Alan - your comments are very tempting! I too would like to enjoy all
of the performance of the 914 but again here are my drawbacks:
1. I have called three Rotax repair facilities and none of them have
dealt with the 914 becase none of their customers own one so they do
not have experience in dealing with it. They cant give me any record
of reliability. However, they have lots of experience with the 912 and
the 912S and they praise the reliabilty.
2. Being a turbo engine, it is inherently complex and therefore, I
would assume have more chances to fail. Now I also would assume that a
failed turbo engine could still fly but with 912 power until I could
land it. That's a guess on my part but if it did fail, I'm sure it
would cost a ton to fix it! Plus who could fix it locally (NY state
area).
3. Everyone I spoke to that has a turbo said that its finicky and
needs alot more maintenance checking..especially if the plane sits for
long intervals.
4. One owner of the turbo said that he loved the performance but hated
the tinkering and maintenance. He said he would of installed a 912S if
he could do it all over again because he said he's pilot, not a
mechanic.
5. Finally, its alot of money for 15 hp and high altitude flying
capability. Again, I would spend the money if I felt comfortable about
the reliability and maintenance of this engine. I haven't heard any
feedback from people with this engine as it relates to reliablity.
Regardes,
Richard
<alan@kestrel-insurance.com> wrote:
>
> Fred
> I don't want to start a war or anything here. So I will qualify this by
> saying THIS IS PURELY MY PERSONAL OPINION...having flown several
> versions of Europa with all three rotax engines I chose the 914 turbo.
> In the last 2yrs it has behaved perfectly and always had an excess of
> power for almost any situation. I cannot rate it high enough. I do not
> know of anyone who has fitted it having anything but praise for it. Now
> that says it all to me. The guys who recommend other engines don't
> usually have a 914 themselves so cannot really appreciate the brilliance
> of this little engine. Fit the 914 you will be glad you did..!
>
> Alan
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fred R.
> Klein
> To: europa-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: What engine for my Europa?
>
> --> <fklein@orcasonline.com>
>
> on 11/6/04 12:50 PM, Richard Sementilli at rsementi@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > --> <rsementi@gmail.com>
> >
> > I am down to 3 choices for an engine for my Europa.
> > 1. Rotax 912S
> > 2. Rotax 914
> > 3. Jabiru 3300
> >
> > I would like to get objective opinions and actual experiences from
> > anyone about the pro's and cons of each engine. My first choice is the
>
> > 914 because of the all around performance but more than the huge
> > price, I am worried about the complexity of the engine as it relates
> > to maintenance and overall reliability. I have spoken to a few
> > mechanics for Rotax but none of them have any experience with the 914
> > turbo. They all say to keep it simple and go with the 912 or the 3300.
>
> > I agree but I'm willing to stretch that goal if feel that I could
> > handle the burden of its complexity. My most probable choice would be
> > the 912S because it seems I can get great performance (the same or
> > better than the Jabiru 3300) with relative ease of operation and
> > mainenance, lighter weight, and comparable price to the Jabiru. I've
> > even found a mechanic that is near (2 hours away) to my location.
> > However, to the best of my research, it is still a more complicated
> > engine and drive unit than the simple low reving Jabiru. It needs pump
>
> > gas almost always, which may not be easy to come by during cross
> > country flights. The Jabiru is the least expensive, most simple
> > design, seems easier to maintain, and is direct drive. However, it's
> > less proven, heavier and I can't find any repair facilities in the NY
> > tristate area. Am I missing any other engine possibilities that could
> > be even a better choice?
> >
>
> I forward the following at the request of Alex Bowman, amhd@shaw.ca
>
> Fred
> A194
>
> Your pros & cons re the available engines for the Europa were
> beautifully discribed. Three years ago, I too, was facing this
> canundrum. I discussed the problem with Keith Wilson while at Europa's
> home base in Yorkshire 1999, but he was not helpful. May I add to your
> cons re the Jabiru 3300? It achieves its 120 HP at an R.P.M. much too
> high for a propellor to be efficient.
>
> My final choice was a CAM 125 (Honda) developed by Firewall Forward,
> Sidney, B.C. On the con side, it is heavy. As delivered it weighed 247
> lbs. With care 17 ibs. were removed from the engine; this included
> parts of the casting pertinent only to automobiles. A smaller 35 amp
> alternator was used. I believe that the reduction unit could be reduced
> by 20 lbs. at least. A friend who has been most helpful in this
> conversion has designed a lighter version of this unit.
>
> On the pro side: We have an engine that produces 130 HP; it has
> VTech; has the legendary reliability of the Honda engine; great fuel
> economy and it uses automobile fuel.
>
> The deciding factor in the choice of this engine was that it was a
> four in line cylinder arrangement. We were able to move the engine
> towards the firewall, between the foot wells. In other words, the C of
> G of the CAM 125 is 5.5" closer to the firewall than the C of G of the
> Rotax 914. My Europa carries no lead except the lead in the battery and
> in the flight control mass balances. The battery was moved rearward by
> approx. 30".
>
> We designed a cooling system for this engine untilizing two motorcycle
> radiators and carefully crafted ducts and exits to reduce drag and still
> provide adequate cooling. To me, this is the most satisfying portion of
> our input; this has been very successful, and light.
>
> My first flight was in May 04. My only snags were - an intermittant
> transponder and friction between the inner aspect of the ailerons and
> the flaps, in the clean configuration. My preliminary performance
> figures were derived without the use of a GPS. Now I have a Garmin 295
> and will crunch real numbers. An incident on my way to Arlington,
> Washington in July 04 caught me like a startled fawn. The throttle
> linkage fractured while over the Gulf Islands. Fortunately we had done
> "what ifs" in the design phase of our conversion, and had spring loaded
> the throttle butterfly to the full throttle position. The nearest
> airport was 20 miles to the stern. The incident happened at 2,500'
> south east bound. Before the 180 degree turn was completed, the
> indicated airspeed exceeded 200 mph. The landing was without incident,
> but I noted that the propeller (Airmaster) stopped with the ignition off
> when the gear and flaps were extended at 90 mph. My son was with me, on
> his first flight, and was quiet, watching things unfold - but not
> crumple.
>
> Our flaw was the design of our throttle linkage - Honda knew better.
> We acquiesed, and replaced the design with Honda's. The throttle
> corrections have been completed, and I'll fly solo until I'm certain all
> is well.
>
> In a previous career, I was the senior engineering flight test pilot
> for the Royal Canadian Airforce at Canadair Ltd, Cartierville, Quebec.
> No military aircraft that I flew had less snags than my wonderful
> Europa.
>
> Alex Bowman amhd@shaw.ca
>
> P.S. in 2002 this engine cost $12,000. US
>
> P.S. An in-flight photo can be seen on the Matronics Photoshare site,
> posted Oct. 23, '04,1852656-R1-018-7A.jpg
>
>
>
|