KR> KR1/KR100?????whats the difference?
Jeff Scott wrote: >I wouldn't put a great deal of stock in the 262 mph speed listed for the >KR-100. I'm not sure if this was a Reno speed, or what, but I have also become very skeptical of reported speeds, even "timed" race speeds. I was always amazed at the issue of Kitplanes that extolled the 197 mph speed of Roy Marsh's KR2S with the 2180 Revmaster turbo in an air race. But what most folks don't realize is the open circuit ones like the Airventure Cup are one way, straight shot, so a tailwind means everything. The first year I ran the Airventure the winds over the course were 15-30kn during the day for the week before the event, and I was expecting to set a new KR record. But as it turned out, there was only a fairly neutral wind the day of the race, and my speed was just my normal speed. I still won the KR category though...I was the only KR there! It's probably time to trot out the "KR-info" site at http://www.krnet.org/kr-info.html for a reality check on that kind of stuff. Only 3 out of 40 planes achieve over 180 mph, although Horton is probably doing it now that he's got his more fine-tuned. Speaking of such things, I haven't gotten any updates from anybody in a long time. It's time to add some "new blood" to the list, and update those that need to be updated. Please send your updates to me... Mark Langford ML at N56ML.com website at http://www.N56ML.com
KR> KR1/KR100?????whats the difference?
i bought a KR project last month it has the modified single seat verticle and horzonial stabilazer elevator has beem made smaller. the person i bought it from was going to install a 0200 on it. i am going to put a VW based engine on it going to be 2300 cc. the D.A.R who was over seeing the rebuild told me it was going to be a 200mph plane with the 0200 on it.will place some photos on it later -Original Message- From: Jeff Scott To: KRnet Sent: Sat, Jan 11, 2014 7:04 pm Subject: Re: KR> KR1/KR100?whats the difference? > - Original Message - > From: Larry&Sallie Flesner > Sent: 01/11/14 05:09 PM > To: KRnet > Subject: Re: KR> KR1/KR100?whats the difference? > > At 02:31 PM 1/11/2014, you wrote: > >Can anyone here shed some light on to the pros or cons of the KR1 VS > >the KR 100 and what changed from the KR1 to the KR 100? > > > considerable info with photos at http://www.krnet.org/krs/kr100/ > > Latest info is that the aircraft is out of registration and located > in Arizona. > > I recall 100 hp is the smallest engine recommended. You could > duplicate it with a KR2S narrowed to a single place and use the new > airfoil. that would make a real hotrod. I recall the only KR100 to > fly used the RAF48 airfoil with a modified lead edge. Personally, I > think a standard KR2, narrowed to a single place, with slightly > enlarged tail surfaces, would make a fast little bird with almost any > engine bigger than a 2100 VW, a Corvair or Continental making it a > real streaker. > > Larry Flesner As Larry says, if you want a KR-100, just narrow up a 2S and use the new airfoil and tail plans. You'll have a much better plane. I wouldn't put a great deal of stock in the 262 mph speed listed for the KR-100. The formula racers using an O-200 were typically turning those engines just a bit over 4000 rpm. It's likely that speed was reached running the engine that way, so I wouldn't count on that kind of speed with any engines normally found on a KR. But you can build yourself a plane that will push 200 mph pretty easily. -Jeff Scott Los Alamos, NM ___ Search the KRnet Archives at http://tugantek.com/archmailv2-kr/search. To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave at list.krnet.org please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change options
KR> KR1/KR100?????whats the difference?
