Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Chris Aysen on August 5, 2011 at 12:54pm

Jan - I have a 701 and I'm curious as to rather or not you had to modify the 701 in order to maintain CG in check?... I like the sound of the engine and I like the posted specs. I don't plan on getting rid of my 912S but if the situation ever warrants that I will definitely be interested in the Viking.

Chris

Permalink Reply by Jan Eggenfellner on August 5, 2011 at 1:35pm

Here is the weight / ballance report down the page http://www.vikingaircraftengines.com/ZENITH.html

 

We have the battery and hgeader tank behind the seat.

 

Jan

Permalink Reply by Chris Aysen on August 8, 2011 at 11:12am

Thanks Jan - Very good and detailed info. Impressive videos.

Chris

Permalink Reply by Jan Eggenfellner on March 20, 2013 at 2:12pm

What EXACTLY do you mean by that Ben?

No need to speak in riddles.

We are big boys and gals down here. 

Jan 

Viking Aircraft Engines

Permalink Reply by Doug MacDonald on August 6, 2011 at 2:59pm

Question Jan,

Is a stainless steel engine mount a good idea?  It is my understanding that stainless tends to be a bit on the brittle side and does not deal with high stress and vibrations all that well.

 

Otherwise, I saw the 701 and talked to you about it at Oshkosh.  Looks like a good fit.

 

Doug MacDonald

CH-701, NW Ontario, Canada

Permalink Reply by Jan Eggenfellner on August 6, 2011 at 3:37pm

There is a wide selection of stainless steel.  We use seemless type 316L. It is an extra-low carbon version of Type 316 that minimizes harmful carbide precipitation due to welding. Typical uses include exhaust manifolds, furnace parts, heat exchangers, jet engine parts, pharmaceutical and photographic equipment, valve and pump trim, chemical equipment, digesters, tanks, evaporators, pulp, paper and textile processing equipment, parts exposed to marine atmospheres and tubing. Type 316L is used extensively for weldments where its immunity to carbide precipitation due to welding assures optimum corrosion resistance.  Also, the stresses / Vibration level of our short engine mounts are low.

 

Jan

 

Permalink Reply by Geoff Klestadt on August 7, 2011 at 3:57pm

Is there a specific reason for using 316L stainless steel? 316L has about half the yield strength of 4130.

 

4130 is tougher and much more resistant to bending loads, I fail to understand why you would not use it.

 

http://asm.matweb.com/search/SpecificMaterial.asp?bassnum=m4130r

 

http://asm.matweb.com/search/SpecificMaterial.asp?bassnum=MQ316N

 

http://www.aerospacemetals.com/stainless-steel-distributor.html#specs

Permalink Reply by Jan Eggenfellner on August 7, 2011 at 5:28pm

There are so many other reasons to use it than the #'s you list. It has great properties for the job it does, it looks very nice, it will be 100% stronger than one internally rusted through in 50 years, you can clamp to it and bolt to it without scratching or crushing powder coat or paint.  Wow, you don't even have to paint :)  Our mounts are super short, due to the Viking layout and in most instances the longest tube is 8". We run slightly additional diameter wall and it ads only a minuscule amount of weight to our very compact mounts. The Seamless 316L tubing is more expensive. Did you know most 4130 is Chinese? Hard to verify the specs? (However, a lot of Chinese parts have been getting better)

Jan

Permalink Reply by Doug Cole on August 6, 2011 at 9:08pm

Jan,

 

  I have a friend who paid for one of your engines last year and wondered if he would ever get the engine, after many phone calls and frustrations, and false promises.  It finally showed up last month, but minus the computers, and now he wonders how long it will be before he sees them.  What is causing the delays?  How far behind are you on deliveries for engines that have been paid for? 

Permalink Reply by Jan Eggenfellner on August 7, 2011 at 5:17pm

I posted a reply to this. Not sure where it went. That engine was shipped and we are close to sending the latest ECU and fuel pump assembly. He will receive the good stuff, fine tuned by our installations in the 3 aircraft that flew to Oshkosh. He wants to get flying and I appreciate that. He will be a great representative for Viking. We are sorry about the delay of the first engine batch. We are now one week from having shipped everything paid in full, other than some that paid in full to get us going on the next batch of engines. Back log is HUGE but all we are ready to take the challenge head on. 50 sets of parts just started production.

 

Jan

Permalink Reply by John Edwards on February 14, 2013 at 12:23pm

Jan,

 

I do hope you are more successful with the Honda, then you were with the Subaru engine.

Permalink Reply by Jan Eggenfellner on February 14, 2013 at 8:02pm

I had my Subaru in my RV-6A for about 7 years.  VERY successful and lots of flying.  Cruised at over 200 mph and had no bad habits.  

The Viking engine has nothing to do with the Subaru.  They are completely different engines, developed at different times, with different goals and for a different mission.  

The Subaru was all about being able to fly, for the least amount of money.  The Viking is all about delivering the best possible quality, for a reasonable amount of money.  

Different time, altogether.

We are now getting ready to fly to NH after this weekend.  Will be a great trip in a fantastic CH-750 air-frame and with a Viking, all hot liquid operated heater, cranking out heat at 12,000 ft.  

Jan

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• Next ›
• Page