new viking 110 -- honda fit core conversion

39 posts in this topic

Posted

i've been following this new conversion by the well known, sub converter, jan eggenfeldner.  this time he's using the honda fit core with mods to make it airworthy, using all his knowledge from the sub experience.  he's located his factory in central fla & seems to be doing really well. he began shipping engines back in early 2012 & now has flying machines from several big kit sellers (incl just ac  & kitfox which are very similar to the avid design. )  he just added an all metal kitplane from new zealand (i think), that seems also to be related to the avid design, with folding wing.  visit his web site for all kinds of vids & info.  if i were ready to buy an engine for my fat avid i think it would be jan's viking. seems a good fit for the larger plus size. jan had a display at sun n fun.  fyi.  john bowman, prvlle, la.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I am so warry of Eggenfeldner that I would buy an engine from the Devil before buying anything from him!

Dave Johnson was making this conversion before he died.

There is another outfit making this same conversion, and I would buy theirs instead.

This might be a good conversion, but it is a lot heavier than the Soob, which is heavier than a C-90 or O-200, which is heavier than a 912, which is heavier than a 2-cycle .... Well, you get the message on that.

I have my reasons - and I don't know the man, but I know the reputations of his engines, and IMO, it is not good.

my 2cents worth.

ED in MO

Edited by Ed In Missouri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

+2. Well said, Ed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Ed - are you sure about the "a lot heavier than the Soob" issue? I don't recall seeing that?

 

In any event, I think we live somewhere in the same neighborhood near the intersection of Stubborn and Skeptical Streets. More importantly, if someone takes me on a one way ride down Brown Alley after I've trusted them, there's about -zero- likelihood you'll ever see the two of us together again short of a fist fight.

 

That said, the following retort to comments very similar to yours (copy 'n paste from TKF forums) softened my stance on Jan somewhat, particularly since I really, really want the Honda engine conversion to succeed. We desperately need more options that don't cost $20k+ to keep the homebuilders in the game. And while I might not be ready to plunk down my cash yet, like John, I think this engine could make for a good Avid+ FWF.

 

Of course, anyone going this route with Jan's (or anyone's) auto conversion needs to keep in mind that it's not just the difficulties associated with the engine install itself, lots of other risks to consider vs. a tried and true turnkey install and manufacturer. Safe to say I still know a lot of happy Sube drivers in spite of Jan's past history and the lack of current turnkey Sube FWF's. I hope the E10 87 Octane lovin' 100hp EFI Honda finds an equal level of success!

 

The way I see it.....this is no different than most of the small businesses throughout our country. How many of those owners had "perfect" success in their first ventures? Most all my really good friends are all small/medium business owners, and ALL of them had many failures on their way to real success....this is just a natural part of business building imo. How many small/medium/large corporations that you deal with on a daily basis had store closings, product failures, or bad customer service, before they finally achieved a level of business competence (that was finally to your satisfaction)?

If I buy an engine from Jan, it is very very obvious to me I am not buying an engine from Rotax.....I should know that at the start and accept that reality. I am not saying that I should expect to be ripped off (buying an engine from Jan) but I should realize he is not capitalized or as well established (in many levels....engineering, support, experience, etc) like Rotax is. These facts though do not automatically mean Jan will fail again with the Viking engine line....he may actually have a very strong and sound engine offering in his new line.

For a good point of reference....go see what Soichiro Honda had to go through as he built and failed, and built and failed, many times before he grew a large company with great success. Buying products from a new company has inherent risks that people must accept imo, or they are just not being realistic in their overall due diligence.

Edited by dholly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Doug,

I will certainly go back and recheck the numbers for you. I believe I posted the weight on this before - maybe when talking to SuberAvid - Havent taken my memory pills this morning, but believe the advertised weight was around 210? - 215? - well, it could be more - you know that the advertizers usually try to make it lighter than the actual installation - that's how they sell engines.

I think I have this in Kitplanes mag for this year. Will check and post later on.

I have wished for an alternative for the E-81, since all the later Soobs that Eggenfeldner and others are building are up in the 260 - 300 weights.

This engine could also be longer than the EA-81, putting it farther out of balance?

This has a few more ponies than the Soob, but I would stay with the proven Stratus or RAM EA-81 if I was buying a new engine.

ED in MO

Edited by Ed In Missouri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Doug and everyone,

I sure hate inaccuracies - especially when they are mine!

Here are some corrections and info:

The HOnda engine that I was talking to Randy about was the RAVEN, HONDA 1500VT Turbo, 140 hp, at 210 lbs, since he was talking about adding a turbo to the EA-81.

The OTHER engine listed in Kitplanes is a VIKING HONDA FIT, 110 hp, and I called them today and got a weight of 178 lbs! They said they had spent 2 years researching and redesigning this engine, and there are very few stock auto parts left in it. They claim the head is not longer than one head of an EA-81, but I would have to see that to believe it.