> - Original Message - > From: Larry&Sallie Flesner > Sent: 01/11/14 05:09 PM > To: KRnet > Subject: Re: KR> KR1/KR100?whats the difference? > > At 02:31 PM 1/11/2014, you wrote: > >Can anyone here shed some light on to the pros or cons of the KR1 VS > >the KR 100 and what changed from the KR1 to the KR 100? > > > considerable info with photos at http://www.krnet.org/krs/kr100/ > > Latest info is that the aircraft is out of registration and located > in Arizona. > > I recall 100 hp is the smallest engine recommended. You could > duplicate it with a KR2S narrowed to a single place and use the new > airfoil. that would make a real hotrod. I recall the only KR100 to > fly used the RAF48 airfoil with a modified lead edge. Personally, I > think a standard KR2, narrowed to a single place, with slightly > enlarged tail surfaces, would make a fast little bird with almost any > engine bigger than a 2100 VW, a Corvair or Continental making it a > real streaker. > > Larry Flesner As Larry says, if you want a KR-100, just narrow up a 2S and use the new airfoil and tail plans. ?You'll have a much better plane. ?I wouldn't put a great deal of stock in the 262 mph speed listed for the KR-100. ?The formula racers using an O-200 were typically turning those engines just a bit over 4000 rpm. ?It's likely that speed was reached running the engine that way, so I wouldn't count on that kind of speed with any engines normally found on a KR. ?But you can build yourself a plane that will push 200 mph pretty easily. -Jeff Scott Los Alamos, NM
KR> Glass work on the KR
And, I will add, no micro on the spars, just resin and good contact with the glass. See N64KR at http://KRBuilder.org - Then click on the pics? Peoples Choice at 2013 - KR Gathering in Mt. Vernon, Il ? MVN Best KR at 2013 - KR Gathering in Mt. Vernon, Il ? MVN Best Interior at 2013 - KR Gathering in Mt. Vernon, Il ? MVN Best Paint at 2013 - KR Gathering in Mt. Vernon, Il ? MVN Best Firwwall Forward at 2013 - KR Gathering in Mt. Vernon, Il ? MVN Daniel R. Heath -?Lexington, SC -Original Message- Study the plans and make sure you micro slurry the foam and squeegee the cloth into the foam and make sure there is good contact between the spars and resin/cloth.
KR> Corvair vs VW
I will put in a point that I consider a big benefit of the Corvair. Assuming you can handle the extra 60 pounds, the Corvair brings a durability level far greater than does the VW. I have had several VW engines in a car and two different KRs, and I consider them to be really good engines and have never had one fail on me. The reason that I believe the Corvair, especially the 2700, to be far more durable than the VW, is because it is not being stressed like the VW is. The Corvair engine that I have was designed as a 2700cc engine, and it is still a 2700cc engine. No boring or stroking has been done to my engine. Most of the VW engines have been both bored and stroked. The most popular being a 2180, started life as a 1600. I believe that it is living on the edge where, other than for the crank, the Corvair, in my opinion, is bullet proof. And with this new crank that has been developed, I don't see how you can go wrong. Now, given the cost of this crank and the other work that needs to be done to the Corvair, you may want to give serious consideration to the Aircraft engines like the 0200 and the 0235, again, if you can handle the added weight. See N64KR at http://KRBuilder.org - Then click on the pics? Peoples Choice at 2013 - KR Gathering in Mt. Vernon, Il ? MVN Best KR at 2013 - KR Gathering in Mt. Vernon, Il ? MVN Best Interior at 2013 - KR Gathering in Mt. Vernon, Il ? MVN Best Paint at 2013 - KR Gathering in Mt. Vernon, Il ? MVN Best Firwwall Forward at 2013 - KR Gathering in Mt. Vernon, Il ? MVN Daniel R. Heath -?Lexington, SC
KR> Fw: KR2 crash in New South Wales- Australia
Phillip; Looks as though the pilot made a normal takeoff and turn to heading for Holbrook when he detected a problem. (normal turn radius, no real effort to return to field directly) When abeam, he deviated toward the runway, with poor heading control, eventually stalling and impacting with one wing and the nose low. Impact velocity was sufficient to eject the fuel 8 meters in direction of impact, no obvious rutting behind fuselage, and no sign of engine rotation on impact. If the ATSB find the sparkplug boss stripped, that points to a sudden loss of power and failure of the pilot to maintain control with the wild shaking of three firing cylinders. If the boss and plug are intact, probable maintenance error- plug not tightened prior to flight, sparkplug rotated out causing loss of power after takeoff, and subsequent loss of control. The ATSB should be pretty certain when they issue the report in April. Peter I have been asked if I know anymore detail about a fatal KR2 Crash in Australia in October 2013 I have found the ATSB report but still ongoing. http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2013/aair/ao-2013-174.aspx Always sad to loose a fellow pilot. My condolence's to his family and friends. fly safe Phil Matheson
KR> KR1/KR100?????whats the difference?
