Do you want this big green box to go away? Well here's how...

Click here for full update

Wildcat! photo archives restored.

Click here for full update

Donors can now disable ads.

Click here for instructions

Add yourself to the user map.

Click here for instructions

[rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Converted from Wildcat! database. (read only)
Ron Shannon

[rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Post by Ron Shannon » Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:31 pm

I hadn't thought much about the paint shaker aspect -- why six are
smoother than four. Thanks for explaining, and for encouragement.

If you had told me three years ago that I'd soon be building a real
airplane at all, much less with an engine that apparently hadn't been
used on the chosen airframe in the northern hemisphere before, I would
have laughed at the absurd lunacy of both points -- yet here I am doing
it. Funny how that happens. I have to thank the great folks on this list
for encouragement -- to do something this nuts! :-)

Ron


Ken wrote:
Nothing intended but encouragement Ron.
Experimental aviation would be pretty boring if we all did the same
thing. In theory you have more power than a rotax so the challenge is
whether you can make it available on a Rebel. The Kitchener crew was
comparing a 4 cylinder Jab to the rotax rather than your 6 cylinder engine.

I actually prefer the 6 cylinder 0-300 to the more popular 4 cylinder
0-320. Smoother and cheaper to operate IMO.

As previously mentioned, a 4 cycle, 4 cylinder engine does not have
overlapping power pulses like a 6 cylinder engine. Between every power
stroke, the 4 cylinder engine slows down a bit which decelerates the
prop and flexes the engine mount rubbers in the opposite direction etc.
Much like a paint shaker... ;)

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

rshannon

[rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Post by rshannon » Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:31 pm

BTW, those who believe the faster revving, shorter prop'ed Jabiru 3300 will
not perform as well as the slower revving, longer prop engines on slower,
draggy airframes should look at the performance comparisons published by
Legend Cub. (See http://www.legend.aero/content.asp) Even on their
relatively draggy Cub knockoff, the Jabiru outperforms their standard O-200
in every category, including take off AND top speed.

Granted, the Rotax 912S is probably some 50+ lbs. lighter than the O-200 so
it may well perform better than the O-200. Maybe even enough to catch up to
the Jabiru. :-)

Ron



-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Keith Leitch

[rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Post by Keith Leitch » Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:31 pm

Ron,

I for one agree with you. I had talked to Legend while at Oshkosh and they were very happy with the Jabiru. The only problem they relayed to me was in cooling it. They recommended putting CHT on all cylinders and keeping an eye on them. I think they may have gotten the problem worked out since they do sell them with the Jabiru. I guess the performance of the Jabiru vs the O-200 is quite a bit better.

Keith

rshannon@dcsol.com wrote:
BTW, those who believe the faster revving, shorter prop'ed Jabiru 3300 will
not perform as well as the slower revving, longer prop engines on slower,
draggy airframes should look at the performance comparisons published by
Legend Cub. (See http://www.legend.aero/content.asp) Even on their
relatively draggy Cub knockoff, the Jabiru outperforms their standard O-200
in every category, including take off AND top speed.

Granted, the Rotax 912S is probably some 50+ lbs. lighter than the O-200 so
it may well perform better than the O-200. Maybe even enough to catch up to
the Jabiru. :-)

Ron



-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------






---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.



-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

C&P Kucera

[rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Post by C&P Kucera » Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:31 pm

Thanks for the info Ron, the Cub has two things going for it, the huge 35 ft
wing and 26" narrow fuse.

I think the Rebel on sraight floats will not do that great with the Jabiru
because of the short prop and wide fuse and shorter wingspan.

paul
reb453R

----- Original Message -----
From: <rshannon@dcsol.com>
To: <rebel-builders@dcsol.com>
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 12:02 PM
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

BTW, those who believe the faster revving, shorter prop'ed Jabiru 3300
will
not perform as well as the slower revving, longer prop engines on slower,
draggy airframes should look at the performance comparisons published by
Legend Cub. (See http://www.legend.aero/content.asp) Even on their
relatively draggy Cub knockoff, the Jabiru outperforms their standard
O-200
in every category, including take off AND top speed.

