4" behind the aft > > edge of the cowling. What is the "idea" gap between the cowling and > > the > > prop mounting surface? Does this gap make any real difference to > > perfromance? Is it OK to use an 8" extension on an 0-320? Should I > > trim the cowling back to fit a 6" extension (looks like I'd need to > > trim > > about 1 1/2" minimum)? Any ideas would be welcome. > > > > Thanks in advance for your help and suggestions. > > > > >From the Central States Newsletters, 3.5" is the minimum gap between the > prop and cowling that you should have. I had 1.5" gap for the first 80 > hours, and experienced significant cowling shake because the prop > pressure wave was impinging on the cowling. I installed an 8" on my > O-320 which provided a 4" gap between cowl and prop. Not only did the > shake go away, I also gained 9 kts in top speed, probably because the > prop is now working in cleaner air. > > Yes, an 8" extension is fine on an O-320. > > Saber Manufacturing makes excellent extensions. In fact, they make the > extensions now sold by Ken Brock. Talk to Judy Woofter at Saber. She's > been making extensions for over 10 years, and probably knows more about > the subject than anyone else. Saber's number is 954-436-9496. > > > -- > Stet Elliott > flyez@earthlink.net > Long-EZ N321EF > > > Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 14:08:40 +0200 From: Rego Burger Subject: COZY: Engine Cowling Hello All, Can someone give me the average thickness of the "kit made" cowlings for the cozy mk4, as I am just about making everything myself I will need to make the cowling too. Having the thickness will help to plan it. Many Thanks Rego Burger, web site: http://home.intekom.com/glen/rnb.htm (home e-mail) mailto:rnb@intekom.co.za From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 07:50:56 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Engine Cowling My COSY cowling is 3 plys carbon fiber, with 2" wide 4 plys BID around the perimeter for stiffening. There is also a 2 ply BID angle rib with 1 ply from other side to prevent pealing 1/2" high at the baffling to prevent the baffling from blowing through, 1 stiffening rib each side top half way down running fore/aft to stiffen the top. Note that my top is ralatively flat being a warped surface from a wider turtleback to the cowl rear opening. If I were going to do it again I would do the same. From: "Rick Roberts" Subject: Re: COZY: Engine Cowling Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 06:24:57 -0800 Hi Rego and Everyone, My cowling is 2 plies of 613 Graphite (about .020" thick each ply) and one ply of 282 Kevlar BID (about .010 thick). So it's about .055" thick and stiff! Rick Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 10:20:19 +0200 From: Rego Burger Subject: COZY: Engine Mount Steel Any metal experts out there? The Rand vs $ being as bad as it is I'm looking at alternative steel tubing for my custom engine mount. Some folks have suggested stainless steel which is available off the shelf in RSA any ideas? Postage on 4130 is often = the the price x 5 Rego Burger, web site: http://home.intekom.com/glen/rnb.htm (home e-mail) mailto:rnb@intekom.co.za From: SBLANKDDS Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 00:42:16 EST Subject: Re: COZY: Re: [canard-aviators] Exhaust wrap Why would we want our pipes so close to the prop center. This area has the longest contact time between the pipes and the prop. Three blade predictable problem. One blade will get toasted over time. Why not direct exhaust out the bottom, or sides? or at least spread the pipes wider so they hit the faster moving part of the prop? Would this effect cooling air movement out the back opening? Where are the draw backs to a new pipe design? Drag? Exhaust manifold pressure? Noise? Cost? or each set custom anyway? Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 08:15:20 +0200 From: Rego Burger Subject: COZY: Re: [canard-aviators] Exhaust wrap -Reply >>> "Rick Roberts" 27/January/1998 06:38am >>> Hi everybody, I've been following with some interest this thread concerning exhaust wrap. If you've seen my web pictures then you would notice that my pipes are pretty tight to the cowl. I've been trying to determine a neat way of providing active cooling to this area. At the local salvage yard, I found this cool material which is aluminum sheet that is formed just like corrigated paper (cardboard box material). I am planning on wrapping the pipes with this and extending it into the alum. venturi pipes and using the suction of the venturi to draw air through the exhaust "radiator". This would increase the cooling area of the pipes and provide a "cold" surface where the pipes are close to the cowl. Any thoughts? Rick Roberts wrote above<<<<< Rick, Just be careful of aluminium near exhausts...they can flash and burn ....I made a seal on my wifes motorcycle out of thin aluminium shim once....wee......after about 5 min on the road flames around her boots. The shim ignited. I think aero engines exhaust gets hotter so just a concern. 2c worth. Rego Burger RSA From: lschuler@cellular.uscc.com Date: Tue, 27 Jan 98 08:44:13 -0600 Subject: Re: COZY: Re: [canard-aviators] Exhaust wrap Rick Roberts wrote: >I've been following with some interest this thread concerning exhaust wrap. >If you've seen my web pictures then you would notice that my pipes are >pretty tight to the cowl. I've been trying to determine a neat way of >providing active cooling to this area. At the local salvage yard, I found >this cool material which is aluminum sheet that is formed just like >corrigated paper (cardboard box material). I am planning on wrapping the >pipes with this and extending it into the alum. venturi pipes and using the >suction of the venturi to draw air through the exhaust "radiator". This >would increase the cooling area of the pipes and provide a "cold" surface >where the pipes are close to the cowl. Any thoughts? Neat idea, but think you may have trouble with the melting point of such aluminum tightly wrapped around the pipes. Also maybe water trap. Not sure I fully understand your venturi setup, but something to think about. Larry Schuler lschuler@cellular.uscc.com From: michael.holm@post3.tele.dk (Holm, Michael) Subject: Re: COZY: optical ice detectors Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 09:47:25 +0100 ---------- > From: Paul Burkhardt > To: cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com > Cc: canard-aviators@canard.com > Subject: COZY: optical ice detectors > Date: 2. januar 1998 08:40 >=20 > I read in CSA ( or maybe hear on th WEB) that someone was usng an > optical ice detector to detect ice in the carburator. Where can I find > information on this item. cost? etc. will it work on an Ellison? Thanks > Paul Burkhardt >=20 I don=B4t know if you have got an answer Poul ( this is an old mail but i have first read my mail now because my modem has been down) anyway this should be your answer: Aircraft Spruce has it ! Se there new catalog (98) page 296 top right colum optical ice detector at a price of 259$ Best Regards Michael Holm Cosy Clasic ( 10 years building 87%) Subject: COZY: Openings in top of Cowl From: mbeduhn@juno.com (Mark W Beduhn) Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 19:08:20 EST Vance, I was reading my back issues of the Central States Newsletter when I saw a modification you made to the top of your cowl (April 1991). It shows two openings above the cylinders to let out cooling air. You stated that it dramatically lowered your cylinder head temps. I don't remember seeing them the last time you were here. Are they still there? Would you recommend them? My cylinder temps are in the high 300's and it would be nice to get them lower. Thanks, Mark Beduhn Cozy N494CZ PS I now have 85 hours on my plane (loving every minute of it) and am making cooling and speed modifications. I just put a boat tail on my lower cowl which added a few knots to my top speed (and seems to have made the plane even quieter). Before repainting the cowl, I'm trying to decide whether or not to cut cooling openings in the top half. _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From: "Fred I. Mahan" Subject: Re: COZY: Openings in top of Cowl Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 18:09:01 -0500 I had cooling problems early in my Long-EZ's career. I cut slots in the top of my cowl to try to get my temps down, and it worked. I made no attempt to streamline the flow out of the slots, they were just holes. I was happy. About 5 years later, Sam Kreidel wandered by my hanger one day. He said he knew someone who had cut slots in the top of his Long-EZ's cowling, and it cost him 10 knots. Doooh! I closed up the holes, tightened up the baffling, and cut away the upper cowl stiffening rib near the outlet to try to improve the cooling. I picked up 8 knots. Fred in Florida Long-EZ N86LE Defiant project From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sun, 1 Mar 1998 21:01:34 -0600 (CST) Subject: COZY: Lycoming cooling - caution Over the period of over 500 hours I have been experimenting with the cooling of my IO-320, with small changes in the baffles. Until recently the engine has been agreeable to the changes, with reams of data of oil and cylinder temperatures but excellent wear and tear of the cylinders and rings. I recently had a cylinder with light scoring of the top surface of the piston and cylinder. During the annual just completed I found light scoring on 3 other cylinders. The conclusion I have come to is the cylinder barrel baffles (the ones nearest the crankcase covering the cylindrical outline fins of smaller diameter) must have atleast 1.5" gap top and bottom. I had gradually closed the opening down to between .75" - 1.0", which I now believe is too small, especially for the top. I have opened up the gap, and will monitor the scoring, but will probably have to put new rings in. Food for thought: I have lined the baffles with 3/32" red silcone rubber sheet to seal, keep the fins from cutting into the aluminum. 1: The silicone acts as an insulator creating less heat transfer. 2: Coat the inside of the baffles with flat black paint to increase the heat sink and consider the baffle as a radiator. Thoughts?? Subject: Re: COZY: 8" Prop extension From: mbeduhn@juno.com (Mark W Beduhn) Date: Sat, 07 Mar 1998 17:17:48 EST On Thu, 5 Mar 1998 16:01:35 -0800 alwick@juno.com (ok How) writes: Hi Mark! Could you take a measure and tell me what the distance is from engine cover to prop inside face? I want to make sure I set up my plane with prop in the "quiet zone". I have 3.5" gap between prop and engine cover now with my prototype mount.Your plane looks great! Saw it in the completions section. Thanks! Al, At the spinner, the prop is 3" from the cowl. Farther out on the prop the clearance is 3 1/2" Mark Beduhn Cozy IV N494CZ _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Oil Coolers? Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 20:53:20 -0600 Eric, I have tried a number of locations for the oil cooler. Mounting at the top of the firewall worked okay, but was unsightly. When I installed the very nice B & C 90 degree spin on oil filter mount, there was no longer room at the top of the firewall for the cooler, so I mounted it alongside the right wing root, exiting downward. It is hidden there and works great without needing a fence to increase the flow. With my various airplanes and engines I purchased quite a few coolers, all aircraft, and all but one were used. The most I ever paid for a used one was $75. Best regards, Nat ---------- > From: Eric Westland > To: Cozy Builders > Subject: COZY: Oil Coolers? > Date: Monday, March 16, 1998 4:11 PM > > Our plans show two possible locations for the oil cooler and I've seen > at least three more. I've read of builders moving them here and there > looking for the perfect location, so I'm figuring finding the right spot > is partially a function of luck. I'm thinking of mounting it on the > upper firewall to start with, but before I did, I thought I would tap > into the collective wisdom of you folks. > > So, where did you place it and why? > > Where did you buy it and what type did you get? Did anyone ever try out > the ones from the archives a few years back (Trans Tech?) ? > > Thanks, > > Eric Westland > Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 13:57:22 -0500 From: glenn murray Subject: COZY: Stainless steel exhaust Hi I flew over the the states last summer to buy a stainless steel exhaust f= or my cozy 3 from custom a/c parts. I need to contact them to find out the exact materials they used as I need to add on a box around the right hand side for hot air for the cabin. The number I have is no longer available, (619 2764802) does anyone have the grade and specs of the stainless used or is it titanium? or their new tel no thanks in advance Glenn Murray (Also having problems installing the oil cooler,I'm trying to use one fro= m a Cessna 172N is it suitable or should I go for a smaller one and will a smaller one cool the Oil sufficiently?) Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 14:41:30 -0800 Subject: Re: COZY: Stainless steel exhaust From: alwick@juno.com (ok How) FWIW, it is likely they used type 304L stainless. No way is it titanium. 304L is one of the few stainless tube materials that can be bent on a mandrel. You can tell it is mandrel bent by the fact that the bent area is appx the same diam as the straight sections of the tube. Non- mandrel bent will become egg shaped in bend area. Hope this helps. You may also contact others who supply stainless exhaust and see what alloy they use, but I don't think it will matter. -al wick 70% comp. Cozy MkIV with stock Subaru 2.5 engine. Computerized cockpit. Just completed proto engine mount, now working towards engine ignite! On Wed, 18 Mar 1998 13:57:22 -0500 glenn murray writes: >Hi >I flew over the the states last summer to buy a stainless steel >exhaust f= >or >my cozy 3 from custom a/c parts. I need to contact >them to find out the exact materials they used as I need to add on a >box >around the right hand side for hot air for the cabin. >The number I have is no longer available, (619 2764802) does anyone >have >the grade and specs of the stainless used >or is it titanium? or their new tel no >thanks in advance >Glenn Murray >(Also having problems installing the oil cooler,I'm trying to use one >fro= >m >a Cessna 172N is it suitable or should I go for a >smaller one and will a smaller one cool the Oil sufficiently?) > _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subject: COZY: Re: Oil Cooler??? From: mbeduhn@juno.com (Mark W Beduhn) Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 22:01:06 EST On Thu, 19 Mar 1998 08:09:26 -0800 Eric Westland writes: >Mark, > >Could I please ask you to tell me what size oil cooler you installed, >where you placed it and if it's doing the job for you? I'd really >like to nail down the installation right the first time. > >Thanks, > >Eric Westland >Painting the wings, then put it all together and go flying :-) > > Eric, I have a 13 row oil cooler mounted to the rear top of the firewall (the same location as shown on the plans). I also added a reverse scoop that I can cut off if it is not needed. What I found is that I had to add a damper to the outlet to close off the air, otherwise the oil temp only gets to 160 degrees (45 degree ambient temp, full throttle). I am waiting for summer temps before making any changes. What I like about the installation is that is cools great and when I park, the heat convects away from the plane. What I don't like is the looks (kind of ugly). However, all things considered I will stick with good cooling. Hope that helps. Mark Beduhn Coay IV N494CZ _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Date: Sat, 28 Mar 1998 02:36:09 -0500 From: glenn murray Subject: COZY: Canopy Fastners Hi Im about to install the upper and lower canopies to my Cozy 3 Place,the plans call for 46 camlock fasteners, Does anyone know of a cheaper solution or is anyone using something else that works as well and a lot less expensive the camlock fasteners work out to the quivalent of $8.5 each here regards Glenn Murray From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sat, 28 Mar 1998 07:15:47 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Canopy Fastners Glenn Murray writes There are many EZ's out there with 10-32 countersunk machine screws and washers out there, but I wouldn't recommend, since you will be removing