At 02:31 PM 1/11/2014, you wrote: >Can anyone here shed some light on to the pros or cons of the KR1 VS >the KR 100 and what changed from the KR1 to the KR 100? considerable info with photos at http://www.krnet.org/krs/kr100/ Latest info is that the aircraft is out of registration and located in Arizona. I recall 100 hp is the smallest engine recommended. You could duplicate it with a KR2S narrowed to a single place and use the new airfoil. that would make a real hotrod. I recall the only KR100 to fly used the RAF48 airfoil with a modified lead edge. Personally, I think a standard KR2, narrowed to a single place, with slightly enlarged tail surfaces, would make a fast little bird with almost any engine bigger than a 2100 VW, a Corvair or Continental making it a real streaker. Larry Flesner
KR> KR1/KR100?????whats the difference?
On 2014-01-11 5:57 PM, Wayne wrote: Il take the engine Id love to have a spare. ordered the corvair conversion book I am near Kingston Ontario so I cross at water-town I81 Good one Kr1 1/2 LOL my phone is 613-968-9516 Thanks as id like to get your input on the KR2 as well phone anytime. Fly on Stan > Stan, > > What Mark L. said. Your 1800cc bus engine is probably a type 4. They > are a little heaver then the usual type 1 VW. It will need a force 1 > front bearing the same as the type 1. You can find everything you need > know about VW conversions at Great Plains Aircraft. Good people. > > For the Corvair, definitely get WW's manual. > http://flycorvair.com/products.html > > Also, check out: > http://list.corvaircraft.org/mailman/private/corvaircraft_list.corvaircraft.org/2014/date.html > > Don't know where you are located, I have a good 1976 2000 cc VW type 4 > you can have for the price of shipping. I'm in Charlotte, NC. > > Some have built a KR2 with a narrow fuselage, called a KR1 1/2. > > E-mail me with a ph# and time if you want to talk. > > Wayne > >> KR> KR1/KR100?whats the difference? >> Global Solutions smcdonal at kos.net >> Sat Jan 11 16:47:27 EST 2014 >> >> Previous message: KR> KR1/KR100?whats the difference? >> Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] >> On 2014-01-11 4:27 PM, Mark Langford wrote: >> With handicap of the 84 HP and close to the same weight that in mind i >> have two 110 hp engines but was going to keep them for a KR2. Il Keep >> the 84 for parts >> Nice how plans can change with the experience and wisdom of others. >> Thanks Mark! >> If you where making a KR1 would you use a hopped up VW or the 110 hp >> Corvair? >> Thanks >> Stan >> > > >> Mark Langford wrote: >> >> The bus engine is the same storyit's too easy to increase the >> displacement with larger cylinders to use the stockers and limit the >> power. >> Great Plains Aircraft is the place to look further into that. See >> http://greatplainsas.com/index.html > > > > ___ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://tugantek.com/archmailv2-kr/search. > To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave at list.krnet.org > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to > change options > >
KR> KR1/KR100?????whats the difference?
