B Specs

9 posts in this topic

Posted

I'm struggling to find original specs on the B model.  Most importantly: Gross Weight and Average Empty Weight.   Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Gross weight was supposed to be 911 lbs.  Supposedly raised to 1050 some say, but I never saw that officially from Avid.  A real light one would probably weigh less than 450, heavier one would maybe go up to 525.  My B model had a pull start 532 (no battery) and it was 445 lb.  Jim Chuk 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Jim,

Thank you for the reply.  If there wasn't an official gross weight increase to 1050, the orginal 911 makes for a poor two place for a couple male adults.  That would explain the used market price jump between the B and C.  Bummer, there is a B model in CA for dirt cheap, but if it doesnt meet my mission, its wasted money.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Are you in U.S. or another place?  There is no "official" Gross Weight for Experimentals - Just how big your Kahoonas are to fly it at some weight.

UK may be a different story?

I don't think 100+ more pounds will make any difference if you are not doing aerobatics or flying in turbulence...

I wont point at anyone, but there are some that are constantly flown "Heavy" - but maybe you had better listen to the guys who fly or have flown early Avids.

EdMO

Edited by EDMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Jim,

Thank you for the reply.  If there wasn't an official gross weight increase to 1050, the orginal 911 makes for a poor two place for a couple male adults.  That would explain the used market price jump between the B and C.  Bummer, there is a B model in CA for dirt cheap, but if it doesnt meet my mission, its wasted money.

 

I think if you look around, you will see B models listed as C, and both B and C listed as MkIV....

I wouldn't have any problem loading a 950 gw Kitfox 2 up to 1100 in smooth air.

EdMO

Edited by EDMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm in the US, work at Reno Tahoe International Airport as an A&P.  

I've determined the Kitfox 3 or 4 1200 meet my mission to fly me and my dad around (about 440lbs between the two of us).  I'm also interested in a Avid equivalent if the price it right.

Safety and performance are priority,  especially here at altitude.   I would prefer to stay at or near recommended gross weights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I'm in the US, work at Reno Tahoe International Airport as an A&P.  

I've determined the Kitfox 3 or 4 1200 meet my mission to fly me and my dad around (about 440lbs between the two of us).  I'm also interested in a Avid equivalent if the price it right.

Safety and performance are priority,  especially here at altitude.   I would prefer to stay at or near recommended gross weights.

The Kitfox 3 and early 4 were 1050 recommended Gross Weight - The Classic 4 was 1200 gw.

I have a repairable, wrecked 3 with papers that wife would like for me to sell cheap.  PM me  for photos if interested.

Ed A&P MO

Edited by EDMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I've determined the Kitfox 3 or 4 1200 meet my mission to fly me and my dad around (about 440lbs between the two of us).  I'm also interested in a Avid equivalent if the price it right.

Safety and performance are priority,  especially here at altitude.   I would prefer to stay at or near recommended gross weights.

I've owned a KF3 w/ 582 and KF4-1200 w/ 912ul. The 4-1200 is built with larger fuse and carry thru tubes, lift struts, etc. It's noticeably stronger, easier to fly, less 'twitchy' and with less adverse yaw than the model 3. If you plan on flying two-up at gross out of a 4400' field elevation on a regular basis, you need the 912.  Yes, more money. Yes, likely a fair chunk more money. Yes, it will be worth the extra money IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I agree.  We flew a stock Cessna 150 for years in Western Colorado,  performance was poor and almost scary at times.  It would be nice to have good performance that we are confident with.  

When you say twitchy, do you mean on tye ground or in the air?  Is this a wing loading thing or just lighter control forcese.  Would a more nose heavy 912 powered 3 with larger vertical improve it?

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