the cowling a zillion times even after flying. THis may a times be at night or less than best of weather. I prefer the camlock 4002 series, stainless steel phillips head studs, corrosion resistant receptacles, 4002-N3 retainers (washers)that are larger diameter for composites. You won't be able to use the retaining rings, since the studs project into the receptacle where a sliding with close clearance will key things together. Initially buy all the receptacles, retainers, and a pair of pliers #4P3, and a small selection of stud lengths, say 2 each -6, -7, -8. Fit the cowlings, install the receptacles, and then determine quantity/length of studs. Try hard to keep all the stud lengths the same by adding local plys of fiberglass before installing grommets finally. I have all of the above sizes, and its kind of a pain to check sizes when reinstalling, they are in groups though. When fitting, I started holes small, (1/8") and used clecos, then enlarged holes carefully in several stages. Buy extra of every thing say 4 each, you'll need them. From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Canopy Fastners Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 10:13:36 -0600 Dear Glenn, I hope you are talking about cowlings and not canopies. Most of us use flat head screws screwed into nutplates, which is an inexpensive solution. Camlock fasteners have a disadvantage in addition to the cost in that they always stay attached, and that makes it more difficult to position the cowlings. Regards, Nat ---------- > From: glenn murray > To: cozy builders forum > Subject: COZY: Canopy Fastners > Date: Saturday, March 28, 1998 1:36 AM > > Hi > Im about to install the upper and lower canopies to my Cozy 3 Place,the > plans call for 46 camlock fasteners, > Does anyone know of a cheaper solution or is anyone using something else > that works as well and a lot less expensive > the camlock fasteners work out to the quivalent of $8.5 each here > regards Glenn Murray From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 15:13:33 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Canopy Fastners Nat writes Not so: Don't install the retainer ring on the grommet (washer). Then the studs and grommet assemblies are loose just like a machine screw and countersunk washer. Thats the way my cowl is, and 1/4 turn is much quicker than many, and a electric screw driver is heavy to carry on trips. From: Epplin John A Subject: COZY: Ellison TBI options Date: Wed, 1 Apr 1998 08:30:55 -0600 I am planning on an Ellison EFS 4-5 fuel system for my O-360. Looking at the Ellison order form there is an option on the throttle position. Either 'A' or 'B' . Couple of quesitons: Has anyone used this combination on a Cozy? Which option is correct or is it something that the rest of the instalation can be disigned to accomodate eaisly? I would appreciate some insight as I will need to order the unit soon. John Epplin Mk4 #467 From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Ellison TBI options Date: Wed, 1 Apr 1998 09:33:15 -0600 Dear John, The illustrations I show in the plans, Chapter 23, page 13, Figures 54 and 55 are correct and this is the recommended configuration for the throttle arm on the throttlebody. However the alphabetic call out on the throttle position may not be the same as on the Ellison order form. The Ellison should be mounted so that the slide operates from side to side (for best fuel/air flow) and the throttle should be on the aft side of the throttlebody for maximum radius of the Cablecraft cable. The designation for the fuel inlet to the throttle body is not critical, because it can be readily changed to either side. Best regards, Nat ---------- > From: Epplin John A > To: cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com > Subject: COZY: Ellison TBI options > Date: Wednesday, April 01, 1998 8:30 AM > > I am planning on an Ellison EFS 4-5 fuel system for my O-360. Looking at > the Ellison order form there is an option on the throttle position. Either > 'A' or 'B' . Couple of quesitons: > > Has anyone used this combination on a Cozy? > Which option is correct or is it something that the rest of the instalation > can be disigned to accomodate eaisly? > > I would appreciate some insight as I will need to order the unit soon. > > John Epplin Mk4 #467 > From: wilhelmson@scra.org Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 15:13:01 -0400 Subject: COZY: cooling problem solution Well, it looks like we are ready for S&F. Got my new brake disks on and tested my bird after all the maintenance and mods. I have always had cyl. head temp problems (as reported by many builders) and finally resorted to cowling ducts to bring air directly to the back cylinders. This brought the temps down into the 450 degree range (thermocouples on top under the plugs) at 75% power, but full power at low altitude and long full power climbs still required reducing power after awhile to keep the temps from going out of limits. I did not like the ducts anyway because they crowded the engine compartment. I read in the central states that some people had good results by adding baffling on top that wrapped around the heads. They made this baffling fit by using glass cloth and RTV layups laid on the cylinder heads and let cure. I looked at my baffling and saw that I already had wraps on the outside (front and rear) cylinders and in the center middle. The only area left was at the extreme top of the cylinder head in the middle. This is the area that is opposite the intake ports on the under side which block most of the under side opening. I decided that since the Glass RTV layup idea was easy I would try it. The finished baffles are about 4 in by 4 in and are formed down into the space between the cylinders up to 1 in from the push rod tubes. I left the lower cowling ducts off and went flying to test it. THE TEMPS IN CLIMB OUT DID NOT REACH 400. AT CRUISE 75% THE TEMPS ARE 350 0N #4 AND LOWER ON THE OTHER CYL. IN A STEADY FULL POWER CLIMB FOR FIVE MIN. THE TEMPS DID NOT EXCEED 400. I have one probe on #4 on the underside of the cylinder in the LYC recommended position and it does not exceed 325. It does not seem logical that such a small area changed would make such a large difference, but I think what is happening is that the open area was causing a general loss of pressure and by blocking it it raised the plenum pressure on the whole underside of the engine causing more air to be forced into the bottom of the fins nearer the cylinder everywhere. I made my baffeling according to the orginal COZY 0235 installation but changed them to fit the 0320. They did not show a baffle in this area. SEE YOU AT S&F JACK & DONNA Wilhelmson N711CZ Date: Wed, 8 Apr 98 16:24:57 EDT From: "Hill-EQE-EQE, Dana" Subject: re: COZY: engine cooling issue As a recent recipient of the plans my interest may seem overly premature but I have been interested in the Lycoming engine cooling discussions/archives. It is interesting to note the large variation in cooling problems and the various solutions. Isn't Nat's recommended trial and error baffling sufficient for adequate cooling? ______ _______ Dana Hill dana.hill-EQE@state.ma.us Chapt. 4 1998-2??? From: wilhelmson@scra.org Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 08:50:02 -0400 Subject: Re[2]: COZY: engine cooling issue The trial and error method works just fine, but it is just that. Having been through it, I would prefer to avoid the error part. Also the errors can be expensive. Aircraft engine cylinders are costly. There is no doubt that the COZY design per plans can be made to cool the engine properly. The fact remains that many builders report engine cooling problems on first flights and later. This basically comes from the fact that the plans show baffling patterns but due to engine variations and fit of seals to the cowling the results can be quite variable. ALSO, small changes can make big differences in cooling results. Jack Wilhelmson N711CZ Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 09:42:34 -0400 From: Paul Krasa Subject: Re: Re[2]: COZY: engine cooling issue Please check in the archives for a post I made on this subject last year. The post describes a method for taking the trial and error out of cooling problems. If you have any questions after reading it, email me or call me. H:757-269-0371 W:757-864-9347 Paul Krasa At 08:50 4/9/98 -0400, wilhelmson@scra.org wrote: > > > The trial and error method works just fine, but it is just that. > Having been through it, I would prefer to avoid the error part. Also > the errors can be expensive. Aircraft engine cylinders are costly. > There is no doubt that the COZY design per plans can be made to cool > the engine properly. The fact remains that many builders report engine > cooling problems on first flights and later. This basically comes from > the fact that the plans show baffling patterns but due to engine > variations and fit of seals to the cowling the results can be quite > variable. ALSO, small changes can make big differences in cooling > results. > > > Jack Wilhelmson N711CZ > > > Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:23:36 -0400 From: Glenn Murray Subject: COZY: Ignition leads Can anyone confirm that the bendix and slick mags have the leads in exact= ly the same position on the distributor caps? Cowlings and baffles now installed and fitted.I used screws with nutplate= s and tinnerman washers in the end (Much cheaper and more secure than = camlocks as suggested in plans) the cowlings which I purched from France needed almost 2 weeks of re-shaping before they fitted properly.I'm just about ready for engine and taxi-trials now.Hope to be at the PFA Rally = at RAF Cranfield in early July (Our equivalent of Oshkosh).I will keep yo= u all informed of my progress rgards Glenn Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 09:24:15 -0700 From: Eric Westland Subject: COZY: Oil Seal Retainer?? I am planning my move to retain the crankcase oil seal located at the prop end of the crankshaft. It is mentioned in numerous newsletters to do this with your Lycoming and I think there was even a template to make the part, but I can't find it anywhere. So, I have fabricated a "U" shaped piece out of 3/16" aluminum and plan to fasten to the crankcase by tapping the two small bosses and using short AN-3 bolts to keep it in it's place. Is this what others have done and/or am I headed in the right direction? -eric From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 16:54:48 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Oil Seal Retainer?? On 05/05/98 09:24:15 you wrote: > >I am planning my move to retain the crankcase oil seal located at the >prop end of the crankshaft. It is mentioned in numerous newsletters to >do this with your Lycoming and I think there was even a template to make >the part, but I can't find it anywhere. So, I have fabricated a "U" >shaped piece out of 3/16" aluminum and plan to fasten to the crankcase >by tapping the two small bosses and using short AN-3 bolts to keep it in >it's place. > >Is this what others have done and/or am I headed in the right direction? > >-eric > > > 2 pieces Lycoming part # 73952, (6) STD-1919 screws, lockwashers, will keep it certified. Drill & tap (6) 1/4 NC holes in bosses. Continue using the seal with the ridge to fit the groove in the crankcase. Caution drilling other spots - there are oil passages. From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Oil Seal Retainer?? Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 16:28:14 -0500 Dear Eric, Current Lycoming production, I understand, has oil seal retainers installed at the factory. On older engines, you have to install retainers. Retainers are only important if a) the oil seal is not properly installed, and b) there is greater than atmospheric pressure in the crankcase, which could "blow" the seal. Uli Wolter had both of the above occur, and ruined his engine and Cozy in the resulting off-field landing. I have always avoided using anything in the crankcase breather (like an oil separator) which might create an obstruction or pressure drop. Other things like moisture freezing up the breather, or venting it through some kind of a back pressure valve into the exhaust pipe might also cause a restriction. I bring my breather straight down (no trap) underneath the cowling and cut the breather pipe off at a 45 degree angle facing aft so the airflow actually reduces the pressure in the crankcase to less than atmospheric. This might cause me to blow out a little more oil than the absolute minimum, but I am willing to allow this to protect my engine. After I learned about Uli's experience, I decided I ought to check my engine to see if it had a retainer, and if not, to install one. After I removed the spinner, propellor, prop hub extension, and ring gear, guess what? The oil seal was lying loose around the crankshaft, without having caused any problem, because the air was leaking in, rather than the oil leaking out. Still, I installed a retainer kit purchased from Lycoming. Hope this experience helps. Regards, Nat ---------- > From: Eric Westland > To: Cozy Builders > Subject: COZY: Oil Seal Retainer?? > Date: Tuesday, May 05, 1998 11:24 AM > > I am planning my move to retain the crankcase oil seal located at the > prop end of the crankshaft. It is mentioned in numerous newsletters to > do this with your Lycoming and I think there was even a template to make > the part, but I can't find it anywhere. So, I have fabricated a "U" > shaped piece out of 3/16" aluminum and plan to fasten to the crankcase > by tapping the two small bosses and using short AN-3 bolts to keep it in > it's place. > > Is this what others have done and/or am I headed in the right direction? > > -eric > From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 22:01:34 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Valve question On 05/12/98 20:47:13 you wrote: > > A few days ago, there were some posts about engines "swallowing" valves >and the horror stories that go with that event. For those of us (I hope I'm >not the only one) who are "engine illiterate", what exactly happens when an >engine "swallows" a valve? Is there any way to prevent this? > > > Gregg Perry > > > Swallowing of a valve is a generic term when a valve (usually an exhaust valve) either breaks or the locks (the retainers that hold the spring compression) break. The result is a collision of the valve and piston. There are several possibilties in order from least severe to most severe: 1: The valve head (the disk shaped end) comes off the stem in pieces, batters the top of the piston and combustion chamber of the head, but the head and piston stay intact, and the valve pieces are broken into small pieces and exit via the exhaust pipe. The good news is probably (in the case of an aircraft engine) the cylinder assembly and piston with rings are quickly and inexpensively replaced. The bad news for a pusher configuration is the propeller will get torn up by the pieces exitting the exhaust pipe. 2: The rising piston squeezes the valve pieces against the combustion chamber, with the head separating from the cylinder, with the possibility of fire from fuel fumes and oil sraying on the hot exhaust pipes. Generally engine damage is substantial with the possibility of broken connecting ros or crankshafts.. 3: The rising piston is squeezes the valve pieces against the combustion chamber, but the piston is the looser. The piston top is punctured, the entire engine gets contaminated, and usually the pieces get wedged between connecting rods, crankshafts, crankcases, etc. Usually the engine is a total disaster, with literally no salvage value other than some accessories. In all cases this happens with no advance warning, and the nearest level clear ground will be a blessing. Mostly the valve head separates from the stem from bending fatigue failure. If the valve guide (tubular bearing bushing for the stem)/ stem clearance is too great, the valve will wobble, randomly striking one side the the other. This alternating bending causes the fatigue. It is also not unheard of for the valve keepers or the grooves for the keepers at the top of the stem to fail. If lucky the valve will bounce against the piston, but not breakup, resulting in loss of power from 1 cylinder. If one valve breaks, this is a warning of very thin ice, if all the valves and guides have the same service and material history. I would not fly more than a few hours before replacing the others. From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 16:39:33 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Wrenching Dynafocal Mounts I thought I used a offset box wrench, possibly grinding the O.D. to fit. Or maybe it was a open end (on end) with a something thru the other end to keep the wrench from turning. Why not torque the bolt head? Although its nice to torque, there are 3 issues: 1: These bolts are not a torque critical application, as compared to engine cylinder bolts, where bearing clearances, crankcase stresses are important. 