Zenith Aircraft Builders and Flyers
Online Community of Zenith Builders and Flyers
We ordered an AeroMomentum AM15 engine!
We finally decided on an engine: We ordered an AeroMomentum AM15!
The engine is offered as a standard version with 117 hp @ 5800 rpm or 132 hp @ 6500 rpm, very similar to the Viking 130, which we were also considering. AeroMomentum however advertises only the 117 hp @ 5800, as this is the rpm at which Rotax engines make max. power and because they believe that pilots do not want to have their engines screaming at 6500 rpm.
AeroMomentum also offers a beefed up version, which makes, as indicated on their website, 131 hp @ 5800 rpm and 147 hp @ 6500.
We decided to go with the standard, low profile, 117 / 132 hp version, as we didn't feel like spending another $3,500 for the additional 14 horses the beefed up version would provide. Another reason was, that the more powerful version contains custom made pistons and some other modifications. If we ever need spare parts, they will probably be easier to obtain for the stock version.
All engines are delivered with a dynamometer print out with the individual engine's torque and power curve. Pretty impressive and I believe unique in the industry!
I also like that AeroMomentum uses only brand new Suzuki engines, which have a very good track record in automotive applications and which are very popular, particularly in Asia and Europe.
Mark, the owner, said that he has been selling these engines for over 10 years to jet- and airboat customers. Most of them permanently run their engines full throttle.
The highest time engine accumulated over 4,000 hours without any issues, in a permanent full-throttle fishing net towing application. When the engine needed replacing, mainly due to poor maintenance, they even continued to use the original transmission. Very impressive, particularly considering that he is promoting his engines with a TBO of only 1,500 hrs.
I also like that the AM15 engine is only a little bit heavier than a 100 hp Rotax 912iS, but almost 40 pounds (!!) lighter than the Viking 130. AeroMomentum also advices against the installation of a header tank, what will save same additional weight, compared to the Viking, and also make the installation less complex.
Ultimately, the main reasons to choose AeroMomentum were the relatively low weight, good power, that they have been selling their engines for over 10 years to airboat customers, the attractive price and the very good impression I had of Mark, the owner. He always responded fast and detailed to my e-mails and was very patient and friendly on the phone. When I met him and Lilli, the lady who is handling the sales, at Airventure, my good impression was confirmed: Super friendly, humble and (we felt) honest.
They are still working on the firewall forward kit, we agreed to be Beta customers. We expect to receive the firewall forward kit, minus the cowling, in September. The engine is supposed to be delivered in October, the cowling towards the end of the year.
Very exciting!
HomebuiltHelp has a nice interview with Mark on his YouTube channel: https://youtu.be/xWOj5_0DoQI
Their website: http://aeromomentum.com/
Oliver
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Oliver Reik on
-
Jan,
As always, I appreciate your detailed feedback.
No question, the Honda is the more modern engine. All the modern features however also add complexity and weight. The weight difference was the main reason why we went with AeroMomentum instead of Viking, I however also prefer the reduced complexity of the Suzuki engine. In an automotive application the Suzuki will certainly be inferior to the Honda, I however don't think that this will be the case in an aircraft.
What I find a bit hairbrow rising, though, are your disparaging comments about tha Suzuki engine, which have nothing to do with the technical features of the engine. I also understand that Suzuki is one of the few companies who is selling crate engines to third parties. The crate engines they are selling may or may not have the same specs as those in the Suzuki cars. The reference to Wikipedia therefore isn't of much value.
You are saying that Honda is intentionally giving up lower end performance in their Honda Fits and that you are able to make better use of it. Frankly I don't see why Honda should do this.
I also understand that you believe that AeroMomentum's engines do not make the advertised power, even though each of their engines comes with a dyno test protocol. I believe you are aware that "tweaked" test reports would be considered fraud and that this would make them vulnerable to lawsuits, which would most likely shut their entire business down? I think this would be a very risky strategy, I am therefore convinced that the numbers on their website are correct.
At the same time, as you are questioning AeroMomentum 's numbers, you expect your customer's to trust your performance numbers, which are significantly off from what Honda is posting on their website. Hmmmm... ;-)
We hope to be flying next year. I am excited to see how our CruZer will perform against the other available engines on the market, particularly the Viking and the Jabiru, in which we were also interested in.
Oliver
-
-
So, since you are virtually stating that AeroMomentum is lying, but that we should trust you, even though your engines do not come with individual dyno test protocols, I think you should underpin your argument.
So - how did you lower max. power by over 1,000 rpm and why do you think chose Honda not to do that?
While I never cared if Viking engines really make the published numbers, as the demonstrated performance of the Viking 130 in your videos is certainly impressive, I am now getting really curious...
-
Permalink Reply by Jim Cates on
-
It would appear that the reason Suzuki stopped selling cars in the US has little to do with engine technology. https://blog.caranddriver.com/suzuki-ends-u-s-car-sales-why-it-had-...
