GravityKnight

Looks are subjective..... but I agree, that's a nice looking / clean airplane. Very easy on the eyes....But I prefer the look of wing struts, especially single struts (cessna style). Doesn't fit my mission, but pretty airplane. The empty weight however is a little high at 829lbs for the LSA version. Also, the non-LSA version with a 1443lb max weight, comes in at 859 empty (still with rotax) wonder what the difference is...

I have to vacuum it out now and then... I actually fly shoes off lol, so the cargo area behind the seats actually needs cleaned more often because my shoes ride in there. I know that sounds weird, but it makes me shorter! I drive with shoes off, hell I drag raced my cars with stiff clutches and such with no shoes. The rudder pedals in the plane are wide, fairly smooth, and are easy to move with the noes wheel disconnect.. so it doesn't hurt the feet w/o shoes.

some panel upgrades:

Here is a video of the zipper in action from a little while back. Take off rolls measured about 220ft. Making some big changes to my exhaust right now to see if I can bring EGTs more in line (rans exhaust system uses smaller pipe that rotax uses, and has very unequal length headers), and maybe squeak out some more power. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSe75BSvHyM

MrMorden, on 24 Feb 2016 - 06:40 AM, said: I was told 91. Which makes sense you wouldn't want to go any lower of course. I know a guy with the 105hp 9.7:1 version with over 500 hrs on his (started as an 80hp 912), and he runs regular! If I was literally at sea level, I would hope I could get 93 for the extra insurance. But supposedly 91 will do. Of course combustion chamber design, camshaft overlap, timing, fueling all play into how much compression you can get away with.... apparently, it will work on this setup but I have never been anywhere lower than about 5300ft since I did the zipper.

IrishAl, on 24 Feb 2016 - 03:41 AM, said: Mine has the newer, HD starter already. So far so good. MrMorden, on 24 Feb 2016 - 06:22 AM, said: Andy, that is exactly right. You only have to use it, when you want to.

Thought about it. My past deals mostly with turbocharging and fuel injection. A little voice inside my head told me to keep it simple, and light lol 160hp just sounds plane fun. There was a video released the other day of a Just StuperSTOLwith a 180hp Titan engine. Now the engine is so heavy, they had to extend the plane almost 2 ft to balance it out, but this thing takes off in 15ft with it's slats and climbs literally straight up. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOcrNdxOtvU I'm sure I'm giving up some economy with my fine pitched prop, but I'm not willing to give up take off and climb performance. I do more landing in someones field if they will give me permission than I do cross country.

To touch a little more on the HACman leaner. It's a simple system that uses manifold vacuum to pull a vacuum on the carb bowls. Easy to install, fairly simple to operate with one minor 'kinda have to get used to' characteristic. It is far more potent at low throttle settings (due to there being much more manifold vacuum when the throttle is closed). Where this can get you a little is if you have it cranked up pretty good to lean at full throttle or higher cruise, and then pull the throttle back, it will go very lean. Only takes a couple times before you stop doing that. But the unit does the job.... but it only leans, unlike the mixture control on a cont/lycoming. This works fine as the bing runs richer the higher you fly - regardless of it's altitude compensating functions, it still gets richer as you climb. I'm sure if you fly at 4000ft the difference it will give you isn't enough to warrant having one.... but up higher it's pretty handy to have! I really think having a wideband o2 gauge makes it that much better.. you can see air fuel ratios in real time, and it makes adjustments quick and easy and precise.

As requested.... different airplane, but same engine so those of you considering going ELSA might be interested in this... When I bought my RANS it had a 100hp 912uls. Performance was really good considering I live at 6650ft elevation (plane weighed 693 empty then)... but my home strip is 1600ft of dirt and I wanted to be able to fly out of here at gross on a hot day and not be dodging the power lines (at one end, two story house at the other). I also wanted to do some other modifications that would add a few pounds etc. I called and worked with Jay http://zipperbigbore.com/ to get my kit on the way. He was a pleasure to work with, and we still keep in contact. There are several options of kits, and my RANS builder friend who knows Hal and the history on the setup gave me a little back info which was all positive towards the 1484cc versions. The really big bore 1622cc version requires case machining and I was told there had been some issues with that version they were still possibly working out. Anywawy, the kit came quickly and I got to work. It's a pretty easy/straight forward install. Took a day to do, not being in a rush. They give instructions and info on break in etc. All pretty straight forward. The kit knocks like 4 lbs off you engine. The CNC cylinders have better cooling they say, but I have no data to argue that either way. I knew there was a pretty good increase in power right off because I had to add a couple degrees to my prop (68" 3 blade taper tip warp drive at the time) to get the RPM back in a similar area. Take off roll was shortened quite a bit, and climb went up 300 ft a min easy, maybe more. I already had already installed a wideband o2 gauge in the plane, and a hacman leaner and 1 egt. Since then I have installed some MGL avionics instruments, 4 egts, CHT, some other stuff etc. I also added a Rotax airbox and did some custom intake stuff. I've actually had several different intake setups, but that's not really related. Anyway.. when I started modifying the exhaust is when things got interesting. But that is also not really related to the zipper kit. Anyway, I felt I wasnt taking full advantage of the zipper with the small-ish prop, so I bought a 72" KOOL Scimitar 3 blade prob. They are light for their size, have leading edge protection and are fairly affordable. But to do that, I had to put larger tires on...which I wanted to do anyway, as I enjoy the off airport stuff. So I had to modify the nose fork to get a 16.5"x6-6 tire there, and I have 21x8-6s on the mains now. This gave enough clearance for the longer prop. The prop gave another 150 fpm in climb. I have it pitched real fine for take off and climb now. The plane at around 1025lbs take off weight will get airborne in about 200ft or less at 6650ft field elevation by grabbing a handful of flaps and yarding it off the ground at 40mph. I have seen as good as 1200ft / min climb at a very steep angle (60mph) at that same weight between 7500-8500ft altitude. I can't imagine what a monster it would be at sea level. Probably the most amazing and somewhat unexpected change has been economy. The slightly higher compression is probably mostly responsible for this. But even dragging this big tires through the air on a plane that is nowhere near as clean as the CT's I see ~3.75gph at 110+mph indicated cruise. And this is at 5500ish rpm. I have slightly larger main jets in my carbs right now, as somewhat of a precaution because even though the carbs adjust somewhat for altitude, I'm not taking my chances until I can visit low altitude and see for myself. Anyway, it starts good, runs smooth, gets good economy, makes good power, is lighter, and really I don't have anything negative to say about the setup. It costs some bucks, but I don't know how you get could get more performance for less! I'll update this if I think of anything I left out!