2: Don't strip the threads or stretch the bolt to breaking. With this size, and a wrench less than a foot long, I don't think unless you are superman, that this is an issue. 2: The bolt cannot be loose. When tightening, it will be apparent when the parts are snug ,when the torque to continue turning rises quickly, then with say 1/3 turn it will become very difficult to continue tightening with a foot long wrench. Now comes decision time where torque is forgotten - Align the cotter pin hole, do you continue tightening, or back off. And these bolts should be cottered! These bolts are long, with the length being many diameters, as a result they can stretch easily 1/6 turn, staying within the elastic range (like a rubber band, and return to original length when loosened), unless just need to backoff slightly, I would probably go for the next tighter hole to come along. From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Wrenching Dynafocal Mounts Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 15:54:28 -0500 Dear Will and Cozy Builders There are one or two places on the dynafocal Lycoming engine where it is difficult to fit a box end wrench, because the recess is so small. In those locations use lightweight/reduced dimension Nuts (NAS 679). These required the next size smaller box end wrench which will fit in the recess just fine. Regards, Nat ---------- From: Will Chorley To: cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com Subject: COZY: Wrenching Dynafocal Mounts Date: Saturday, May 16, 1998 2:54 PM Can anyone tell me where I can get a wrench that will get into the nut recess on a Dynafocal mount (0-320). All my open ended, ring, and sockets are too big to fit into the recess on the crancase. A socket of some sort would be nice if I could get my torqu wrench on it as well, but it would have to be really stubby! Any ideas? Will From: "Will Chorley" Subject: COZY: Wrenching Dynofocal Mounts - Problem Solved! Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 13:15:30 -0500 Thanks to all who sent me suggestions on how to get a wrench into the = recess on the dynafocal mount. I ended up grinding down a wrench until = it fit - seems this is the simplest solution. (That right hand one on = the top is, indeed, a real bitch!)=20 By the way, Nat, where would I get the NAS 679 nuts from as the = "regular" suppliers don't seem to list them. Will From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 18:56:13 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Wrenching Dynofocal Mounts - Problem Solved! Tony Bingelis's book Firewall Forward specifically shows cotter pins. I agree. This is probably one of the most important set of bolts with the most vibration. In this case when you torque the bolt, a small amount of the load is taken by the rubber bushings, but the majority is taken by the thin tubular bushing. This does not provide a substantial structure not to yield under the combination of the bolt load, the compression from the propeller thrust, and vibration. The result being the possibility of the bolt tension getting unloaded, and the possibility of the bolt loosening if the locknut doesn't do its job. How do you check visually the tightness of the locknut, and you think its hard to get to with everything else missing. Its easy to see if there are 4 cotters though. Remember some locknuts may be used a limited number of times, some only once. From: mbeduhn@juno.com Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 06:01:11 -0500 Subject: COZY: Re: Cylinder Head Temps On Thu, 28 May 1998 10:39:28 -0500 Ken Reiter writes: >Hi Mark, > >Could you please tell me what your oil and cylinder head temps >are and how/where you are measuring the temps. > >Thanks, >Ken Reiter > Ken, I just returned from a 250 mile trip that I flew at 7500' (canard fly-in in Oklahoma City). The OAT was 62 degrees F and I ran at 2550-2600 rpm (175kts true). My cylinder head sensors are installed in the tapped holes located on the underside of the cylinders (not under the plugs). I saw cylinder head temps get to around 400 degrees F, and oil temp stabilize at 195 degrees F. However, while I was at the fly-in, I saw a Long-Eze that had cooling vents in the top of his cowl (like the ones that Vance Atkinson has installed). I had been thinking about doing the same thing, so when he reported that he got a 30-40 degree reduction in CHT's I modified my cowl when I got home. I haven't had a chance to fly since then (crummy weather), but when I do, I will watch my CHT's closely and give you another report. Mark Beduhn Cozy IV N494CZ _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 08:59:26 -0500 From: Ken Reiter Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Cylinder Head Temps Hello Mark, Thanks for the quick reply. I have 11.6 hours on my CozyIII and things are working almost fine. The plane is a joy to fly! Many thanks Nat and Burt. Slight issue with the alternator - going for a replacement. Oil temps are high - tried the MarkIV way but just did not have enough room for air flow ( have the B&C spin-on filter ). Switched to the PLAN'S way ( Nat does have know how) and oil temp is now down to 180 at 3000' at 2200 rpm. CHT 2 is high (446) / 1 is low (374) - I made ramps as big as possible and now in process of sizing down and matching temps. I am using probes under plugs on top. I think it is accepted that (ref is 500 max measured at bottom tap with up draft cooling) the bottom tap reads 50 low on the cool side; while the plug reads 50 higher than tap. Sooo, my 446 on top plug is really 396 as lycoming specs?? Please let me know how the top opening are working. Thanks, Ken Reiter From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Cylinder Head Temps Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 11:18:51 -0500 Dear Ken and Builders, One time on the way to Sun and Fun, we overnighted with a Long EZ builder at Ft. Stockton. He was complaining about high cylinderhead temperatures. The next morning I checked over his installation. His engine baffling wasn't the best, but the first thing I noticed was that he had rather large openings around his exhaust pipes. I explained to him that these openings were letting a lot of cooling air escape, which reduced the pressure inside the cowling and reduced the amount of air flowing through the engine. When builders experience high cylinder head temperatures, there is usually a reason. When they call me with a complaint like this, without being able to inspect their installation, all I can do is ask them about it. I can verify that my 0-360 Lycoming is installed and baffled as I show in the plans. When I rebuilt my Lycoming, I used a B & C spin-on oil filter adapter, so I could no longer mount the oil cooler so the air exited at the top of the cowling. So I mounted it at the wing root with the air exiting out the bottom of the cowling. I am using a 13-row cooler, and my oil temperature usually runs below 180 deg F in cruise (2600 rpm) at altitude in the summer. My cylinder head temperatures run from 290 deg F to 335 deg F measured with probes at the bottom of the cylinders with updraft cooling. That is what they ran with my 1800 hour Lycoming before I rebuilt it, and that is what they run now with about 65 hours on my Lyc after rebuild to new specs. With updraft cooling, the probes are no longer on the hottest side of the cylinder, so you have to mentally add about 40 degrees before comparing the readings to Lycoming specs. If you are using themocouples under the plugs, they read about 40 degrees higher than the bayonet probes would read. So if you are using thermocouples under the bottom plugs, you can compare those readings directly with Lycoming specs. If you are using them under the top plugs, you need to subtract 40 degrees before comparing them to specs. Lycoming says that you should not run an engine continuously with cylinder head temperatures over 400 degrees, if you expect to get the best life out of the engine. Optimum oil temperature is 180 degrees F, and I believe you should not accept oil temperatures over 200 degrees. The cylinders close to the fire wall usually run the hottest, because the least pressure drop for the cooling air is to go through cylinders #1 and #2, so it is necessary to install baffles in the bottom cowling to intercept the high velocity air which piles up at the aft of the cowling, and redirect it through cylinders #3 and #4. You should measure the temperatures in all cylinders so you can balance them. The airflow changes at different speeds, so you balance them at one particular speed and accept the variation at other speeds. It is not necessary to put vent holes in the top of the cowling (unsightly) if you do the correct baffling in the bottom cowling, UNLESS you have a restriction in your top cowling. I experienced this with the Franklin engine, because it was a longer engine, and solved the problem by making the blisters a little taller so there was more room for the air to get out. One last thought, oil provides one-third of the cylinder cooling, so it you are running with too high an oil temperature, you will probably have cylinder head temperatures which are too high as well. It increases drag to use more air than the minimum necessary to cool the engine. The NACA flush scoop shown in the plans provides more than enough air to cool the cylinders and oil for an 0-360 engine. If your temperatures are too high, you need to study your installation. You may have too small an oil cooler, or lines that are too small, or leaks that let air excape without cooling, or restrictions which won't let the air get out. There could be many causes. Best regards, Nat > From: Ken Reiter > To: mbeduhn@juno.com > Cc: cozy_builders@canard.com; canard-aviators@canard.com > Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Cylinder Head Temps > Date: Friday, May 29, 1998 8:59 AM > > Hello Mark, > > Thanks for the quick reply. I have 11.6 hours on my CozyIII and > things are working almost fine. The plane is a joy to fly! > Many thanks Nat and Burt. > > Slight issue with the alternator - going for a replacement. > > Oil temps are high - tried the MarkIV way but just did not > have enough room for air flow ( have the B&C spin-on filter ). > Switched to the PLAN'S way ( Nat does have know how) and oil temp > is now down to 180 at 3000' at 2200 rpm. > > CHT 2 is high (446) / 1 is low (374) - I made ramps as big as > possible and now in process of sizing down and matching temps. > I am using probes under plugs on top. I think it is accepted > that (ref is 500 max measured at bottom tap with up draft cooling) > the bottom tap reads 50 low on the cool side; while the plug > reads 50 higher than tap. Sooo, my 446 on top plug is really > 396 as lycoming specs?? > > Please let me know how the top opening are working. > > Thanks, > Ken Reiter Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 16:22:51 -0500 From: Ken Reiter Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Cylinder Head Temps Hello Group, Yes, Nat does know his stuff! Ir was suggested to me by a knowledgeable person to have a open 3/8" area around the exhaust pipes to lower the Oil and CHT temps. The idea is to allow the high temp air from around +the pipes to exit directly. I did not have this originally. Soo, I tried the open area around the pipes, (YES, YOU GOT IT NAT) the temps increased about 60F. on all CHT, oil up about 40F. Today back to the original way as per Nat with the cooler in the wing root. Thanks Nat, Ken From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 07:09:58 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Starting Problems Was this engine running previously in recent time? Was the only change the Ellison and one ignition? CAUTION: MAKE SURE THE IGNITION IS OFF!!! For a gasoline engine to start we need several items: 1: Compression: are the piston rings, and valves sealing, opening and closing at the at the right TIME. Pull the #1 plug and check the timing mark on the engine side of the starter gear with the piston. Then if possible compare with a similar engine (any 320 same rotation will do) where the compression is felt while pulling the prop through with the timing marks. Also note the force required to pull the prop through on all 4 cylinders. 2: Fuel/air mixture: This one is going to be more difficult to check; Is it possible to flood the engine - fuel dripping out of the air inlet, when you pull plugs are they wet with fuel, and will dry off by them self in a short time. Is it possible to crank the engine and not flood the engine, with the mixture control at some leaned position. 3: Ignition source at correct time: This is the most likely cause. Have you tried starting with only one ignition on? It could be possible that one ignition is out of time, and firing at a time when the piston is ready to go down with the valve closed. With the top #1 sparkplug removed, put you finger over (not in) the hole, and turn the prop in normal rotation (when facing prop, left blade down for a conventional rotation 320 - do you have a unconvential rotation form a twin?) until you feel compression on the prop and air starts to escape by your finger. Now put a finger straight in the sparkplug hole and move the prop (should be less than 20 degrees either way) until you feel that the top of piston is as high as it is going get. The T.D.C. (Top dead center) mark on the engine side of the starter gear should be lined up roughly (an inch or 2) with the top crankcase joint, and the mark on the other side of the starter gear lined up with the mark on the starter if there is one. Move the prop until the mark approx. 24 degrees before TDC is lined up. Check the mag timing - pull the bakelite plug on the mag, there should be a red painted gear tooth visible near, if so then use a aircraft timing light to check the timing. Has the mag been bench checked or overhauled, does it produce a healthy blue spark when cranking the engine with one lead on a sparkplug laying on the engine? Does the mag have an impulse coupling? It should to help generate a healthy spark. Not having an electronic ignition, I can't address it's problems, but would suspect timing issues, where is the timing mark? The issue here is, too many variables changed at the same time. It would have been better to change to the Ellison, (I kept my Bendix injector), make provisions to easily install the electronic ignition, and then after the engine is running well with some flight time make the change. Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 06:51:35 -0400 From: Jerry Kennel Subject: COZY: Starting Problems I am trying to get my O-360 started and I am having some problems. I have a Ellison TBI and Lightspeed Electronic Ingnition. I have one mag for the other set of plugs. Here is the things I have done: Electronic Ignition has been tested and works correctly Induction system checked for leaks Mag puts out a good spark Timed mag to 25 degrees BTDC There is good fuel flow to TBI The engine still sputters and backfires when I attempt to start it. What else should I be checking? Are Ellison TBI prone to air bubbles in the fuel flow? It is really fustrating to be so close to begining the taxi tests and not be able to begin. Any suggestions will be very much appreciated. Jerry Kennel Cozy Mark IV #241 From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Subject: COZY: Starting Problems Date: Mon, 1 Jun 98 9:00:42 EDT Jerry Kennel writes: >The engine still sputters and backfires when I attempt to start it. What >else should I be checking? I'm not an engine expert, but I rebuilt a Fiat 124 Spider 4-Cyl engine once. When I re-assembled it, I got the cam timing wrong - it was 180 degrees out of phase. The engine would just about start - sputter and cough, backfire (big time! - got some nice flames shooting out of the carb), and idle a bit, but nothing else (not surprisingly). Once I got the cam timing right, it started right up. So, as one of the things that Carl points out as something to check, I'd just thought that I'd reiterate that your symptoms sound line mine did. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Starting Problems Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 13:33:28 -0500 Cozy builders, I am not an expert on engines. I replied to Jerry Kennel that his starting problem sounded like his ignition timing was off. The only time I ever had a Lycoming backfire was when the ignition was too far advanced. We learned that the ring gear was not the original one, and the 0 degree mark on the ring gear was about 30 degrees off. I also know that if you have the wrong fuel pump (20 psi) ahead of the Ellison TB, the pump overwhelms the diaphragm valve on the Ellison, and it really floods, and can make the engine sound terrible. Don't know whether it is truly a backfire. Regards, Nat Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:22:58 -0400 From: "Edmond A. Richards" Subject: COZY: RE: airbox Paul Burkhardt wrote: > I had the same problem with mine when I installed it. I used the feather lite box and it hit the cowl near the inlet area< I had the same problem with the Feather Lite unit and have done the same modification. I haven't run the engine yet and I'm a little concerned about restricting the air flow on the aft (pinched) side. Not quite sure why there is an interference problem in the first place but I feel better knowing that someone else is having the same experience. Happy Building! Ed Richards' Cozy Mark IV #88 Working on what seem like a hundred loose ends. Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 00:08:01 -0600 From: Dave Chapman Subject: COZY: air filter fit/cowling questions My fuselage is currently upside down with the engine on and the top cowl in place. I am about to build the bottom cowl but ran into a snag that I hope the group can help me with. >From a line extended straight off the bottom of the fuselage to over the bottom of the engine, I find that there is only 2 inches from that line to the carburator. In other words, there is not enough room to put the 3 inch high air inlet part on the carb and still fit within a cowl that forms a continuous line along the bottom of the airplane. The engine is an O-320-E2D on a dynafocal mount. Now the questions...... Do the prefab cowls (when installed) extend below a straight line along the bottom of the airplane? If not, how much does it extend below to allow the air inlet to the carb? Does the prefab cowl lip (that forms the end of the naca scoop) extend below the airplane bottom? Thanks, Dave Dave Chapman (Pilot@xmission.com) "This is USHGA #5742 a spiritual calling to Park City, Utah set one's soul free by flight...." http://www.xmission.com/~pilot Cozy 3 on gear, with the engine on, in other words, 80% done and 80% to go... ***************************************************************************** The box said 'Requires Windows 95, or better.' So I bought a Macintosh. ***************************************************************************** e From: "Brown, Michael" Subject: RE: COZY: air filter fit/cowling questions Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:28:00 -0700 The Featherlite cowl for my 3-place Cozy extends about 1 inch below the bottom surface of the fuselage. I also installed Featherlite's airbox on my carbureted O-320 and found that it hit the sides of the lower cowl. I ended up chamfering off about an inch on either side of the airbox to gain clearance, as well as dishing out the foam laid into the inlet of the cowl bottom. I found a K&N air filter to fit the space left and have had good results with the setup. As a side benefit, the K&N filter helped even out the cylinder head temperatures, I'm assuming due to better airflow distribution in the induction tubes. michael.brown@alliedsignal.com Cozy (3); N97PZ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 07:52:00 +0200 From: Rego Burger Subject: COZY: Engine Thrust line Nat, The Thrust line is not published in the Plans as far as I can see. >From the three view drawings the spinner centre line looks about 2" above the longeron. Now the Longeron is W.L. 23 minus 2" will make W.L. 21. Seeing Nat is on the newsgroup and some others are attempting to make their own engine mounts for whatever reason an official W.L. on this line will be valued. Rego Burger, web site: http://home.intekom.com/glen/rnb.htm (home e-mail) mailto:rnb@intekom.co.za RSA Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 06:38:46 -0400 From: "Jeff S. Russell (http://www.AeroCad.com)" Subject: Re: COZY: Engine Thrust line Rego Burger wrote: > The Thrust line is not published in the Plans as far as I can see. > >From the three view drawings the spinner centre line looks about 2" > above the longeron. Rego, The Vari-ez, Long, Berkut, Cozy-3, E-raser, Velocity, AeroCanard thrust line is 20, The thrust line on the MkIV is at 21. -- Jeff Russell/AeroCad Inc. E-mail: Jeff@aerocad.com P.O. Box 7307 Port St. Lucie FL. 34985 2954 Aviation Way Ft. Pierce, FL. 34946 Shop# 561-460-8020 7:00am to 3:30pm Home# 561-337-1579 Composite workshop info: http://www.Sportair.com From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: COZY: Re: Thrust Line -Reply Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:20:46 -0500 Rego, The thrust line on the Mark IV is 21.5 at FS 135 and inclined up toward the rear 1-1/2 degrees. Regards, Nat ---------- > From: Rego Burger > To: cozy@extremezone.com > Subject: Thrust Line -Reply > Date: Friday, June 12, 1998 1:27 AM > > Thanks Nat. > > Sadly, due to financial reasons (All engine options (aero ) have been > way above a years salary for me )I must consider an automotive option > for now, I would have to wait 5 more years to afford an O-360 with our > current exchance rates.... > > I have kept the plane 99% dimensionly (canopy was my own idea) in order > to easily adapt to an aero engine when my bank manager allows in the > future....this would then be an improvement. > The only change then would be cowlings and engine mount plus fittings. > Yes I realise the craft will not perform like advertised but because it > flys with all the other options so far it has the potential to get me > into the air. I'm in a coastal area and most of my flying is coastwise > to Cape Town or Durban. > > Therefore I wanted to try design an auto engine's thrust line to be as > close to the real thing as possible, give or take an inch. We found on > the 337 (friends)with rear engine only (two seats in place of the front > engine ) that there was a tendancy to push the nose onto the ground > causing long T/O run. So if I can with the known STD T/line meet or > lower it an 1" or so I feel the T/O habits should be within norms. > Naturally ground clearance for flare and rotation must be near to the > original... so I may have to go to a smaller dia. three blade prop to > meet these requirements. > Since my faith in aero engines took a serious dive after a valve > break,auto has now become an option. > Two years ago I was an aero engine only man. > >From the performance point of view the aero wins hands down, so I know I > must sacrifice a bit. > Until the R vs $ gets back to 1960's 75c per $ I'm faced with: > Economics here in RSA: > Aero: > $5000 for a used aero engine = R 26250-00 > $7500 for parts / rebuild = R 39375-00 > freight costs $ 600-00 = R 3150-00 > subtotal = R 68775-00 ( my gross > salary )... pse don't weep. > 14% vat excl. > > Auto: > Subaru, V-8, V-6 options. > Fitted ready to fly: = R 35000-00 > Incl. PSRU. > > Average value of flying craft est @ R 190 000-00 with aero engine. > R 155 > 000-00 with auto engine. > In the US in think the ratio is almost even,(bet. auto and aero) but > here it makes a difference. > Naturally anyone wishing to sponsor me with a running O-360 can contact > me... :-) > > Cozy plans # 139 > Reg. as Fish Eagle. > Main changes Canopy and trial engine. > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 17:31:34 -0500 (CDT) Subject: COZY: Electronic Ignition - CAUTION During the race a Butler, my alternator belt shredded. Most if not all v-belts are made by winding ONE long piece of small diameter aircraft cable (or some other material) helix like at a uniform tension and close spacing, bonding rubber to one side then the other to make a wide (2 feet or so) flat belt, then sawing into the "V" crossection. This results in the cable beng cut at a very flat slope on both sides. Apparently one of these cable ends came loose, got stuck to the alternator pulley, got wrapped many turns around the small pulley, tearing out of the belt rubber. At some point a long piece of rubber held together with fabric reinforcing was flapping around hitting everything nearby including scratches on the prop blades (6" extension), inside of top and bottom cowlings, the starter and alternator and their brackets, and the crankcase nose areas. Ask someone who was there to confirm the damage, I had an audience of more than a dozen while it took 15 minutes to remove what was left of the old belt and another 20 minutes to install a new one. If I would have had an electronic ignition with the usual crank sensor installation, I would have lost it, compounding no altenator with one or less spark source. Any ignition sensors located at the crank nose SHOULD have a substantial steel bracket and guard for the wiring. I'm talking of at least .125" material, using the big crankcase through bolts. From: Epplin John A Subject: RE: COZY: Electronic Ignition - CAUTION Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 08:03:16 -0500 Just an observation. The automotive industry has pretty much went to the POLY-V or MICROGROOVE or whatever you call the serpentine belt. My experience which dates a few years back has been extremely good with this type of belt. It is much more flexible than a standard V belt, generates less heat etc. I have one running on my air compressor which has only been inspected occasionally for the last 25 years. Not even tightened once. A 2 cylinder compressor is not the smoothest load either. Does anyone know of a pulley configuration that can be used on the Lycoming engines and alternators that would accommodate one of these? I have been away from light planes for some years, don't know of such an application. John epplin Mk4 #467 > -----Original Message----- > From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com [SMTP:cdenk@ix.netcom.com] > > Apparently one of these cable ends came loose, got stuck to the alternator > > pulley, got wrapped many turns around the small pulley, tearing out of the > > belt rubber. At some point a long piece of rubber held together with > fabric > reinforcing was flapping around hitting everything nearby including > scratches > on the prop blades ......... Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:08:01 -0700 From: Eric Westland Subject: COZY: Alternator belt? Epplin John A wrote: > Does anyone know of a > pulley configuration that can be used on the Lycoming engines and > alternators that would accommodate one of these? I don't know about the serpentine belts, but I'm having a tough time finding a belt that is the same width as the Lycoming flywheel groove, but shorter than their standard 37.5". The automotive belts are slightly wider, so they "ride" just a little higher in the groove. Is this what everyone is using (automotive belts)? I'm told that Lycoming just makes the one size. -Eric From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 16:16:19 -0500 (CDT) Subject: COZY: V-belts As far as I know, Lycoming only makes "V" pulley starter gears. It would be exceptionally expensive to make a flat belt work. From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 16:14:27 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Alternator belt? On 06/17/98 09:08:01 you wrote: > > > >Epplin John A wrote: > >> Does anyone know of a >> pulley configuration that can be used on the Lycoming engines and >> alternators that would accommodate one of these? > >I don't know about the serpentine belts, but I'm having a tough time finding a >belt that is the same width as the Lycoming flywheel groove, but shorter than >their standard 37.5". The automotive belts are slightly wider, so they "ride" >just a little higher in the groove. Is this what everyone is using (automotive >belts)? I'm told that Lycoming just makes the one size. > >-Eric > > > Apparently there are 2 width pulley grooves in the starter gear. I must have the wider, and its an "A" series industrial belt, an A-29 to be exact. The "A" is measured length on the inside, not to be confused with a fractional horsepower "L" belt almost the same width, different angles on Vand measured on outside. I use a 72 amp Delco alternator with a standard delco pulley. The belt that I replaced at Butler Saturday came from NAPA autoparts for under $5. Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 08:48:56 -0700 From: Eric Westland Subject: COZY: Baffle attach point?? As I am finishing up my baffling, I have a question about 4 attach points. I have a Lycoming IO-360 angle valve engine for my Cozy and on the "front" and "back" of each cylinder is a hole that would be perfect for attaching the baffles. However, these holes are not threaded and actually interesect another hole that comes up from the bottom - not much there to tap even if I decided to go that way. Now, I could just stick something in there to safety wire it together, but I am thinking there must be some sort if insert that did not come with my engine to help with this purpose. My question is, does this insert exist or is there a "best" way to do this? Thanks, Eric Westland From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Alternator belt? Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 16:52:35 -0500 Builders, Bill Bainbridge (Makes all the neat things like filter adapters, alternators, starters, etc,) supplies or knows where you can get the belts of the right cross section. I got mine at Pep Boys. Regards, Nat From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:19:56 -0500 (CDT) Subject: COZY: Fuel leaking - fuel fire Al Wick writes If using the IO-320-B1A engine (and maybe others) with the Bendix Injection (and I believe the Airflow also) there is a 1/4" drain plug hole from the intake plenum at the center bottom of the oil sump. This should be tubed through a sniffle (special one way check valve) valve to an outlet outside the cowling. The valve closes when there is vacuum in the intake (engine running) to prevent the mixture from being lean. When the engine is stopped, it allows fuel that drips from the injector nozzles (also when flooded) to drain harmless, as long as someone doesn't drop a cigar in it. All engines with the bottom mounted carb or intake manifold will loose liquid fuel on occasion. Carbureted and injected engines should all have a way for fuel to drain harmless outside the cowling. From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: N10CZ First Flight Update Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 08:42:51 -0500 Dear Dave and Al, I don't have any fuel dripping from my Ellison after shutdown or during startup. The way I shut down is to shut everything off while the engine is still running (includes fuel pump), and then shut the engine off by pulling the mixture to full lean. By the way, it helps on the subsequent start up to taxi back to the hangar with the fuel leaned out, so you don't foul the plugs. Then for start up, I usually turn the fuel selector on to a full tank, turn on the boost pump, prime for about 5 or ten seconds, then shut off the pump. I open the mixture and crack the throttle a bit and pull the prop through 3 blades. Then I climb in, turn on the boost pump, and hit the starter and it starts right away. If your Ellison leaks, you may have some dirt in the diaphragm valve. Also, If you have the wrong fuel pump (more than 6 psi), it will overpower the diaphragm valve in the Ellison. A good test to make is to shut down the engine, and watch your fuel pressure gage. If eveything is working right and tight, you should hold fuel pressure in the system at 6 psi for at least 2 minutes. Regards, Nat From: Epplin John A Subject: COZY: Engine mount Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 13:42:05 -0500 I am in need of a mount for Cozy Mk4 with O-360-A1A, dynafocal mounts. Does anyone know if Weldtech is still in business? Any other options? Does Brock provide this? Maybe someone has