You can contact VIKING at 386-566-2616, In Florida, or get the dimensions of the engine on their site at www.vikingaircraftengines.com.

Eggenfeldner did not even make the list in this years alternative engines section???

Now, I stand corrected - and hope this helps. I would like to see some time on this engine before trying it.

Is Eggenfeldner now Viking?

ED in MO

Looks like the HONDA FIT is about the same as a C-90, but then you add the rad & hoses & water......

Dam, I forgot to ask a price!!!! What does FIT stand for?

BTW: HAPPY BIRTHDAY DOUG!

Edited by Ed In Missouri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I went to the site - price is $12K - either in process or delivered already are 3 for the Kitfox 4, and 3 for the Kitfox 7.

Be nice to get some reports from owners.

NOTE: A little confusion about the site - The photo shown looks like an opposed 4, and not the in-line Honda. :huh:

ED in MO

Edited by Ed In Missouri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The day that motor actually installs that light ill eat my hat.

As to the cost argument, that is a straw man. There are thousands of used 912 motors out there to be had if you just look around a little. I know a guy who is up to almost $10k trying to make an Aerovee work in a Just Escapade. It's still neither reliable or functional. My othe buddy built his plane with a used 912 and has less than $8k in the fwf, he's here with me on the east coast now...

You decide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

From my understanding the major problems with the Egg engines were the redrive failures and that Egg didn't stand behind them.

 

There is a lot to be said for a setup that works well and is reliable.  Just turned over 200 hrs on the Stratus... :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

From my understanding the major problems with the Egg engines were the redrive failures and that Egg didn't stand behind them.

 

There is a lot to be said for a setup that works well and is reliable.  Just turned over 200 hrs on the Stratus... :P

Testing before selling is a better plan. My friend totaled his new RV because Egg sold him an unproven supercharger and it failed. I believe manufacturers should prove their product first - like the Stratus was flown many hours in the C-150 before he put them on the market.

I don't trust "new stuff"!

ED in MO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I don't trust "new stuff"!

ED in MO

 

:funnypostabove:

 

Sez you with the...

 

'new' scratchbuilt Modified Kitfox Klone fuselage,

'new' dorsal fin,

'new' enlarged vertical stabilizer,

'new' modified enlarged rudder,

'new' enlarged elevator,

'new' horizontal stabilizer attach tubes,

'new' nose gear attach supports,

'new' extended cabin width,

'new' raised cabin roof,

'new' baggage door,

'new' crosstubes,

'new' longerons,

'new' cabin bottom,

'new' landing gear attach structure,

'new' wings w/ 'new' extended leading edges,

'new' flaps and flatted front end,

'new' shoulder.

 

Just sayin'...

:BC:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

:funnypostabove:

 

Sez you with the...

 

'new' scratchbuilt Modified Kitfox Klone fuselage,

'new' dorsal fin,

'new' enlarged vertical stabilizer,

'new' modified enlarged rudder,

'new' enlarged elevator,

'new' horizontal stabilizer attach tubes,

'new' nose gear attach supports,

'new' extended cabin width,

'new' raised cabin roof,

'new' baggage door,

'new' crosstubes,

'new' longerons,

'new' cabin bottom,

'new' landing gear attach structure,

'new' wings w/ 'new' extended leading edges,

'new' flaps and flatted front end,

'new' shoulder.

 

Just sayin'...

:BC:

AND NONE OF IT IS FOR SALE UNTIL PROVEN!

If it don't kill me on the test flights, then I might let someone else fly it. I am not "Commercial"!

What does the FAA say about "Amateur-Built": "For MY education and enjoyment only!"

At least I am using a proven engine - When the fan stops turning, it don't matter how the rest was built!

Please note: I did not change the original elevator tube design - but maybe should have?

Don't worry Doug - I will keep you on the "potential buyers list"! :lol: And, Thanks for writing a good advertisement list!

My widow will have a copy!

ED in MO

P.S. I wonder how many people told Dean Wilson that he shouldn't redesign Taylor's plane into a kit called the Avid Flyer? Or told Van not to modify Ray Stitz's plane into the RV?

I cant compare myself to those two designers - But I will sure try to "Do my own thing", and I will post a photo of the first flight someday.

Edited by Ed In Missouri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

When you guys say "Stratus" engine, is that a Subaru variant?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Yes. Stratus was a Subaru conversion. I don't know if they are still In business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I believe it is now listed as the Stratus2000, Reiner sold the company about 13 years ago, but it is still the same Subaru EA-81 with twin carbs, a stainless exhaust that "adds 10 hp", a reground cam, redrive, and I think it is bored over .020? You can read anything between 105 hp and 115 hp at higher rpm - the original engine was rated at 72 hp in a car for the American single carb version with smog controls - Jap 2 carb was more hp.