-
Permalink Reply by Mark Kettering on
-
Hi Jan,
I think that is great that you are active on this site and supporting your and Zenith customers. I am sorry that I am taking so long to help clear things up but I have been very busy.
"A seriously old designed engine block" While the Suzuki G series block is well proven it was very advanced when introduced and has underwent many advancements including a completely new manufacturing method.
"No fancy cylinder head design allowing high compression on pump gas" Actually the heads we use do have a "fancy" high turbulence design with a squish and quench band to allow high compression on pump gas.
"No variable valve timing" No we don't have it and you don't want it for aircraft. The reason for VVT is to make good low end power and still have good high end power. Since we all operate aircraft engines in a relatively narrow band we just use a cam that is perfect for that band. So all the VVT adds is weight and complexity without any benefit in an aircraft. If we wanted VVT we would use the Suzuki M series engines.
"No dual cam design" Actually there are DOHC heads for the G series engines. But they add weight and with an aircraft weight is more important than the benefits if any.
"An old style cam belt" Actually cam chains are the old style and have been around for 100+ years. Belts got a bad reputation since many engines were interference so if the belt broke you wrecked the engine. Our engines are non interference so this does not wreck the engine and modern belts are much better than they were 30 years ago. So far our longest time belt went over 4000 hours. The new trend is actually back to belts but wet. The belt system is much lighter weight. For example an aluminum belt cover is about 10+ lbs. Our belt cover is just ounces.
"No coil-on-plug ignition" COP is great and the better method.
"No direct injection" GDI is great for low power emissions and economy but has lots of issues at the power settings we use. The major issue with GDI is carbon build up on the intake valves and this can actually destroy the engine in a fairly short time if you are unlucky. Of course Suzuki has this on their Boosterjet series of engines but due to the problems of all GDI engines in aircraft use this is a poor choice so we do not use these. Toyota/Lexus actually use a dual system with GDI at low rpm and port injection at high RPM.
"100 hp" We offer engines from 75hp to well over 200hp Some are Suzuki G series and some are not. Keep in mind that the numbers you see on "Wikipedia" do not represent all of the versions Suzuki makes and are more what they used to sell into the USA market. More current versions have different parts, configurations and power. For example the US versions of the G13bb had a 40mm throttle body and more current versions have 45mm or 50.8mm (2"). The heads, cam, intake, fuel injection, etc are different. We have our own in house dynometer and have spent many hours making sure we produce the power we publish and at the RPM we publish.
"No special internal engine coatings" Coatings are a great thing and we use them on our high performance versions. At best they are good for 1% to 1.5% more power. The main reason the piston side coating is used on the Honda FIT engine is that engine has a very long stroke and fairly short rods so there are very high side forces on the pistons. The G series engines that we use have shorter stroke and better geometry so do not produce the high side forces.
Honda makes great engines. The main issue with the FIT engine is it is just too heavy (40 lbs more than the G15) for it's displacement due to all of the features that are great for cars but not useful or wanted for aircraft.
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to clear things up a bit. I hope I did not miss your points.
Mark
-
-
Jan, I started this thread to share my experience with AeroMomentum - you posted a page long bragging article about how stupid my choice was and how great your solution is, badmouthing AeroMomentum.
Mark from AeroMomentum posted a measured and very detailed response to your claims - you posted a entirely pointless, pretty much content free video of a customer who upgraded from a Viking 110 to a Viking 130.
In another thread, somebody wanted to discuss pros and cons of header tanks - you claimed that a header tank is a must and that it has to be from Viking
Sorry to say this, Jan, but your never ending cheap marketing makes you look bad and I know for a fact that I am not the only one who is tired of how you abuse the forum as your sales platform.
What would you think if others would post in each and every of your many Viking threads how inferior you engine packages are? You don't even try to engage in any discussions or accept criticism, but instead claim that Viking is perfect, while offering very little technical detail and that everything else is outdated technology.
The Viking 130 has, like everything, its pros and cons (quite a few actually) and is certainly NOT a bulletproof Honda engine anymore, as most critical components have been replaced by your solution and as it was brought to the market with no / minimal testing. Most Viking 130s still seem to be very low time or not in the air at all. Only future will tell how reliable they will actually be in the long term.
It also makes me cringe when I see that people with minimal technical knowledge believe in your "it's a Honda" slogan, not understanding that they buy a complex EXPERIMENTAL engine package. Just think about the crashed Zenith with the Viking 130. While I doubt the pilot's claim that the engine ran too lean, it is a fact, confirmed by Viking, that the ECU had to be replaced multiple times due to sudden stoppages / start problems. Heck, you didn't even shy away from selling your first turbocharged customer engine to a guy who wants to put it in a CH801, who is planning to carry his family in it and who naively seems to believe that he bought Honda reliability!
Jan, I am tired of this. Please stop posting in this thread. And - full disclosure - I will report you to the admin, as I believe that your behavior discourages others to discuss other engines or even problems with a Viking.