one they want to part with. Etc...... Thanks for any help. John Epplin Mk4 #467 Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 21:26:16 -0400 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Engine mount John, re "I am in need of a mount for Cozy Mk4 with O-360-A1A," I have a 0-360-A4M, and bought the mount from Ken Brock. Can't remember the cost but I know they are available. It took about a month to get it - after welding it up they had to send it out for heat treatment...seems to be a very substantial unit. dd From: lschuler@cellular.uscc.com Date: Wed, 05 Aug 98 11:05:31 -0600 Subject: COZY: Engine Mount info Request Anyone know where I can find the official specs on Lycoming standard engine mounts and bushings for an O-360? Looking specifically for the dimensions of the tube which passes throught the rubber bushings and the appropriate torque for the bolts. Also, are the bolts normally torqued to the tube, or do the bushings take all the bolt torque? Thanks, Larry Schuler Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 16:18:09 +0200 From: Rego Burger Subject: COZY: INFO Re: Cozy Mk IV I am looking for the measurement of a std. installation from firewall to prop-hub (face) to compare for auto conversions please. Thks Rego Burger, web site: http://home.intekom.com/glen/rnb.htm (home e-mail) mailto:rnb@intekom.co.za RSA Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1998 12:26:01 -0700 Subject: Re: COZY: INFO From: alwick@juno.com (ok How) Hi Rego. I get 41.5" from prop fwd face to firewall. THis gives you 3.5" gap between engine cover and prop and is equiv to the long prop extension. Reportedly cleaner air. My source is archives. You could shorten it up couple inches no problem. Hope it helps. -al wick 83% comp. Cozy MkIV sn 389 with stock Subaru 2.5 engine. Computerized cockpit. Done building components, now installing winglets. Expect completion date 4-30-99. On Wed, 05 Aug 1998 16:18:09 +0200 Rego Burger writes: >Re: Cozy Mk IV >I am looking for the measurement of a std. installation from firewall >to >prop-hub (face) to compare for auto conversions please. > >Thks > > >Rego Burger, web site: http://home.intekom.com/glen/rnb.htm >(home e-mail) mailto:rnb@intekom.co.za >RSA > _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1998 07:48:50 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Oil filter On 08/20/98 23:42:08 you wrote: > >I didn't spend as much time under the cowlings as I would have liked at OSH. > >Does the Cozy with the standard Brock dynafocal mount have plenty of room for >the oil filter or is is better to have one of the remote mount systems? > >Kevin Funk >Cozy MKIV #90 > > I have a special IO-320 Weldtech mount, which as tight as possible with Bendix Mags (the sparkplug wires have minimum clearance to the firewall. None of the engine mounted filters would come anywhere near enough room. I have the Lycoming Service Instruction #1457 installation. The usual filter oil screen mount gets a flat plate with tapped hole for temperature probe. The hoses come from the usual oil cooler locations on the accessory case. The Vernatherm valve mounts on the oil filter casting. One of the big advantages there is room to get your mirrors for inspection, wrist and hand down between the mags. Otherwise you usually have to pull a mag for access, even to inspect or look for an oil leak. All the other mounts including another variety of the Lycoming bring hoses from the previous filter mount. From: "Reid Siebert" Subject: Re: COZY: Oil filter Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1998 08:23:52 -0500 If you buy a Lycoming engine that uses the DUAL magneto it has a spin-on oil filter located where the right-hand mag would have been. This filter has plenty of room for removal when engine is mounted on the firewall, so there is no need to spend money and payload on another filter mount. An example of a dual mag engine is the O-360-A1AD, where the last "D" stands for dual mag. I bought an engine that did not have a mag, and instead mounted an Electroaire dual electronic ignition sensor in it's place. The two ignition modules are mounted on the firewall, aft of the wing spar. Another advantage of having an engine with this dual mag accessory case is that there is plenty of space to mount a prop governor on the pad below the oil filter. Reid Siebert From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Oil filter Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1998 15:22:02 -0500 Dear David, Why didn't you choose option #4? A B & C 90 degree spin on oil filter adapter. It fits on the Lycoming accessory case, the oil filter stands almost vertically, so height of the filter isn't a problem, and there is plenty of space between the filter and firewall using the Brock dynafocal mount. When I change oil and filter, I take a center punch and punch a hole in the top of the filter the night before, and then the next day the filter is empty and I can change it without spilling any oil on the firewall or accessory case. This is the neatest unit I have ever seen and I heartily recommend it. It beats an oil screen, or remote filter all to H. Best regards, Nat ---------- > From: David Domeier > To: COZYMK4@aol.com > Cc: cozy_builders@canard.com > Subject: Re: COZY: Oil filter > Date: Saturday, August 22, 1998 3:46 PM > > Kevin, > > re "Does the Cozy with the standard Brock dynafocal mount have > plenty of room for the oil filter or is is better to have one of the > remote mount systems?" > > I have the Brock dynafocal mount with an 0-360-A4M that has a spin > on filter. The shortest certified oil filter is about 3/4" inch too > long. I found numerous auto filters that would fit but did not like the > thin wall of these filters, nor could I figure out a way to safety wire > these filters that satisfied me. One could use a large hose clamp > around the filter but I did not know what the vibration of hard banging > 0-360 would do to the wall of the filter. > > There are really three choices to solve this problem: > > 1. Convert to the Lycoming rock catcher screen and change oil every > 25 hours. > 2. Use a remote mounted spin on filter. There are at least 2 > certified units available. > 3. Use the ADC remote oil screen. My choice....it does filter the > oil quite well and provide about 30° of oil cooling in the process. It > is STC'd. Down side is that the unit is heavy and little messy to clean > the screen....it also has a metal detecting light if one wants to pay > for it. > > dd > Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1998 18:38:06 -0400 From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Subject: Fwd: Re: COZY: Oil filter David Domeier wrote; > There are really three choices to solve this problem: I think there's at least one other choice. B&C sells a 90 degree oil filter adapter that points the filter away from the firewall - Nat has this adapter on his plane and described it in newsletter #58 in the "engines" section. I was planning on going this route on my O-360 A1A as well. -- Marc J. Zeitlin                     marcz@burnside.ma.ultranet.com 3 Sweetbriar Way                  http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz Acton, MA  01720                 http://cozy.canard.com/ From: sdbish@juno.com Subject: : Re: COZY: Oil filter Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1998 23:46:47 EDT Nat said Good operating practice is to drain oil when hot. I most of the time am able to drain, refill, and change the filter while the engine is hot from flight, and button everything back up ready for next flight without an extra trip to the airport. I also like to drain oil when hot, and while stirred up with all possible contaminats still suspended so they hopefully will drain out. Suggest start draining shortly after shutting down, pundh hole in filter, and let drain for a period of time, perhaps overnight. Doesn't get everything buttoned back up right away, but allows to drain when oil is hot. Marv Bishop sdbish@juno.com _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1998 12:09:18 -0400 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Oil filter Nat, re "Why didn't you choose option #4? A B & C 90 degree spin on oil filter adapter." It was not available when I chose ADC...I agree, it probable is a better installation. dd From: EJCV@aol.com Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 03:32:12 EDT Subject: COZY: Oil Filter mounting With regard to the current discussion on Oil Filter configuration, I would like to share my experience with you. I purchased a certificated oil filter adaptor from an approved source which replaced the oil screen on my Conti. O-240 with a spin-on filter adaptor which placed the filter cartridge with it's axis nearly perpendicular to the crankshaft axis. The whole of the filter cartridge was offset from the mounting thread axis. It was fitted and wire locked correctly. However, it came loose after about 150 hours flying while I was crossing the Mediteranean to Corsica (120 NM) and we lost all the oil. Luckily, I landed at Nice before the engine siezed! I determined that the mass of the cartidge full of oil, located off centre from it's threaded mounting and subjected to the oscillation of the engine around it's crankshaft axis was sufficient to unscrew the filter adaptor, despite the wire locking. We tightened it up to fly home and in 3 hours flying it was loose again and loosing oil. Needless to say that adaptor is in the dustbin and I have exchanged my remote mounted oil radiator for a remote mounted Oil Filter which still provides more than enough oil cooling. Please take care when adding components in the very high vibration environment of an aircraft engine. On a similar note, remember that the opposed cylinders on a "flat" aircraft engine are not exactly "opposed" and that this gives rise to significant oscillations in the horizontal plane of the cylinders. Make sure that your exhaust system supports the pipes against this oscillation. I nearly lost a pipe due to this and obviously it would have gone through the prop!!! I have taken Dick Rutans advice to ensure that the engine is retained by a steel cable so that it does not fall completely off if, for example, you loose a prop blade, and I have attached this cable securely to each exhaust pipe so that they are prevented from going through the prop if they come loose, which could really spoil your day. From: "Will Chorley" Subject: COZY: Alternator Mods. Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1998 19:39:57 -0500
Help! (Again)
 
Does anyone know:
a) If it is really necessary to remove the regulator from a standard Nipon Denso type alternator and use an external linear regulator to avoid switching noise from the standard unit?
b) If so, what do you remove from under the covers, and what do you connect to what after you've performed the surgery?
 
Thanks for your help,
 
Will
 From ???@??? Sun Aug 30 16:17:29 1998 Return-Path: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@betaweb.com [206.43.209.18]) by acestes-fe0.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult.n14767) with ESMTP id MAA10792 for ; Sat, 29 Aug 1998 12:01:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA03761 for cozy_builders-list; Sat, 29 Aug 1998 12:03:19 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com using -f Received: from enterprise.extremezone.com (root@enterprise.extremezone.com [208.129.255.5]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA03755 for ; Sat, 29 Aug 1998 12:03:14 -0400 Received: from default (i010-2.px.extremezone.com [208.152.73.10]) by enterprise.extremezone.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11061; Sat, 29 Aug 1998 08:52:56 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <199808291552.IAA11061@enterprise.extremezone.com> From: "Nat Puffer" To: "Bill Theeringer" , "All" Subject: Re: COZY: Carb box help Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1998 08:47:55 -0500 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Nat Puffer" X-UIDL: 3377d14467daa5b07017753cf51d47d1 Bill, We have plans for the filter air box in our Mark IV plans, and Featherlite has a very fine pre-fab kit for this box for either $100 or $150. Regards, Nat ---------- > From: Bill Theeringer > To: All > Subject: COZY: Carb box help > Date: Friday, August 28, 1998 10:39 PM > > Fellow Pusher People; > > My Long EZ has the per plans air input plumbing to the carb on the 0-235L2C > Lycoming. I have 4 inches clearance from the carb bottom to the cowl > bottom, and a NACA air inlet. I want to install some sort of a ram air box > to better feed the carb from the NACA inlet and still have carb heat > available. I am also installing armpit scoops to boost cooling, as #4 is > and always has been high, and will play with the baffling later. Does > anyone have plans for a carb input box as described that I can build from? > How about a box mounted on the cowl (it's flat bottomed) with scat hose to > the carb to keep vibration down? > > Bill Theeringer > N29EZ From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 07:31:39 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Inter-cylinder baffles On 09/20/98 20:15:50 you wrote: > >I am about ready to start my engine baffling. Can anyone tell me if the >Lycoming inter-cylinder baffles that come with the engine are supposed to >remain in place or are they replaced by the new baffling? > >Thanks. > >Paul Stowitts >Cozy Mark IV #200 > > REMOVE. Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 08:58:47 -0400 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Inter-cylinder baffles Paul, I did not use the baffles that were on the engine. I was not sure how they would affect cooling since they obviously were designed for down draft cooling. The plan cooling system seems to be working quite well. I've flown on 100° days without a problem. dd Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 02:19:48 -0400 From: Glenn Murray Subject: COZY: Custom exhaust I am carrying out ground runs prior to first flight. I have fitted the stainless exhaust from custom a/c parts and find that 1. There is a lot of movement at the end of the pipes which could foul the engine coulings 2. The heat from the pipes is melting the couling around the edges where they pretrude. 