This is a liquid-cooled, re-engineered, boxer engine of the VW and Porche, and Contentental, Lycoming type of flat, opposed 4 cylinder, 4 cycle, short-stroke like the Rotax.

Eggenfeldner and some others continued with the Subaru engine conversions with engines having overhead cams, double cams, more horses, and all too heavy for our birds.

Didn't means to give a seminar - just check the website for Stratus2000 - Suberavid loves his.

EDMO

Edited by Ed In Missouri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I just talked to Mike today who is down the road from me at Stratus2000.  He said he does still retrofit the subaru EA-81 but it will soon be VERY hard to find parts.  E.g. oversize pistons.  Soon these parts will simply be unavailable, even though he still answers the phone.  He said lots of these things should outlast the life of the plane, but still that makes me a little uneasy.

 

Basically, the story I'm getting is the subaru is on its way out and the Viking, if it's true that they've sold 200 engines already, is on its way up. 

 

As someone who doesn't have any preference either way, I don't see how one could opt for a new Subaru without equal consideration of the Viking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I just talked to Mike today who is down the road from me at Stratus2000.  He said he does still retrofit the subaru EA-81 but it will soon be VERY hard to find parts.  E.g. oversize pistons.  Soon these parts will simply be unavailable, even though he still answers the phone.  He said lots of these things should outlast the life of the plane, but still that makes me a little uneasy.

 

Basically, the story I'm getting is the subaru is on its way out and the Viking, if it's true that they've sold 200 engines already, is on its way up. 

 

As someone who doesn't have any preference either way, I don't see how one could opt for a new Subaru without equal consideration of the Viking.

I believe the oversize pistons are actually VW parts - and with all the parts still being made aftermarket, don't expect a shortage soon - you may have to pay a little more for them.  The real shortage may be the Jap twin-carb engines, but you can put a Holly 2-brl on and do just fine.

The Viking has not been "proven" as much as the Soob - and Egg don't have the best track record so far.

EDMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Basically, the story I'm getting is the subaru is on its way out and the Viking, if it's true that they've sold 200 engines already, is on its way up. 

 

As someone who doesn't have any preference either way, I don't see how one could opt for a new Subaru without equal consideration of the Viking.

 

 

Again I wouldn't buy a dog house from Eggenfellner.  If they have sold 200 of these things, where are they?  What I know about his business practices, maybe he took the money for 200 of them.  There certainly isn't 200 of them flying, that's for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I agree with Doug Holly - I would like to see a replacement for the Subaru EA-81 - But, I want it to have a similar PROVEN dependability first. I hope Egg can do that with his reconstructed engine.

EDMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Here is a purpose built Aircraft engine. A very solid option for a wide selection of planes. 97-200 hp in 8 engine configurations. Visit the link below and ask me any questions you would like. I am a new dealer/build assist/service center for UL POWER AERO ENGINES.

http://www.ulpower.com/sites/default/files/manuals/flyer_ul260EN_web.pdf

Edited by Flyhighbigsky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

They say,  "If you have to ask, you can't afford it." 

Guess I better not ask about this or the Viking or Rotax 912, but someone might want to know.

Anyone got a tail number, or type of plane, for ONE of those "200 sold" Viking engines?

EdMO

Edited by Ed In Missouri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Ed, our UL POWER engines start @ $16,500 for the 97HP and go up incrementally thru 8 Engine sizes with the 200HP engine costing $30,500... Reasonable when compared to the "competition". There is the Euro conversion to consider.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Flyhigh,

 

Nice looking engines. What is the cost on their UL350i?

 

It looks like it only weighs about 10-15 lb more than the 260, but has a stroke of 3.9" instead of 2.9". For comparison, a C-85 has a stroke of 3.6", and an o-200 has a stroke of 3.9". All have about a 4" bore. On our slow draggy airplanes, swinging a bigger prop is more important than it would be on those slick composite LSAs that are popular in Europe.

 

How big a prop can these engines swing?

 

Luke D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Looks like the UL260 Torque/HP peaks out at 83hp at 2900rpm - You can get prop size from that.  (68 -70"?)

I haven't seen any charts for the 350.

EdMO

Edited by Ed In Missouri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I saw on the Zenith forum that someone said that the factory suggests a 65" prop, but someone else said they actually test run them with 68". Here is the torque/HP plot for the 350:

 

http://www.ulpower.com/engines/ul350i/performance

 

Looks like it's got the torque to spin a bigger prop. Some engines are more sensitive the torsional resonance though, so prop selection is more critical. I just wondered what the official company recommendations are.

 

I'm not a huge fan of FADEC on engines with relatively small production numbers and limited R & D budgets, but it looks like they've at least got some history with this system in the auto world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now