Granted, the Rotax 912S is probably some 50+ lbs. lighter than the O-200
so
it may well perform better than the O-200. Maybe even enough to catch up
to
the Jabiru. :-)

Ron



-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------






-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Ron Shannon

[rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Post by Ron Shannon » Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:56 pm

Alright thrill seekers... although the hubbub has settled down of late
[Yea!] I can't resist passing on this contribution to The Great Jabiru
Debate [Ed.: See message archives, this subject line. Thou shalt not repeat.
<g>]

Some months ago I made my first contact with a real Jabiru 3300-powered
Rebel in the wild. Dan Dyet has one of the earlier mechanical valve lifter
models on 730R. He reported at first he had problems with cooling, which he
acknowledged have been addressed in newer models. (He apparently did not use
a Jabiru nose bowl.) However, he included the following performance data:

---
---

I am using the std Bing carb without the economy tuning kit. Haven't had any
issues with it at all, good carb.
Engine runs great and starts like a charm (with preheat during winter).
...
I have one of the original models,mechanical lifters.
I started out with the GT wood prop then switched over to a Sensenich ground
adjustable carbon fiber.
GT prop at 64" dia and 51" pitch is too coarse for the Rebel airframe.
GT prop on climb out at 70 mph gave me 2700 rpm 700 fpm solo, cruise 2750
rpm at 120 mph, WOT 2900 rpm 130 mph.
Sensenich prop 64" at a pitch setting of 2.5 gave me 2900 rpm at 70mph 1000
fpm solo climb out, cruise 2750 rpm at 110 mph, WOT 3200 rpm 125 mph. With
this prop I use up less than 200 ft of runway before I'm in the air and
flying.

---[end quote]---

He didn't mention the takeoff gross he was carrying for these results, but
IMHO, with either of those props, the numbers are not too shabby for 120 HP.

The newer hydraulic lifter models have redesigned cylinder cooling fins,
redesigned baffle ducts, better oil pump, better carb tuning, they specify a
more efficient Positech cooler and reportedly have a bit more demonstrated
HP than the early models. The total width of the 3300 is barely 24" which,
with a properly fitted nose bowl/cowl, makes for a pretty small drag profile
up front.


Ron
254R
http://n254mr.com




-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------


Joe Ronco

[rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Post by Joe Ronco » Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:56 pm

Good info Ron. If you can get it, I would be interested in the 730R empty
weight, max gross weight it is registered at and the weight when he took
these readings. Also the fuel burn at the various speeds.



J Joe



-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com] On Behalf Of Ron
Shannon
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 8:19 PM
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Jabiru engines



Alright thrill seekers... although the hubbub has settled down of late

[Yea!] I can't resist passing on this contribution to The Great Jabiru

Debate [Ed.: See message archives, this subject line. Thou shalt not repeat.

<g>]



Some months ago I made my first contact with a real Jabiru 3300-powered

Rebel in the wild. Dan Dyet has one of the earlier mechanical valve lifter

models on 730R. He reported at first he had problems with cooling, which he

acknowledged have been addressed in newer models. (He apparently did not use

a Jabiru nose bowl.) However, he included the following performance data:



---
---



I am using the std Bing carb without the economy tuning kit. Haven't had any

issues with it at all, good carb.

Engine runs great and starts like a charm (with preheat during winter).

...

I have one of the original models,mechanical lifters.

I started out with the GT wood prop then switched over to a Sensenich ground

adjustable carbon fiber.

GT prop at 64" dia and 51" pitch is too coarse for the Rebel airframe.

GT prop on climb out at 70 mph gave me 2700 rpm 700 fpm solo, cruise 2750

rpm at 120 mph, WOT 2900 rpm 130 mph.

Sensenich prop 64" at a pitch setting of 2.5 gave me 2900 rpm at 70mph 1000

fpm solo climb out, cruise 2750 rpm at 110 mph, WOT 3200 rpm 125 mph. With

this prop I use up less than 200 ft of runway before I'm in the air and

flying.



---[end quote]---



He didn't mention the takeoff gross he was carrying for these results, but

IMHO, with either of those props, the numbers are not too shabby for 120 HP.



The newer hydraulic lifter models have redesigned cylinder cooling fins,

redesigned baffle ducts, better oil pump, better carb tuning, they specify a

more efficient Positech cooler and reportedly have a bit more demonstrated

HP than the early models. The total width of the 3300 is barely 24" which,

with a properly fitted nose bowl/cowl, makes for a pretty small drag profile

up front.





Ron

254R

http://n254mr.com









-----------------------------------------------------------------

List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login

username "rebel" password "builder"

Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com

List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com

-----------------------------------------------------------------











-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Walter Klatt

[rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Post by Walter Klatt » Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:56 pm

Ron, why would the coarser prop at 2900 rpm do 130 mph while the finer one
do only 125 mph at 3200 rpm? That engine should be producing more hp at the
higher rpm, which should translate into more speed, not less. With my Rebel,
I have always got more speed out of it if I could pitch my prop for maximum
rpm at WOT.