-
Permalink Reply by Loren Warner on
-
Jan’s post today seems to merely be a response to Mark Ketterings lengthy post directed at him a few hours earlier. Seems your irritation should be with Mark, not Jan.
-
-
Mark's post was, in my opinion, a detailed and polite response to Jan's long post from August 28, 2017 at 8:52pm, in which he pretty much told me that I'm an idiot for not choosing a Viking and in which he made an argument of how inferior the AeroMomentum engine is.
http://www.zenith.aero/xn/detail/2606393:Comment:585774
I started this thread to share my experiences with the AeroMomentum engine. I did not want AeroMomentum to post in my thread and most certainly didn't want Jan to hijack it with his aggressive and misleading marketing!
Jan also badmouthes other companies like Continental - this is absolutely unacceptable and would certainly not be tolerated in too many other forums.
-
-
Our AeroMomentum engine is ready! I actually heard it running. Pretty exciting!
One minor thing, though, the engine mount is apparently still not perfectly right. I understand that the engine attachment points are not exactly per spec, what makes it hard to tighten the bolts. Mark still wants to send it to us, so that we can see if it generally fits. We will later get another one, which is in accordance with the design.
I am seriously impressed by Mark's business ethics, as he still could have sold us the mount: It works, just not exactly a desired. Since we agreed to be the CH750 beta testers, we'll gladly give mount #1 a try. The correct mount will already arrive shortly after.
When I told him, that I actually do not yet have use for the engine, if I would later have to replace the mount again and that we are also not far enough with our build, he immediately suggested that he can keep it in his shop until we need it.
He furthermore suggested, that we will then also not need the parts of the firewall forward kit, which will be bolted to the engine and that we therefore also do not yet have to pay for them!
I have a really good feeling about working with AeroMomentum and hope that the engine will be just as good.
I asked him to ship the firewall forward kit during the first week of January. We should be ready for the engine by March.
-
-
Considering an AM13 for my CH701. Have you completed and flown your Zenith and what are your thoughts on the AM15
-
-
Jim,
We still have quite a bit of work to do until we can fly our Zenith. Realistically, it will take us another year or so. We're currently working on the second wing, which is the last major part of the airframe. Next we'll have to install the engine, the avionics and paint the thing.
I asked AeroMomentum to ship the engine only a few days ago, as we weren't quite ready for it yet.
I'll keep this thread updated...
-
Permalink Reply by John Austin on
-
Forum Moderator's Note:
We have a very difficult situation here: There have been several responses by Mr. Jan Eggenfellner/Viking Engines in this thread. Most forum members tell me they want unbiased discussions and don't want to be "sold" something. Obviously, Mr. Eggenfellner/Viking Engines is biased - who wouldn't be if they were in the business of selling aircraft engines?
On the other hand, Mr. Eggenfellner/Viking Engines is a legitimate Zenith builder and flyer and therefore has a right to participate in these forums. After much deliberation and consultation, it was decided that perhaps the best compromise was to provide a "Viking Forum" where Mr. Eggenfellner/Viking Engines could respond to posts and within that forum supply supplementary promotional material such as photos, videos, performance comparison charts, etc.
The AeroMomentum is obviously a competitive engine to Mr. Eggenfellner's/Viking Engines' product. I have therefore deleted all comments by Mr. Eggenfellner in this thread - if he wants to address points made in this thread, he can do so in the Viking Forum as he was requested to do when the Viking Forum was initiated. I apologize for any disruption in the train-of-thought created by deleting his comments.
If we can't have some measure of fairness and unbiased discussion, the next step will be to totally ban vendors from these forums. I would also like to point out that there is a standing offer for any engine vendor to have the privilege of a forum dedicated to their product.
Although I have a hard-and-fast rule that I immediately contact anyone that has a post that I must delete so as to explain why and what I did, I will from this point forward delete without explanation anything that I consider of a commercial or biased nature that is being posted by a commercial vendor.
Thanks to all for your cooperation and understanding,
John
Zenith.aero Forum Moderator
-
-
This discussion started as a member / builder was simply stating which engine he decided to go with for his build and share that information with other fellow builders. How did that in itself become a commercial post?
To be clear, Oliver's topic and posts weren't commercial!
John
New from Zenith:
Classified listing for buying or selling your Zenith building or flying related stuff...
Custom Instrument Panels
for your Zenith:
Custom instrument panels are now available directly from Zenith Aircraft Company exclusively for Zenith builders and owners. Pre-cut panel, Dynon and Garmin avionics, and more.
Zenith Homecoming Tee:
Flying On Your Own Wings:
A Complete Guide to Understanding Light Airplane Design, by Chris Heintz
Builder & Pilot Supplies:
Pro Builder Assistance:
Transition training:
Aircraft Spruce & Specialty for all your building and pilot supplies!
How to videos from HomebuiltHELP.com
Developed specifically for Zenith builders (by a builder) these videos on DVD are a great help in building your own kit plane by providing practical hands-on construction information. Visit HomebuiltHelp.com for the latest DVD titles.
© 2024 Created by Zenith.Aero.
Powered by