3 Should the pipes be joined together to limit movement on each side or do they need to have the movement to avoid cracking due to vibration? your views appreciated Glenn Murray Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 07:12:06 -0500 From: Vance Atkinson Subject: Re: COZY: Custom exhaust You Don't say what system you have other than custom pipes. the pipes must be free to vibrate or they will crack. The springs should be strong enough to hold them in place while flying. the exhaust ends of the two pipes on one side should be joined by a piece of stainless steel slip tubing to keep the pipes together but free. In my experience (I Made the first of these set of pipes in 1988.)the pipes float in the same position they are attached. If yours don't, put a stainless steel clamp around the two exhaust pipes with a bracket attaching to one of the cylinder heads. This doesn't have to be heavy duty, but vibration resistant (stainless steel does well) and a quarter inch tube is big enough. SAFETY wire the clamp to something on the cylinder also, because if the clamp breaks it going through the prop. This arrangement will keep the pipe in relative alignment untill some soot has built up in the slip joints at the cylinder ports and form then on will hold its own alignment without the makeshift bracket. Vance Atkinson Tech Counselor and Flt. Advisor. Glenn Murray wrote: > > I am carrying out ground runs prior to first flight. > I have fitted the stainless exhaust from custom a/c parts and find that > 1. There is a lot of movement at the end of the pipes which could foul the > engine > coulings > 2. The heat from the pipes is melting the couling around the edges where > they > pretrude. > 3 Should the pipes be joined together to limit movement on each side or > do they need to have the movement to avoid cracking due to vibration? > your views appreciated > Glenn Murray From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 07:40:50 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Custom exhaust On 10/13/98 02:19:48 you wrote: > >I am carrying out ground runs prior to first flight. >I have fitted the stainless exhaust from custom a/c parts and find that >1. There is a lot of movement at the end of the pipes which could foul the >engine >coulings [ I have hangers aft of the rear baffle, that fasten to the cylinder head screw(on the aft side) and the baffle. The hangers allow flexibility in all directions, are fixed in the sideways direction, spring loaded vertical allowing slight movement, and free rotation andfore aft directions. Since there are only 2 engines 320 & 360 these are used on, the hangers should be part of the pipes, NAT take note!!] >2. The heat from the pipes is melting the couling around the edges where >they pretrude. [Use fiberax (non-woven insulating material from spruce, etc. gluein place with RTV beads and protect with heavy duty kitchen aluminum foil, with more RTV beads, replace every 2 years or so. Place where pipes are closer than 1". Pipes should not be closer than 1/2" to fiberglass.] >3 Should the pipes be joined together to limit movement on each side or >do they need to have the movement to avoid cracking due to vibration? [Should be held together but allowed to move] >your views appreciated >Glenn Murray > > Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:30:11 +0000 From: Robert Eeg Subject: Re: COZY: Prop extension SWrightFLY@aol.com wrote: > > I have found an O-360 A1A that has a Flange run-out of .015 (one and one half > thousands) If I use a 9 inch extension will this much run-out present a > problem? How much of a run out is acceptable? > Thanks in advance for your input. > > Steve Wright > Wright Aircraft Works LL > > Steve A run out of .015 is 15 thousands(th) NOT one and one half thousands as you indicate. One and one-half thousands is .0015 Has the engine ever been damaged by a sudden stoppage or a bent propellor? Has the Crankshaft ever been Magnafluxed or Dye Checked? Who did the run-out check? Bob From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:56:30 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Prop extension On 10/15/98 09:44:19 you wrote: > >I have found an O-360 A1A that has a Flange run-out of .015 (one and one half >thousands) If I use a 9 inch extension will this much run-out present a >problem? How much of a run out is acceptable? >Thanks in advance for your input. > >Steve Wright >Wright Aircraft Works LL > > > > >From the 320 Service Table of Limits: Mfg. tolerance + 0.002", and service limit = 0.005" (thats 2 zero's between the decimal point and first none-zero digit). It appears this crank has been damaged, either shipping damage or a prop strike. I would tear the engine down, and find what its real condition is! There is the possibility of a crack, or the bend causing a binding (close clearance where the normal lubrication film is lost. The issue here is a defective part issue that has to be resolved first. From: "Paul Comte" Subject: Fw: COZY: Prop extension Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:38:34 -0500 How Carl gets those numbers out so fast is amazing... Steve, Your post didn't mention the source of the measurement so I'll assume they are supplied by the seller and possibly confirmed by you. Just to be sure of your base line, you may want to have a reliable third party measure for run out. I don't know what the regulations state for the precision maintenance of an A&P's tools. It couldn't hurt to ask how often their tools are checked against standards. Best Regards Paul Comte A Plus Computer Service, LLC 5100 West Blue Mound Road Milwaukee, WI 53208-3654 (414) 456-9700 Voice (414) 456-9701 Fax (414) 305-7496 Mobil -----Original Message----- To: ; cozy_builders@canard.com Date: Thursday, October 15, 1998 11:27 AM Subject: Re: COZY: Prop extension >On 10/15/98 09:44:19 you wrote: >> >>I have found an O-360 A1A that has a Flange run-out of .015 (one and one half >>thousands) If I use a 9 inch extension will this much run-out present a >>problem? How much of a run out is acceptable? >>Thanks in advance for your input. >> >>Steve Wright >>Wright Aircraft Works LL >> From: "Hunter GA (Gary) at MSXSCC" Subject: RE: COZY: Prop extension Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:38:26 -0500 Call Phil Hiponic at Mattituck (800-624-6680) - tell him I sent you. I think there is an AD on the cranks of 360's that may require replacement. I think the AD is about rust on the interior of the crankshaft (I think it is on the propshaft end) being possible cause for failures. You can do what you want on an uncertified engine - BUT.... You may have read my comments on run-out before. Pushy Galore used a 12" extension and run-out had to be 0.000" for it run smooth. IMO - .0015" runout is little much for a 9" extension - at the very least, it will be hard to balance. I would be especially concerned considering the AD (if applicable to your engine). BUYERS BEWARE...... Gary Hunter "Pushy Galore" > -----Original Message----- > From: SWrightFLY@aol.com [SMTP:SWrightFLY@aol.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 15, 1998 8:44 AM > To: cozy_builders@canard.com > Subject: Re: COZY: Prop extension > > I have found an O-360 A1A that has a Flange run-out of .015 (one and one > half > thousands) If I use a 9 inch extension will this much run-out present a > problem? How much of a run out is acceptable? > Thanks in advance for your input. > > Steve Wright > Wright Aircraft Works LL > > Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 19:43:11 -0400 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Custom exhaust Glenn, re "The heat from the pipes is melting the couling around the edges where they pretrude." I bought some stuff from Aircraft Spruce on page 298 of the '98 catelogue called Sound and Vibration Damping Tape. (part #09-30200) I lined the cowling abeam the pipes with it and also where they exit the cowling. It words very well in reflecting heat and keeping the pipes centered. dd Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 00:30:18 -0500 From: Mike Davis Subject: COZY: Lord Mounts We just received the Brock engine mount for the Cozy MKIV today. Does anyone have the "correct" part number for the Lorde mounts. The plans specify 100-006 but A.Spruce hasn't any idea how it might cross reference to their stock. The mount has 2.25 id retainer cups. Thanks in advance, Mike From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 07:55:07 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Lord Mounts On 10/21/98 00:30:18 you wrote: > >We just received the Brock engine mount for the Cozy MKIV today. Does >anyone have the "correct" part number for the Lorde mounts. The plans >specify 100-006 but A.Spruce hasn't any idea how it might cross >reference to their stock. The mount has 2.25 id retainer cups. > > >Thanks in advance, >Mike > > All the Lycoming dynafocal (it appears you have this) are the same shape. For different applications there are minute differences in the rubber (neophene) durometer (stiffness). I don't think it makes much difference which, no one has done the testing to find the best for us. Someone may differ with this. Bottom line: As long as it is for a Lycoming Dynafocal, its OK. There are a few Lycoming Engine models that use the Type II dynafocal, including the IO-320-B1A. They still use the same vibration isolator mounts, but the engine mount (STEEL) is different. The idea of the dynafocal is the bolt centerlines converge at the propeller. The IO-320-B1A, is only on the Piper Twin Commanche, which has a very long prop. extension. The convergence point is different, making the angles of the cups different. When ordering a mount, make sure which one you have. I got mine from Weldtech. From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Lord Mounts Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:07:30 -0500 Builders, In the certified world each aircraft manufacturer specifies exactly what Lord Mount bushings must be used in each aircraft. As a result, the catalog of Lord Mount Bushings contains many different listings specific to a given aircraft. If you go to a salvage dealer, you can sort through a number of used ones and see that the differences are rather minor. I have seen off-center bushings to correct a case where the engine mount is a little off and doesn't line up with the holes in the engine case. You shouldn't buy used ones, however, because the rubber (neoprene) hardens after time and looses some of it shock absorbing qualities. I think the maintenance manuals on certified aircraft require that the bushings be replaced after a certain amount of time in service. The difference between the two different types listed in the Wicks Catalog is that the heavy duty ones have the inside metal spacer encapsulated in rubber to give it a little sideways support. This is the type that I prefer, although I have used both types and don't know of a reason to prefer one over the other. Regards, Nat ---------- > From: Epplin John A > To: cozy_builders@canard.com > Subject: RE: COZY: Lord Mounts > Date: Wednesday, October 21, 1998 10:53 AM > > What would be preferable? The so called heavy-duty or the normal mount? If > heavy-duty means harder rubber, may not be a good idea. I need to order > some soon. Was leaning to the normal mount, do not plan on a lot of hard > aerobatics. Would rather have more isolation. > > Any answers? > > John Epplin Mk4 #467, will hang engine about end of year. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David Domeier [SMTP:david010@earthlink.net] > > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 1998 9:37 AM > > To: Mike Davis > > Cc: cozy_builders@canard.com > > Subject: Re: COZY: Lord Mounts > > > > Mike, > > > > re "The mount has 2.25 id retainer cups." > > > > I am reasonably sure the mount has 2.75 ID retainer cups. (I need to > > get to the hangar to confer mine) Also, I believe Wicks has the listed > > as part numbers EM100-005 and EM100-006. One is heavy duty. Both are > > 2.75 ID. > > > > dd From: SWrightFLY@aol.com Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 13:15:59 EDT Subject: COZY: Re:Ellison TB? or Airflow performance fuel injection? Would appreciate input concerning which system to use for an 0-360 XP engine kit (190 HP) I just ordered for my Stagger EZ. The Ellison cost about $500 less. What other advantaged or disadvantages does it have over the fuel injection? Steve Wright Wright Aircraft Works LLC From: "david vollrath" Subject: COZY: Re: [canard-aviators] Re:Ellison TB? or Airflow performance fuel injection? Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:05:11 PDT >Subject: [canard-aviators] Re:Ellison TB? or Airflow performance fuel injection? The only advantage I see of Airflow performance over Ellison is the capability change injector size to equalize mixture distribution between cylinders and therefore be able to run well on the lean side of peak EGT at low power settings. Even with a perfectly equal induction system, the unequal length of exhaust pipes will cause different volumetric efficiency between cylinders, and therfore the need for different fuel flow for each cylinder. A second smaller advantage of Airflow Per. is not needing to make accommodation for carb heat in the induction system as is recominded for Ellison. They are both great systems, and are well supported, but be willing to do lots of adjusting to get them running just right. A four cylinder combustion analyzer (digital EGT CHT) is manditory for optimum operation. Also elecronic ignition of your choice is a recominded. David Vollrath Cozy III N22AZ Flying on Airflow Performance ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From: EJCV@aol.com Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 13:39:13 EDT Subject: COZY: Airflow Performance Injection With reference to the current discussion about the relative merits of these systems I would like to add my two cents worth. I installed an Airflow Performance system about a year ago and it's wonderful. I had little problem with setting it up and lots of help from the supplier. I have the choice between more power for the same fule flow or less fuel flow for the same power. But much more important, I have TOTAL freedom from carb icing. The Ellison system is good and certainly a vast improvement over the prehistoric carbs used on Contis & Lycs but, as Mr. Ellison says himself, it's not PROOF against carb icing, which kills someone every year. Go injection, you'll love it. From: SWrightFLY@aol.com Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 17:42:02 EDT Subject: Re: COZY: Re:XP360 engine kit and the Ellison In a message dated 10/23/98 12:58:27 PM Central Daylight Time, tgb@cozy.wamnet.com writes: << Is there any more firm pricing on the XP 360 engine? At Oshkosh they weren't sure. >> Gregg Perry, a good friend and Cozy builder in East TN. and I have been looking for engines for our projects for over a year now and we both have decided to get the XP 360 kit (190 HP at 2700 RPM) and the Ellison Throttle body. The Ellison cost almost $1000.00 less than the airflow and the cost was the deciding factor as they are both excellent systems. We are the first to get the new XP in its kit form. This kit is in interim step for the company as they do not have the new case ready but all other parts are new. The cost of the kit with the Millennium cylinders and minus accessories is $14,300.00. We are assured of a flange run out of .000 so a 9 inch extension is useable. Both Gregg and I know just enough about engines to be "dangerous" so with this engine assembled by a knowledgeable A&P here in Nashville we are confident we will have a reliable powerplant. So far, the support and communications with Roy Scott, the XP representative has been great. Roy still does not have firm pricing on the complete XP engine they had on display at Osh, but he thinks it will be somewhere around 20k. When I do get firm pricing I will post it or you can call XP at 817-540-6500. They do not have a web page yet. Thanks to everyone who gave me input on my airflow or ellison question. It's really great to have all these experts only a mouse klick away. Steve Wright Stagger EZ From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 12:14:55 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Airflow Performance Injection On 10/23/98 13:39:13 you wrote: > >With reference to the current discussion about the relative merits of these >systems I would like to add my two cents worth. > >I installed an Airflow Performance system about a year ago and it's wonderful. >I had little problem with setting it up and lots of help from the supplier. I >have the choice between more power for the same fule flow or less fuel flow >for the same power. But much more important, I have TOTAL freedom from carb >icing. The Ellison system is good and certainly a vast improvement over the >prehistoric carbs used on Contis & Lycs but, as Mr. Ellison says himself, it's >not PROOF against carb icing, which kills someone every year. > The Bendix is a standard aircraft part, and basically the same a the Airflow. They are bulletproof, and if problem at distant airport, the mechanics will be very familiar. The one on my IO-320 had 4400 hours on it and some time of storage when it was overhauled by a certified repair station including flow testing for about $250. From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 12:17:48 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Re: [canard-aviators] Re:Ellison TB? or Airflow performance fuel injection? The bendix required minimal adjustment, just the idle mixture and speed, which is very easy. Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 17:45:43 -0500 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Re: [canard-aviators] Re:Ellison TB? or Airflow performance fuel injection? For what it's worth, my 2 cents worth.... re "Was said lots of adjusting of Ellison and Airflow" My Ellison installed on an 0-360 A4M has required no (nada) adjusting since installation. Engine starts when it should and accelerates like a demon with it's tail on fire. My only problem is Cessna, Piper, and Katana. They all fly too slow in the pattern around here. Did you know the new Cessna 172 costs $165,000 and tops out at 122 knots! I usually exceed that speed turning out of the pattern. Three cheers for canard efficiency! dd From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:11:49 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Re:O-320 for sale On 10/27/98 08:03:57 you wrote: > >the following post is from Wayne Peach who has an O-230 which was mounted on a >Sea Hawker so it is all set up for a pusher with 8" extension and exaust. It >has only one hour since major and cost about $9500. I would have bought it but >chose to have more power. Contact Wane Peach directly for details. > >Steve, > > I finally got back home. In my travels I picked up a new dail >indicator. Using the dail, I can't find any run out at all. (When I >did it without the gauge I had the stand on the floor and not attached >to the engine. When I would lean on the engine to turn the crank, the >engine cradle must have flexed enough to make it appear that there was >some run out.) > If you're still interested, let me know. Reply-to: peach@clinton.net >Wayne > > Crank runout MUST be checked with a good dial indicator anchored to the engine, sparkplugs out. Cradle has nothing to do with it! The vibration isolators (Lord mounts, Dynafocal or Conical) should with some force all the engine to move possibly an eigth of inch, while looking for thousandth of an inch. From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Engine Mount Info Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 08:30:59 -0600 Bill, I think you should explain that the engine mount you are talking about was for a Long EZ and it was designed by Burt Rutan. The Long EZ mount was designed for an 0-235 Lycoming, but most Long EZ builders hung heavier engines on it. Brock does not change any mounts designed by others. You are doing a dis-service to allow builders to think that you are talking about the Cozy Mark IV mount, designed by Co-Z Development, and manufactured by Brock. In the case of Cozy mounts, Ken Francis learned that Weldtech's mount didn't fit, because it wasn't built to plans. Weldtech refused to supply one of their mounts to us to check out, but we found a builder who had one, paid him to send it to us, checked it out, told Weldtech what they were doing wrong, and returned the mount to the builder. I would like builders to know that the Cozy Mark IV mount is much stronger than the Long EZ mount. Regards, Nat ---------- > From: Bill Theeringer > To: All > Subject: COZY: Engine Mount Info > Date: Monday, November 09, 1998 10:05 PM > > > After having Brock rework my cracked (in 4 places) dynafocal engine mount, > I had it certified airworthy by a repair station using both magnaflux and > dye penetrant. The second time it cracked (in 3 places) I replaced it with > the Weldtech unit. The geometry on Dicks design is different from Brocks. > Stress points are minimized, tubing is 3/4 OD instead of 5/8, but it weighs > only 4 ounces more. (5.0 vs 5.25 Lbs). I should have gone with his unit > right from the start and avoided an unbelievable hassle which included 2 > trips to Stanton. > > Incidentally, I have a Brock engine mount from a decommissioned Long EZ for > sale. N82CZ was parted out for liability reasons. I bought the mount but > never used it. > > I don't have Richard Lauz's phone number but his address is 1920 Terminal > Dr., Richland, WA. > > Bill Theeringer > N29EZ From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 06:43:01 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Engine Mount Info Metals crack for several reasons: 1: Fatique is a function of the number of cycles of loading, in particular where there is stress reversal between tension and compression. 2: The magnitude of the extreme stresses (measured in units per area, i.e. pounds per square inch), the higher, the greater chance of failure. 3: Stress risers, much like traffic funneling into a roadway with less lanes, the lines of force or stress, get closer, and at the same time tend to avoid the sharp edge, getting even closer, this drives up the stress. Also at the narrower crossection, the uniform stress is higher. Then the material exceeds the ultimate stress limit of the material and a crack results. With time the crack zips along, with stree going up due to reduced crossection. Stress risers can be caused by scratches, weld defects (less than full penetration, cracks, inclusions, undercut, etc.). 4: Work hardening, the hardening due to inelastic straining (movement in percentage), reducing the ductility (ability to withstand movement). 5: When welding certain materials (high strength steel, and many others), special welding techniques including atmosphere, pre and post heat are required to prevent crystalization of the base material. 6: When weld heat is cooled, material shortens thermally causing residual stresses (loads at various locations. These loads then are in addition to normal service loads, and may cause stresses above allowables with resulting failure. All these can be demonstrated with a paper clip by bending back and forth. Slight movement can be done forever, the larger movement the less times. Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 15:10:53 -0800 From: "LCDR James D. Newman" Subject: COZY: Re: Engine mount revisited Hi Bill, Nat and All, >> Nat Puffer wrote: >>Bill, >>I think you should explain that the engine mount you are talking about was for a Long EZ and it was designed by Burt Rutan. The Long EZ mount was designed for an 0-235 Lycoming, but most Long EZ builders hung heavier engines on it. Brock does not change any mounts designed by others. You are doing a dis-service to allow builders to think that you are talking about the Cozy Mark IV mount, designed by Co-Z Development, and manufactured by Brock. In the case of Cozy mounts, Ken Francis learned that Weldtech's mount didn't fit, because it wasn't built to plans. Weldtech refused to supply one of their mounts to us to check out, but we found a builder who had one, paid him to send it to us, checked it out, told Weldtech what they were doing wrong, and returned the mount to the builder. I would like builders to know that the Cozy Mark IV mount is much stronger than the Long EZ mount. > Bill Theeringer wrote: > Wow. I certainly would never attempt to do a dis service to anyone! Pardon me all. I thought it was clear in my post that the engine mount that I was referring to on my Long EZ airplane was the Brock made engine mount for a Long EZ. I was not aware of the other issues noted above. The purpose of my post was to share truthful information to help make our hobby safer and more enjoyable for all. There is a history of cracking on these Brock made (LONG EZ) mounts and mine was the only one that I know of to have failed twice. When I tried to find out what quantities were failing the only person that would answer me candidly and off the record was David Orr who said ......as many as 10%. So, again my apologies to Nat, who has a sterling reputation for supplying a superior product on time and at a very reasonable price. I think the point is being missed here, and there is no dis-service intended. Bill just forgot to mention he is still flying his Long-EZ with the originally recommended Lycoming 0-235, and still had the cracking problems with the Brock engine mount twice. Infinity's Forever, JD Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 22:47:39 -0500 From: Bill Theeringer Subject: COZY: The last word from me Bill, What engine did you hang on the Brock mount? Are you aware that Burt never approved hanging anything heavier than an 0-235 on this mount? I know that Brock would never send a Cozy III mount to a Cozy builder if they told him that it was for an 0-320. We had to design a special mount for the Cozy III for 0-320s. Maybe it is your fault that you used a mount that wasn't designed for the engine you installed. If so, perhaps you ought to tell builders this who might have gotten the impression that it was either Burt's fault of Brock's fault. Regards, Nat +++++++++++++=======+++++++++++++ I guess my post, while 100% true in what was said, was lacking in what was not said. I sure don't know why any one would assume that I have a bigger engine than called out in the plans, or that I was referring to another airplane when I was talking about my plane, but there are all kinds of people out there. My airplane is stock and built to plans. 0235-L2C with B&C's starter and alternator. Several mods were done after the fact, convenience items, nothing that would affect flight characteristics.......except JD's retractable mains years later. I am very much aware of the weight limitations on the stock engine mount. I had been a pilot only 2 years when I started building the plane. I am an excellent craftsman and a meticulous to a fault builder. I made a pest of myself every Saturday visiting Mojave with my weekly list of questions and small pieces built the previous week. I was paranoid about doing this thing right. Probably because I knew nothing about airplanes. 8 1/2 full time years later it was done. My first flight as a private pilot outside of the State of California was in the just completed Long EZ to Sun-N-Fun where I won the Outstanding workmanship award. I have a little more than a thousand hours on it now. Its a comfortable feeling when you are up there all alone, flying over water, and know that you built it exactly as the designer said to. Bill Theeringer N29EZ See our award winning Long EZ with Jim Newmans excellent retractable gear at http://www.flash.net/~infaero/infgear.htm Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 09:39:03 +0100 From: lecoqben Subject: COZY: Air filter size Hello to all of you I am starting the engine installation. I want to raise a question about the size of the filter that is fitted in the mark IV design. Nat is giving us a drawing for the air filter box which is fine to me. He is calling the Fram CA3647 to be used. Being in France and guessing that this filter needs to be changed fairly often I tried to find a filter that would fit in the box that Nat had used. This was very easy and I was able to find a filter used on Renault cars in an auto shop. I happened to talk about that with Alain Raposo. As you might know he is also a Cozy Mark IV builder and a very good friend. His work is very nice and I put quite a lot of confidence on his advices. He is working on the design of new engines for cars at Renault and he told me that the filter I had bought was designed for a 60 hp Renault engine. ( We have a 180 hp engine). So he is questionning strongly the use of my filter. He says the pressure drop in the filter would be too high unless we use a different less efficient filter (different mesh size) . So I have several questions: -For which vehicule was the CA 3647 Fram filter designed ( ie hp)? -Alain thinks the air box is too small but I have the feeling that the position of the box is of utmost importance because it is in front of the air scoop so there is a high pressure at the inlet of the box that compensate for the pressure drop through the filter. How did you come up with this design , Nat? -Was there any measuring done in terms of pressure drop inside the box? -The influence of the air box design must be very high on the cylinders cooling so I hate to change it and have to redesign the baffling of the engine. ( I want to fly ASAP) . Any comment on that. Thanks to everybody. Benoit LECOQ From: "Romulo Augusto" Subject: Re: COZY: Air filter size Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 09:05:52 -0200 Benoit, I suggest you regard not only the engine power. The RPM is important too. More RPM, more volume/minute, more resistence, when you compare the same displacement. A engine car at 5000 RPM can use the same air volume/minute than a aircraft engine at 2500, in despite of the less displacement in a car engine versus aircraft engine. I don't have the calculations, I am only a Doctor ( and this is true for pulmonary ventilation...and engines sometimes are different than human body, sometimes with lots of similarities...), but if I don't be wrong, this is a linear reasoning.... Regards, Romulo Augusto. -----Original Message----- From: lecoqben +ADw-lecoqben+AEA-club-internet.fr+AD4- To: Cozy MK-IV Builders +ADw-cozy+AF8-builders+AEA-canard.com+AD4- Date: Thursday, November 19, 1998 7:24 AM Subject: COZY: Air filter size +AD4- Hello to all of you +AD4-I am starting the engine installation. +AD4- This was very easy +AD4-and I was able to find a filter used on Renault cars in an auto shop.... +AD4-....the filter I had bought was designed for a 60 hp Renault engine. ( +AD4-We have a 180 hp engine). So he is questionning strongly the use of my +AD4-filter. He says the pressure drop in the filter would be too high unless +AD4-we use a different less efficient filter (different mesh size) . +AD4- So I have several questions: +AD4--For which vehicule was the CA 3647 Fram filter designed ( ie hp)?..... +AD4- Benoit LECOQ +AD4- +AD4- From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Air filter size Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 08:24:06 -0600 Dear Benoit, I don't remember for sure, but I think the filter I am using has about the same area as the one used on the Long EZ. In the Long EZ design, the filter is mounted on the firewall, and then the air travels through Aeoquip tubing, making a number of turns into the carburetor. Someone else (not I) came up with the idea of a filter box attached directly to the carburetor using ram air directly from the scoop. The claim was made that this resulted in 100 more rpm (more horsepower). I accepted this and never tried to verify it. One thing that makes our airplanes different from autos is that we probably have about 3 times the velocity pressure entering the filter, so pressure drop thru the filter is much less important. When all is said and done, it would be difficult to use a much larger filter than the one I am using. I don't know how you could prove one way or another what is adequate and what is optimum. Regards, Nat ---------- > From: lecoqben > To: Cozy MK-IV Builders > Subject: COZY: Air filter size > Date: Thursday, November 19, 1998 2:39 AM > > Hello to all of you > I am starting the engine installation. > > I want to raise a question about the size of the filter that is fitted > in the mark IV design. > Nat is giving us a drawing for the air filter box which is fine to me. > He is calling the Fram CA3647 to be used. Being in France and guessing > that this filter needs to be changed fairly often I tried to find a > filter that would fit in the box that Nat had used. This was very easy > and I was able to find a filter used on Renault cars in an auto shop. > I happened to talk about that with Alain Raposo. As you might know > he is also a Cozy Mark IV builder and a very good friend. His work is > very nice and I put quite a lot of confidence on his advices. He is > working on the design of new engines for cars at Renault and he told me > that the filter I had bought was designed for a 60 hp Renault engine. ( > We have a 180 hp engine). So he is questionning strongly the use of my > filter. He says the pressure drop in the filter would be too high unless > we use a different less efficient filter (different mesh size) . > So I have several questions: > -For which vehicule was the CA 3647 Fram filter designed ( ie hp)? > -Alain thinks the air box is too small but I have the feeling that the > position of the box is of utmost importance because it is in front of > the air scoop so there is a high pressure at the inlet of the box that > compensate for the pressure drop through the filter. How did you come up > with this design , Nat? > -Was there any measuring done in terms of pressure drop inside the box? > -The influence of the air box design must be very high on the cylinders > cooling so I hate to change it and have to redesign the baffling of the > engine. ( I want to fly ASAP) . Any comment on that. > Thanks to everybody. > Benoit LECOQ > > From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 07:37:59 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Baffling question On 12/11/98 04:35:58 you wrote: > >To anyone who has completed the baffling or Nat, > >Do the cylinder fin baffles get connected to the forward baffles at the >tangent point with three rivets or just one in the center? I figured three >but I don't see it mentioned anywhere. Thanks. > >Paul Stowitts >Cozy Mark IV #200 > > I used 2 avex rivets, then flattened with a hammer, since my rivet squeezer only has a 3" trout. Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 15:14:39 +0100 From: lecoqben Subject: COZY: Oil cooler position Hello to everybody. Merry christmas to everyone. One question on where to put the oil filter: I am willing to put the oil cooler per plan ( Below top right of top cowling). But I bought the B&C oil filter 90° adapter and the Jeff Rose electronic ignition.They both have to use the right side of the top cowling in front of the engine.Is it acceptable to place the oil cooler on the left side below the top cowling? (I hate to put it on the side of the engine.) One comment ( No reply needed) to every builder: Please,please,please,please If you want a Cozy Mark IV, then do what Nat is asking. If you want to major change the structure, then fly test , fly test, fly test. Call it your own name and you will be proud of it. This is a lot more work. If you want to do it , you will be famous for it but you have to do it. If you do not want to invest on the additionnal work needed for a major change, then respect the whole design per plans (including providers).And stop,stop,stop,stop arguing around on the web.This arguing activity is slowly but surely,surely,surely killing our activity ( ie building well proven designs). We devote too much in official trials. It already killed certified airplanes business in general aviation. I do not want to give a lesson but I start to be very much afraid of what is going on.It might kill our passion . I will not say more on that subject. Again Merry Christmas. Benoît LECOQ From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 09:43:56 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Oil cooler position This is a detail, not major change in my book. If done in a reasonable manner, mirror imaging the installation, the major issue would be cooling, which many have problems with anyway, where the oil temperature rising to the red line while flying near your airport on a flight during the test time, is near urgent, but not an emergency. More important in my book, is the ignition, have both mags been removed, if so, what is being done to ensure ignition in the event (when, not if) of power failure. Also are the sensor(s) used the ones that go in the mag mounting, and not the sensor mounted near the crankshaft forward of the propeller. I had a alternator belt come apart during the Butler flyin race. The steel cable end whipping around left some ugly marks on the prop, cowling, and crankcase where the sensor is usually mounted. I inspected the belt (what you can see and feel without turning the prop) as part of the preflight immediately before the race. Benoît said The oiler cooler question is proper on this form, this is not an unusual modification, was worded to be understood, and did not discredit anyone. I would much rather see extra questions, than read about an accident, or extra work done. Also many times, there are other related issues that can be discussed. I do not profess to be an expert, have and will continue to learn from this forum and always welcome critique and suggestions. Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 18:29:54 -0500 From: Bulent Aliev Subject: COZY: Re:Teflon tape & fuel lines > > > << The best pipe dope has Teflon granules to help it seal. This is what > you want to use. The particles are so small, they will not plug screen, > valve, nor jets. You still do not want to put it on the first thread. My friend is a A&P and uses (to my surprise) teflon tape on his plane. Just the other day I had to install a Racor fuel/water separator and filter on a boat and the instructions advised against the use on Teflon tape on any fuel lines. The instructions stated that Teflon paste is better. I use Safe-T-Lock teflon pipe adhesive/sealant at Aeroquip. It is extremely fine textured almost like hand lotion. Service temperature range -100 to +350 degree. I think it is better choice than the plumber's Teflon sealant from the hardware store. Regards Bulent From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 20:27:21 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Re:Teflon tape & fuel lines The teflon or anything fiberous can clog injectors and carb. On all fuel fittings, I have been using "SEALUBE", Spruce # 09-25200. It is an antiseize sealer for all threaded alloy parts. Once in a while I have also used the Permatex "Aviation Form-A-Gasket No.3". From: Militch@aol.com Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 20:56:26 EST Subject: Re: COZY: Re:Teflon tape & fuel lines In a message dated 98-12-15 18:31:27 EST, you write: << My friend is a A&P and uses (to my surprise) teflon tape on his plane. Just the other day I had to install a Racor fuel/water separator and filter on a boat and the instructions advised against the use on Teflon tape on any >> I spend time occasionally reading the NTSB accident reports and have seen a couple of crashes blamed on teflon tape use in the fuel system. The fuel injection systems in all my cars run at 30 - 40 psi and none of them leak, and they just use conventional flared pipes and fittings. Why use a material that shouldn't be necessary if the lines are built properly in the first place, if it adds even a hint of risk? Peter Militch - Plans #740 Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 08:31:23 -0500 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Re:Teflon tape & fuel lines Pete, re "Why use a material that shouldn't be necessary if the lines are built properly in the first place, if it adds even a hint of risk?" The same question has crossed my mind. I have used no sealant on any fitting in my fuel system and have been wondering it I should have. dd Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 13:39:45 From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: COZY: Teflon tape & fuel lines > >> "Why use a material that shouldn't be necessary if the lines are >>built properly in the first place, if it adds even a hint of risk?" >> > The same question has crossed my mind. I have used no sealant on >any fitting in my fuel system and have been wondering it I should have. Bottom Line: Check out the manufacturer's recommendations for the fittings used. Tapered thread pipe fittings are by design, structural only. They are not designed to be fluid tight and always require some form of ductile sealant to fill the gaps, tiny tho they may be. All other fittings (flare, o-ring, furrled, barbed, etc, etc) are designed to be compression and/or interruption fit between fluid carrying components and require no sealants . . . indeed, adding sealants may interfere mechanically with a critical assembly feature. When in doubt, read the instructions and add no materials not specifically called out by the folk who sold you the product. Here at RAC, we may use a thread-locker or safety wire to insure that a mechanical fastener doesn't work loose . . . but no new material or technique is added for the purpose of keeping the fluid inside the plumbing. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection //// (o o) ==========o00o=(_)=o00o========== < If you continue to do > < What you've always done > < You will continue to be > < What you've always been. > ================================= Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 11:05:25 -0800 From: hrogers@slac.stanford.edu (Howard Rogers) Subject: COZY: Re:Teflon tape & fuel lines >In a message dated 98-12-15 18:31:27 EST, you write: > ><< My friend is a A&P and uses (to my surprise) teflon tape on his plane. Just > the other day I had to install a Racor fuel/water separator and filter on a > boat and the instructions advised against the use on Teflon tape on any > >> > >I spend time occasionally reading the NTSB accident reports and have seen a >couple of crashes blamed on teflon tape use in the fuel system. The fuel >injection systems in all my cars run at 30 - 40 psi and none of them leak, and >they just use conventional flared pipes and fittings. Why use a material that >shouldn't be necessary if the lines are built properly in the first place, if >it adds even a hint of risk? > >Peter Militch - Plans #740 Perhaps I can shed some light on the above. Flared fittings are not without their potential failure modes, also. For example, if done incorrectly, they can break off completely, due to cracking (I've seen THIS in the NTSB accident reports, too). I have yet to see the system that can marry the various components of a fuel system without the use of NPT (tapered pipe thread) SOMEWHERE. Various pipe dopes can be misapplied and wind up in the fuel system, causing clogs, etc. When I used to teach A&P mechanics, we used three levels of teaching for various tasks. Level 1= tell you about it. Level 2= demonstrate it to you. Level 3= YOU must DO it. A good example of an FAA-mandated level 3 required curriculum item would be packing a wheel bearing with grease. Flare fittings were definitely level 3. I honestly don't remember if pipe threads were level 3, but if they weren't, they definitely SHOULD be. There is no substitute for actually doing it, under the supervising eye of a knowledgeble person. There are several perfectly acceptable materials for sealing NPT threads on fuel systems. I prefer to use teflon tape on fuel systems (never had a problem), but I would stop short of advocating that YOU do so, unless I could personally demonstrate my techniques, and then watch, as you do it, too. My point here, is that the training is probably a lot more important than the materials selected (though it is, of course, important to select correct materials). Seek out a qualified person, and get them to demonstrate, and then watch, as you do it. It really is simple, but it is also easy to screw up. Howard Rogers, A&P 2005148 Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 20:54:37 -0800 From: Eric Westland Subject: COZY: Floscan Transducer? If you are running a fuel flow monitor, you are probably using the Floscan transducer, an inline device. My question is simple, where did you put it in your fuel system? Don Rivera of Airflow Performance has told me to mount it on an intake tube between my Bendix unit and my fuel distributor (spider). I can do that, but I worry a little about the vibration. Then again, Matronics who makes fuel flow instruments recommends mounting it right after the fuel selector valve (with a pre-filter). This location worried Don because the boost pump might cause some back feeding to the sender that could make air bubbles in the system. Maybe it does not matter that much, but with our fuel systems being similar, I was hoping to get some proven ideas. BTW, I did call Floscan, they would not advise. Thanks, Eric Westland Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 05:59:53 -0500 From: Jeff Russell Subject: Re: COZY: Floscan Transducer? Eric Westland wrote: > If you are running a fuel flow monitor, you are probably using the > Floscan transducer, an inline device. My question is simple, where did > you put it in your fuel system? > > Don Rivera of Airflow Performance has told me to mount it on an intake > tube between my Bendix unit and my fuel distributor (spider). Westland Eric, that's where ours is mounted. Works great. you will need about 8" of hose on both sides of the transducer as straight as you can get it for best results. -- Jeff Russell/AeroCad Inc. E-mail: Jeff@aerocad.com 2954 Curtis King Blvd. Ft. Pierce, FL. 34946 Shop# 561-460-8020 7:00am to 3:30pm Home# 561-334-6200 Website: http://www.Aerocad.com Composite workshop info: http://www.Sportair.com Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 08:29 -0600 (CST) From: Michael Pollock Subject: Re: COZY: Floscan Transducer? Eric Westland wrote: >If you are running a fuel flow monitor, you are probably using the >Floscan transducer, an inline device. My question is simple, where did >you put it in your fuel system? Eric, On our Velocity,we mounted our fuel flow sensor right after the fuel filter and electric boost pump. Not a good place. The electric boost pump, when turned on, causes an inaccurate reading by about 2gph. Mount it prior to the electric fuel pump and you should not have that problem because it will be sucking fuel through the sensor instead of blowing bubbles through it. My .02 worth ----- Michael.Pollock@mci.com Flying Velocity N173DT Building Cozy MKIV#643 From: N433DP@aol.com Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 08:06:04 EST Subject: COZY: Oil Filler Tube Hi. Everyone Does anyone know how long the oil filler tube should be? MKIV O360 Thanks Doug Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 20:32:50 -0500 From: John B Vermeylen Subject: Re: COZY: Oil cooler position Hello Benoît LECOQ, I also bought the B&C 90 degree oil filter adapter and have electronic ignition. I've installed the oil cooler on the lower right side of the cowling just like Nat puffer did. Johnny V N69CZ From: Epplin John A Subject: COZY: Cowling Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 14:42:32 -0600 Just started serious cowling installation. I received it from Feather Light in good time, about 3 weeks after order and it looks great! The fit is quite good. Now a question. I noticed you can see the oil check door outline. Has anyone used this outline to install the door? If so, did it come out good? I am confident it will work, just would a quarter inch one way or another be any better. John epplin Mk4 #467 From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 15:20:35 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Cowling, Oil filler spouts. Suggestion: Take a piece of cardboard that fits the cowling in the area and make a cutout to match the oil opening less the flange (that the door will rest upon when closed). I assume the engine is installed, wouldn't want to fit the cowl without. Practice checking oil and filling oil to check location of the door. There are various oil spouts that screw onto a plastic quart oil container. I found at the local autoparts store, a 3 section plastic tube of 3 telescoping sections. The end that screws onto the container is the largest diameter. Discard the other sections. There is no valve, just a tapered tube, female threads on one end. I carry one with and have one in my airport tool box. The one carried in the airplane is rolled up in a paper towel, ends of towel stuffed into the tube ends. After use, I pass the towel through the tube to remove remaining oil, and replace the towel. It looks like one could stick the container directly into the engine fill tube, on mine it won't stay there without a spout, and its difficult to get it there without spilling oil. Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1998 15:53:22 -0500 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Cowling John, Re "Now a question. I noticed you can see the oil check door outline. Has anyone used this outline to install the door?" My oil check door would be better it were about 1/2" lower. The dip stick just clears the bottom edge of the opening. I have a feeling that not all Lycoming dip sticks come off the engine at the same angle or reference point. Might be a good idea to wait to cut the opening until you have a chance to check where your dip stick will be. dd From: "Tim" Subject: Re: COZY: Cowling, Oil spout location Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 09:12:31 -0600 John the outline on my cowling matched up well. The laser light would be a good idea. Good luck. -----Original Message----- From: ponciroli@postoffice.worldnet.att.net To: cozy_builders@canard.com Cc: Epplin John A Date: Wednesday, December 30, 1998 8:36 AM Subject: Re: COZY: Cowling, Oil spout location >>Just started serious cowling installation. I received it from Feather Light >>in good time, about 3 weeks after order and it looks great! The fit is >>quite good. Now a question. I noticed you can see the oil check door >>outline. Has anyone used this outline to install the door? If so, did it >>come out good? I am confident it will work, just would a quarter inch one >>way or another be any better. >> >>John epplin Mk4 #467 > >John - I have decided that when I get to that stage, I am going to strap a >laser pointer to the oil spout and see where it shines on the cowling. It >will shine through, and give you an accurate position of the oli fill spout. > > From: SWrightFLY@aol.com Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 10:38:40 EST Subject: COZY: Re:Prop extensions What is the latest thoughts on the "best" length for prop extensions for maximum performance and minimum drag? I recall that longer is better but how long? I am thinking a 9" would be about the most I can install on my XP-0360 190 HP clone from Superior. I will be using a 3 blade prop. I have been assured the crank has 0" run-out so wobble is not a concern. Input please. Steve Wright Stagger EZ N-700EZ Wright Aircraft Works LLC (The Nose-Lift Guy)