Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Bob McDonald on April 5, 2013 at 6:20am

If possible fly it, you should see 800 - 1100 fpm climb and 80 mph cruise airspeed. The air cooled Jabiru 2200 is not the best engine for the CH701. Under powered and prone to over heating in the high drag low air speed CH701 airframe. Fly in a CH701 with a Rotax 912 series engine and make your seat of the pants comparison.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Streat on April 5, 2013 at 3:03pm

Thanks Bob, I had heard the Jabiru not nearly as reliable as Rotax, quieter lighter cheaper though. I'd put a chute in  it. When i made the original offer I thought it was a 2006 engine and aircraft, made the post above yesterday after I found out its a rather old Jabiru when I got the aircraft manual by  hard mail subsequent to making offer on it. Its +4 -2 in the aircraft manual but +6 -3 on Zenair webpage which worried me too. Another thing that worried me is airspeed indicator top of green arc shows "80" whereas flight manual states 60kt maneuver speed, I assume the "80" airspeed indicator is knots and even if it were 80 mph, its placarded wrong for 60kt maneuver speed, which worried me as the aircraft may have been flown in turbulance for many of its 400hrs at too high a speed. I am booked to travel 5 hours in friends plane to look at it in two days but changing my mind now while I do my due diligence on it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kevin Collins on April 6, 2013 at 2:04am

kind of doubt that it's been cruised at 80kt's i be thinking thats just about top s/l speed with the jab, another thing to take in to consideration is the actual a/c history and i dont recall anything nasty happening to this machine.i do think you would have to be pretty ham fisted to break a 701 they be pretty tough

i'm thinking the price reflects the fact that it's not a rotax powered machine.I'm flying the only 582 powered 701 in the country and i love it, would i like a 912? maybe ! the 582 in a light machine go's like a scalded cat and no where near the investment that i would have with the 912, what it means to me is that i'm flying instead of saving for some dream machine.

 I guess it comes down to is will it do what you want reliably, and i suspect that it will, Shafid sems to have been everywhere, done everything in it. but your expectations may be different from mine and in the end it has to suit "you" i would think the best gauge of how it will suit is to fly it. cheers, Colly. zk-JRT .

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ralph Sanson on April 6, 2013 at 5:25am

I have the 2200, so a bit biased, having rejected  the 912 for various reasons..... 

Vno where the yellow arc on the airspeed starts is 74 kts (78 kts for the CZAW airframes) and without a supercharger the 2200 is not going to pull it that fast. Also dont expect more than 600 fpm climbout on an average day. I wouldnt put too much concern on this lack of 'performance' compared to a 912 - after all its a landing limited airplane and the Jab engines - and the 582 - break ground faster IMHO. If you wanted a fast plane its not going to be a 701 no matter what engine.

Mine is a 2003 engine and at 440 hrs doing OK - it will need some work in the next 100 hrs because the oil blowby has increased but I think it has faired much better than the 'average' reports for the Jabiru series of engines. A lot would depend on what upgrades that early serial engine has had - most by now would have the large finned heads fitted - basically if it is upgraded to the specs of serials 700 - 1700 there is little to be concerned with. Zenith did not recommend the 2200 back in 2003, hardly anyone did until Jab USA marketed them for the Zenairs and now they are accepted as a viable choice. I had no issues with cooling or anything and just enjoy the flying, the whole point of the 701 if you have an engine problem it would probably parachute in safer than an actual chute! I'm not making this up, there is a characteristic with the lighter 701s where under power off, full aft elevator, they glide with control but at a faster descent rate than a normal glide approach. 

I think i've just said about the same as Colly - your mileage may vary

Ralph. ZK-ZAR

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kevin Collins on April 7, 2013 at 1:57am

Hi Ralph - have to agree with a lot of what you say, the 701 is possibly the last airplane i'd mount a ballistic chute on for just the reasons you mention, far better to fly it to the ground.

 I think also your on the button with airspeeds and rare of climb, when i read what others get out of their machines i am impressed, I took jrt  out for a spin this morning and she climbed out at 980 fpm which is about as good as it gets (all i can see at that angle/rate of climb is sky) hot and high days will halve that.

my cruise is 63 knots, economical cruise / stooge around mode 60 knots. i bought a 701 because i love flying and getting into the back country, not so interested in going places, if i had i would have bought a faster more efficient airplane. i like the handling and load space of the 701, I like that i can peg it out when in the boonies and i dont have to worry about the fabric deteriorating (or cows eating it)

I had never flown a 701 before i got JRT, it has done every thing i ask of it and more, put a smile on my face every time i climb out and put her away sending me home buzzing and you can't ask a lot more than that.