Stan, What Mark L. said. Your 1800cc bus engine is probably a type 4. They are a little heaver then the usual type 1 VW. It will need a force 1 front bearing the same as the type 1. You can find everything you need know about VW conversions at Great Plains Aircraft. Good people. For the Corvair, definitely get WW's manual. http://flycorvair.com/products.html Also, check out: http://list.corvaircraft.org/mailman/private/corvaircraft_list.corvaircraft.org/2014/date.html Don't know where you are located, I have a good 1976 2000 cc VW type 4 you can have for the price of shipping. I'm in Charlotte, NC. Some have built a KR2 with a narrow fuselage, called a KR1 1/2. E-mail me with a ph# and time if you want to talk. Wayne > KR> KR1/KR100?whats the difference? > Global Solutions smcdonal at kos.net > Sat Jan 11 16:47:27 EST 2014 > > Previous message: KR> KR1/KR100?whats the difference? > Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] > On 2014-01-11 4:27 PM, Mark Langford wrote: > With handicap of the 84 HP and close to the same weight that in mind i > have two 110 hp engines but was going to keep them for a KR2. Il Keep > the 84 for parts > Nice how plans can change with the experience and wisdom of others. > Thanks Mark! > If you where making a KR1 would you use a hopped up VW or the 110 hp > Corvair? > Thanks > Stan > > Mark Langford wrote: > > The bus engine is the same storyit's too easy to increase the > displacement with larger cylinders to use the stockers and limit the power. > Great Plains Aircraft is the place to look further into that. See > http://greatplainsas.com/index.html
KR> Corvair vs VW
Stan wrote: > If you where making a KR1 would you use a hopped up VW or the 110 hp > Corvair? I would have to go with the Corvair, but it would have a 4340 steel crank in it (which I've bought for the next plane), and they're not cheap. The VW is a fine engine, but there are two big differentiators...more power and two extra cylinders for the Corvair. And if you're starting from scratch, the Corvair requires no machine work at all, as opposed to lots for the VW. I should also mention that the Corvair is about 60 pounds heavier, but the extra power forgives that sin and plenty more. On the Corvair you could blow a spark plug out on takeoff and it wouldn't be much of an issue. Ask Bill Clapp, who's done that twice. Steve Makish took off from SNF headed home and noticed a little miss, but it wasn't concerning enough to landhe continued to fly all the way home. One of his cylinders wasn't working because the pushrod had come loose due to geometry issues. I've always expected that losing a plug on takeoff in a four cylinder was going to put you in the weeds, and I may be right. Fortunately this is not usually a problem, and we do know how to prevent it. Having said that, I just finished up rebuilding a 2180cc for N891JF, with a lot of GPASC parts in it, and I'm looking forward to flying it. I don't intend to swap it for a Corvair, although I will build another Corvair powered plane when I'm done fooling around with the KR2. Mark Langford ML at N56ML.com website at http://www.N56ML.com
KR> KR1/KR100?????whats the difference?
On 2014-01-11 4:27 PM, Mark Langford wrote: With handicap of the 84 HP and close to the same weight that in mind i have two 110 hp engines but was going to keep them for a KR2. Il Keep the 84 for parts Nice how plans can change with the experience and wisdom of others. Thanks Mark! If you where making a KR1 would you use a hopped up VW or the 110 hp Corvair? Thanks Stan
KR> EAA Sportair workshops
Oscar Zuniga wrote: I have not attended any of the workshops so I can't comment on how useful they are, but I'll put in a good word for the KRNet because that was how I got my first lesson on fiberglassing and it looked so easy and so clear that I had the confidence to just jump right in and get busy. I would agree with Oscar. I did not have any fiberglass experience either just spent a lot of time studying Mark L's website. Thanks again Mark. I would highly recommend Mark's plastic sheet layup method helps keep the cloth fibers aligned and does not allow the cloth to stretch and deform. Study the plans and make sure you micro slurry the foam and squeegee the cloth into the foam and make sure there is good contact between the spars and resin/cloth. Steven Bedford Kr2s Builder s1bedford at msn.com
KR> Fw: KR2 crash in New South Wales- Australia
Looks like engine failure. What kind of engine? -Original Message- From: Phillip Matheson Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 11:14 PM To: KRnet Subject: KR> Fw: KR2 crash in New South Wales- Australia I have been asked if I know anymore detail about a fatal KR2 Crash in Australia in October 2013 I have found the ATSB report but still ongoing. http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2013/aair/ao-2013-174.aspx Always sad to loose a fellow pilot. My condolence's to his family and friends. fly safe Phil Matheson ___ Search the KRnet Archives at http://tugantek.com/archmailv2-kr/search. To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave at list.krnet.org please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change options
KR> KR1/KR100?????whats the difference?
Good day list this is my first post to the group. I ordered the plans for the KR1 and after reading the list I learned of the KR-100. Both are one person airplanes but the 100 seems to have better specs as far as speed goes. What I have to work with is a 85 hp Corvair engine or a VW bus engine 18xx cc. Can anyone here shed some light on to the pros or cons of the KR1 VS the KR 100 and what changed from the KR1 to the KR 100? Does anyone have the plans for the KR 100 Thanks for your help Regards Stan
KR> KR1/KR100?????whats the difference?
