Jump to content

912iS Fanatic

Members
  • Posts

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location
    CA
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

594 profile views
  1. Roger you commented on this pretty extensively on the rotaxowner forum. You also seem to be up on the prop and spinner balancing criticality for all versions, perhaps this is best for you to address. My ownership of the iS has been a positive experience.
  2. The gearbox upgrade was installed in mine over 18 months ago, it was paid for by Rotax and we saw no evidence of wear but did the upgrade anyway.
  3. Tom, you’re right about mixture control; need to take my own advice on off topic hearsay and my caveat about being beyond my experience base. This is the best written section of the FAA’s LSA rules that I should’ve re-read. https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/airplane_handbook/media/18_afh_ch16.pdf
  4. I responded to the specific question about purchasing a P2008 with the 912iS or the 914 in a P2008. For that question I’m a firm advocate of the injected engine. Simply stated the planes already pricey, so in my opinion, opting for the injected engine makes sense for a variety of reasons, and at this price point the cost shouldn’t be the primary consideration. In terms of the CS prop, as I understand it, there is only one solution for US-LSA’s being evaluated, and that is for a single lever control, and only the iS engines are able to interface with this system. The single lever requirement is what caused the altitude compensated carbs to be implemented versus a mixture control so it is likely the FAA will remain steadfast on this requirement. This is beyond my experience base so will leave that debate to the forum. Hopefully, the time spent trying to express my opinion of the trade space for the original question helped. I’ll leave this forum to the CT crowd who know that very capable airframe.
  5. I’ve been flying a P2008 with the 912iS for over 3 1/2 years out of CA, in the mountains. The engine is by far the most reliable Rotax ever made. Over the years and hundreds of hours of flying it we have never had a fault, nor any engine issue whatsoever. The 912iS with the sport upgrade sips fuel (<3.5 gph), and maintains at least 110 KIAS through 12,000 MSL. In our family we have also had two 912ULS powered planes, and one 914. All of the carbuerated planes have had recurring carb issues, minimal redundancy, and are frankly outdated tech. When single lever constant speed (CS) props become available, hopefully late this year, only the iS engines will be eligible since they are full fadec engines, that means only the 912iS or 915iS. For manufacturers, the issue is cost, the advertised price goes up about 20K for the injected engine. The injected engines have/require among other things metal fuel lines, high pressure filters, and provide substantially more electrical power along with over 27 engine sensors and dual redundant Engine Control Units (ECU). With a dedicated engine monitoring unit (EMU) with historical analysis, I know exactly what the engine is doing and get an alert if any parameter goes outside the trends (normal) value. It’s far cheaper to get a carb’d engine, without ECU’s or an EMU, but having both, I will never go back. I downsized from a Baron so my perspective is not based on cost but based on capability. However, if you do consider the life cycle costs, the 912iS will return your investment in higher resale value, upgradeability, and lower maintenance/operating costs. In terms of power, our 912iSc sport engined P2008 climbs out of Mammoth Lakes on a 90 degree day, with full tanks, two on board, one bag, at 1000fpm at 80KIAS. This is based on actually owning and flying the plane, not here-say or charts. There has been much made of “early issues” with the 912iS. In all cases it has been the install, not the engine. Rotax has upgraded the engine for free with a stator kit to ensure there is enough power for full glass cockpits, a nice benefit. The 912iS requires a more robust installation, as mentioned, things like metal fuel lines which require exact fits, unlike rubber hose, but it also requires the sensor tiedown kit, which is a few hundred dollar kit, with sensor specific tie downs to eliminate false alarms due to sensor vibration. Many of the early installs didnt have this, mine didn’t so we immediately added it and this is likely why we have had zero faults. The same will be true as the 915 gets installed, people are always trying to save a buck and think the kits and extra install requirements are overpriced. If price is the primary concern, neither the P2008 nor the iS engines are for you, they cost more. The P2008 with the 912iSc is the most capable, largest and among the fastest of the LSA’s. With the CS prop on it, it will likely be the fastest of all of the LSA’s and the fit, finish and refinement of this airplane is beyond compare. It’s expensive but in this case you get what you pay for and given the comfort, performance and reliability, it’s well worth it for us. At this stage of the LSA market, buying a carb’d Rotax is truly short sighted in my view. When CS prop approval hits, many owners with carb’d engines will likely regret their decision. 2 cents worth from an owner, I’d say buy the 912iS or wait until the 915 is available, avoid the old tech dual carb’d engines regardless of cost.
×
×
  • Create New...