Pretty sure most owners would feel the same, Cheers Colly.

p.s.also big respect to the builder he deserves a mention for making such a fine machine - thanks Julian.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Doug Cole on April 7, 2013 at 1:07pm

I have a ballistic chute in my 701, not for engine failures (which are extremely rare) but for mid-air collisions which unfortunately are more and more common.  I have lost 4 friends in the last 25 years to 4 different mid-air collisions, and another friend just this last year collided with another aircraft that crashed with 4 fatalities, but he made it back to the airport. I haven't ever lost a friend to an engine failure.  Just adding my 2 cents.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim Cates on February 25, 2018 at 9:55am

Have an opportunity to buy a 2003 2200.....SN# 1572.  Does this engine have the larger cooling fins....Intend to use in my CH701

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Austin on April 6, 2013 at 9:42am

Hi Chris,

 

You probably know this, but there is wealth of information about the 2200 on the jabiruengines group on Yahoo.

 

John

N750A

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Streat on April 7, 2013 at 3:19am

First I love the Zenair concept and still want to get one.

Thanks John for link to Yahoo Group Jabiru.

Kevin I've flown hang gliders for 38 years always with chutes & don't want to stop now, last funeral for a dear old friend in microlight with no chute was only 3 years ago in CHCH , two former flatmates, and a good mate in Motueka a few years back who had two young girls.. I used to fly with two chutes actually after meeting Eric Raymond and he told me how one snagged on him. I got to realising the 701 losses it baggage allowance if chute installed, 750 much better load. On the green arc airspeed error of 80kts should be 60kt, I am not assured the aircraft KHA has not been over speed in turbulence on decent, or that the tough old 701 can take a 20kt increase in VA maneuver speed which roughly increases forces by 50% due to the velocity squaring forces, especially on a regular cumulative basis in a country like NZ with high winds and lots of mountains. Sure it may not have been.By way of example there were numerous failures of 601's (on wikipedia) which was largely put down to over speed and over loading, or was it flutter? I googled the old 1997 Jabiru and got this link at top of list jabirucrash.com which had very very unflattering things to say about the old Jabiru engines, including claims that Jabiru were changing their engines and not re certifying them, lack of accident reporting, and the purported LAME that built the aircraftt in discussion there (not the one I looked at) was not a LAME, but he was head of AOPA AUSTRALIA. Issues now sorted on newer Jabiru engines I hear. I called the Jabiru factory, the 1997 engine in the CH701 I was looking at with 400 hours has $500 trade in value in Australia, then they throw them away. I negotiated a price on a 2006 aircraft thinking it had 2006 or about engines. It didnt, it was a 1997 engine. Buying it appeared to be a financial and personal safety lottery whether the 1997 engine would make TBO. If the engine has nil value, its not worth paying $45kNZ for the airframe, I'd be better to get a 750kit. Back to drawing board for me, and I note the seller of KHA back on market without engine year in the ads!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kevin Collins on April 7, 2013 at 4:44am

can't fault your reasoning, so you think you will build a 750? now is a good time to buy with the exchange rate as it is.

always the spectre of death with aviation, I lost a long time flying buddy in january (westport). always a reminder to play it safe as practicable,

Cheers, Colly.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Streat on April 7, 2013 at 2:05pm

do you know someone good who could build a 750 in NZ Colly? Did you build yours Colly, where you at? I used to be a tradesman, now I'm a civil engineer (Land Surveyor) but i prefer flying to building. Those 801's look good too, I've got a PPL so no hassles with that. See 801's for sale at 60-70kUS low hours which is 100k NZ landed with GST.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kevin Collins on April 8, 2013 at 4:20am

I'm located in Fairlie, my 701 built by Julian Thornton in hamilton.  I would love to build a new 701 for myself but busy working on a rans s7 for a guy in england and doing some painting for russel brodie on his s7(long term project) plus i'm busy at work restoring a 38 ford v8 pickup for a customer in Invercargill, getting toward the end of that thankfully, so busy busy but make time to fly when i can. where you located? thinking back to the woodbury weekend some talking to some one who mentioned your name, cant remember what about it may have been about 701's, talked to so many people it's all a jumble.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page