Stan wrote: > What I have to work with is a 85 hp Corvair engine or a VW bus engine 18xx > ccDoes anyone have the plans for the KR 100? Steve Glover is probably the guy to answer the KR100 question, but best I can tell only one has ever flown, and it's now stripped to a shell somewhere. Plans were never sold for it, which I view as a missed opportunity to further the breed. As for the 84 HP Corvair, conventional wisdom is that the 84 HP engine weighs the same as a 95 or 110 HP engine, so you'd be wise to use the larger long-stroke engine instead, and the 95 HP and 110 HP (and their parts) are likely more plentiful anyway. The 84 HP engine is the earlier short-stroke engine, so it's handicapped from the start. If you already have an 84 HP Corvair, you could sell it or parts of it on ebay and buy a 95 or a110 to replace it, but there are enough parts that interchange that you could use it as a parts donor for the larger engine. Don't extrapolate this theory to the 140 HP engine though...they are more likely to drop a seat than a 95 hp or 110. After you swap the cam in the engine to one better suited for aircraft use, you'll have about the same power out of a 95 as a 110, so don't let that be a factor in the decision either. For more on Corvairs for aircraft purposes, you need to buy William Wynne's Conversion Manual, at http://flycorvair.com/products.html , especially before you spend any money on the core engine. The bus engine is the same storyit's too easy to increase the displacement with larger cylinders to use the stockers and limit the power. Great Plains Aircraft is the place to look further into that. See http://greatplainsas.com/index.html . Mark Langford ML at N56ML.com website at http://www.N56ML.com
KR> tailspring?
Check with Glover Lee Van Dyke > On Jan 11, 2014, at 11:08 AM, tommy waymack wrote: > > The tail spring on Jim's plane ,now ML's,was made from a mold that came > from Deihl.Martin Roberts had the first and then the mold made the > rounds.Some one probably knows where it is.Thats all I know.Tommy W. > >> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:11 PM, Mark Langford wrote: >> >> Larry Flesner wrote: >> >> Those are made from the same material as the Diehl gear legs and can be >>> cut down and make excellent main gear legs for the KR, real cheap. > ___ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://tugantek.com/archmailv2-kr/search. > To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave at list.krnet.org > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change > options >
KR> tailspring?
The tail spring on Jim's plane ,now ML's,was made from a mold that came from Deihl.Martin Roberts had the first and then the mold made the rounds.Some one probably knows where it is.Thats all I know.Tommy W. On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:11 PM, Mark Langford wrote: > Larry Flesner wrote: > > Those are made from the same material as the Diehl gear legs and can be >> cut down and make excellent main gear legs for the KR, real cheap. >> > >
KR> Progress//older KR 2
At 08:53 AM 1/11/2014, you wrote: >This also gives me the opportunity to thoroughly go over the airplane. > I would appreciate hearing from those of you that have older aircraft >and what type of maintenance issues especially regarding the fiberglass + I consider the two flight control systems , pitch and roll, to be the most critical items on the KR. Inspect them closely. I'm convinced that a loss of either system in flight would be terminal, unlike the failure in a "certified" aircraft where yaw can control roll and pitch trim is required to control pitch. I'm convinced that "controlled flight" to an off airport landing should be quite survivable in a KR (ref. Langford's several dead stick landings). Larry Flesner
KR> Fw: KR2 crash in New South Wales- Australia
I have been asked if I know anymore detail about a fatal KR2 Crash in Australia in October 2013 I have found the ATSB report but still ongoing. http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2013/aair/ao-2013-174.aspx Always sad to loose a fellow pilot. My condolence's to his family and friends. fly safe Phil Matheson
KR> Progress//older KR 2
Not sure is this is a subject of interest any of you as my aircraft has been flying with two previous owners for quite some time. N186 RC is a standard KR 2 that has been flying since 1993. It is in my garage with the wings of. I have cleaned up the stub wings at the mounting area, have re-arced the tailspring and reinstalled it. I also have plans to raise the canopy an inch and a half to 2 inches for more head room and am currently in the process of retrofitting a different cowling. Possibly will convert it to a tri-gear but that being the operation at it is remains to be seen. I also plan to add a belly flap. This also gives me the opportunity to thoroughly go over the airplane. I would appreciate hearing from those of you that have older aircraft and what type of maintenance issues especially regarding the fiberglass that you may have run into. My airplane much to my satisfaction seems to have been very well built and maintained. Thank you Doran