Walter

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com] On Behalf Of Ron
Shannon
Sent: October 21, 2008 7:19 PM
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Alright thrill seekers... although the hubbub has settled down of late
[Yea!] I can't resist passing on this contribution to The Great Jabiru
Debate [Ed.: See message archives, this subject line. Thou shalt not repeat.
<g>]

Some months ago I made my first contact with a real Jabiru 3300-powered
Rebel in the wild. Dan Dyet has one of the earlier mechanical valve lifter
models on 730R. He reported at first he had problems with cooling, which he
acknowledged have been addressed in newer models. (He apparently did not use
a Jabiru nose bowl.) However, he included the following performance data:

---
---

I am using the std Bing carb without the economy tuning kit. Haven't had any
issues with it at all, good carb.
Engine runs great and starts like a charm (with preheat during winter).
...
I have one of the original models,mechanical lifters.
I started out with the GT wood prop then switched over to a Sensenich ground
adjustable carbon fiber.
GT prop at 64" dia and 51" pitch is too coarse for the Rebel airframe.
GT prop on climb out at 70 mph gave me 2700 rpm 700 fpm solo, cruise 2750
rpm at 120 mph, WOT 2900 rpm 130 mph.
Sensenich prop 64" at a pitch setting of 2.5 gave me 2900 rpm at 70mph 1000
fpm solo climb out, cruise 2750 rpm at 110 mph, WOT 3200 rpm 125 mph. With
this prop I use up less than 200 ft of runway before I'm in the air and
flying.

---[end quote]---

He didn't mention the takeoff gross he was carrying for these results, but
IMHO, with either of those props, the numbers are not too shabby for 120 HP.

The newer hydraulic lifter models have redesigned cylinder cooling fins,
redesigned baffle ducts, better oil pump, better carb tuning, they specify a
more efficient Positech cooler and reportedly have a bit more demonstrated
HP than the early models. The total width of the 3300 is barely 24" which,
with a properly fitted nose bowl/cowl, makes for a pretty small drag profile
up front.


Ron
254R
http://n254mr.com




-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------






-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Ron Shannon

[rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Post by Ron Shannon » Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:56 pm

I'll probably put my foot in something here but (here goes) this doesn't
surprise me.

With the std. Bing carb, other things being equal the Jabiru 3300 develops
max HP at around 2800 RPM +/-. As all props "unload" with increased airspeed
and, if the props being compared are more or less appropriate for the
engine, the more finely pitched prop will be more unloaded ( at a higher
cruise speed than will a coarse prop. To put it another way, the more coarse
cruise prop will still be pulling (with its max thrust) at higher airspeed
AND slower RPM, because the latter (2800 RPM) also yields greater HP.
(Notice the difference in WOT: the cruise prop WOT was 300 RPM less than the
climb prop means it was more fully loaded, developing more thrust, even at
slower RPM, when at cruise+ airspeed.) Another way to say it is at cruise+
airspeeds, a finer pitched prop's thrust-per-RPM will max out at a lower
speed.

Of course, the airspeed vs. RPM vs. prop pitch is not a linear set of
tradeoffs, with each one pivoting around the others in perfect correlation,
in large part because drag increases with the square of airspeed, but also
because of the sweet spot where max HP occurs.

In short, the cruise prop developed more thrust at 2800 RPM (max 120 HP)
than the climb prop developed at 3300 RPM (l~100 HP). Of course, as we all
know, different results occur in the lower speed ranges and different loads,
i.e., climb.

That makes sense to me... I think.


On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 8:29 PM, Walter Klatt <Walter.Klatt@shaw.ca> wrote:
Ron, why would the coarser prop at 2900 rpm do 130 mph while the finer one
do only 125 mph at 3200 rpm? That engine should be producing more hp at the
higher rpm, which should translate into more speed, not less. With my
Rebel,
I have always got more speed out of it if I could pitch my prop for maximum
rpm at WOT.

Walter

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com] On Behalf Of Ron
Shannon
Sent: October 21, 2008 7:19 PM
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Alright thrill seekers... although the hubbub has settled down of late
[Yea!] I can't resist passing on this contribution to The Great Jabiru
Debate [Ed.: See message archives, this subject line. Thou shalt not
repeat.
<g>]

Some months ago I made my first contact with a real Jabiru 3300-powered
Rebel in the wild. Dan Dyet has one of the earlier mechanical valve lifter
models on 730R. He reported at first he had problems with cooling, which he
acknowledged have been addressed in newer models. (He apparently did not
use
a Jabiru nose bowl.) However, he included the following performance data:

---
---

I am using the std Bing carb without the economy tuning kit. Haven't had
any
issues with it at all, good carb.
Engine runs great and starts like a charm (with preheat during winter).
...
I have one of the original models,mechanical lifters.
I started out with the GT wood prop then switched over to a Sensenich
ground
adjustable carbon fiber.
GT prop at 64" dia and 51" pitch is too coarse for the Rebel airframe.
GT prop on climb out at 70 mph gave me 2700 rpm 700 fpm solo, cruise 2750
rpm at 120 mph, WOT 2900 rpm 130 mph.
Sensenich prop 64" at a pitch setting of 2.5 gave me 2900 rpm at 70mph 1000
fpm solo climb out, cruise 2750 rpm at 110 mph, WOT 3200 rpm 125 mph. With
this prop I use up less than 200 ft of runway before I'm in the air and
flying.

---[end quote]---

He didn't mention the takeoff gross he was carrying for these results, but
IMHO, with either of those props, the numbers are not too shabby for 120
HP.

The newer hydraulic lifter models have redesigned cylinder cooling fins,
redesigned baffle ducts, better oil pump, better carb tuning, they specify
a
more efficient Positech cooler and reportedly have a bit more demonstrated
HP than the early models. The total width of the 3300 is barely 24" which,
with a properly fitted nose bowl/cowl, makes for a pretty small drag
profile
up front.


Ron
254R
http://n254mr.com




-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------






-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------





-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Ron Shannon

[rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Post by Ron Shannon » Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:56 pm

Oops! That got sent in the middle of editing, before it was fully baked.
I've tweaked the version below a little more, though I'm not sure it really
adds much to my 1st edition gibberish.


On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 9:36 PM, Ron Shannon <rshannon@cruzcom.com> wrote:
I'll probably put my foot in something here but (here goes) this doesn't
surprise me.

With the std. Bing carb, other things being equal the Jabiru 3300 develops
max HP at around 2800 RPM +/-. As all props "unload" with increased airspeed
and, if the props being compared are more or less appropriate for the
engine, the more finely pitched prop will be more unloaded at a high cruise
speed than will a coarse prop. To put it another way, the more coarse cruise
prop will still be pulling at higher airspeed AND slower RPM, because it's
more loaded AND the latter (2800 RPM) also yields greater HP to cope with
that load. (Notice the difference in WOT: the cruise prop WOT was 300 RPM
less than the climb prop means it was more fully loaded even at slower RPM,
when at cruise+ airspeed.) Another way to say it is at cruise+ airspeeds, a
finer pitched prop's thrust-per-RPM will max out at a lower speed.

Of course, the airspeed vs. RPM vs. prop pitch is not a linear set of
tradeoffs, with each one pivoting around the others in perfect correlation,
in large part because drag increases with the square of airspeed, but also
because of the sweet spot where max HP occurs.

In short, the cruise prop developed more thrust at 2800 RPM (max 120 HP)
than the climb prop developed at 3300 RPM (l~100 HP). Of course, as we all
know, different results occur in the lower speed ranges and different loads,
i.e., climb.

That makes sense to me... I think.



On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 8:29 PM, Walter Klatt <Walter.Klatt@shaw.ca>wrote:
Ron, why would the coarser prop at 2900 rpm do 130 mph while the finer one
do only 125 mph at 3200 rpm? That engine should be producing more hp at
the
higher rpm, which should translate into more speed, not less. With my
Rebel,
I have always got more speed out of it if I could pitch my prop for
maximum
rpm at WOT.

Walter

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com] On Behalf Of Ron
Shannon
Sent: October 21, 2008 7:19 PM
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Alright thrill seekers... although the hubbub has settled down of late
[Yea!] I can't resist passing on this contribution to The Great Jabiru
Debate [Ed.: See message archives, this subject line. Thou shalt not
repeat.
<g>]

Some months ago I made my first contact with a real Jabiru 3300-powered
Rebel in the wild. Dan Dyet has one of the earlier mechanical valve lifter
models on 730R. He reported at first he had problems with cooling, which
he
acknowledged have been addressed in newer models. (He apparently did not
use
a Jabiru nose bowl.) However, he included the following performance data:

---
---

I am using the std Bing carb without the economy tuning kit. Haven't had
any
issues with it at all, good carb.
Engine runs great and starts like a charm (with preheat during winter).
...
I have one of the original models,mechanical lifters.
I started out with the GT wood prop then switched over to a Sensenich
ground
adjustable carbon fiber.
GT prop at 64" dia and 51" pitch is too coarse for the Rebel airframe.
GT prop on climb out at 70 mph gave me 2700 rpm 700 fpm solo, cruise 2750
rpm at 120 mph, WOT 2900 rpm 130 mph.
Sensenich prop 64" at a pitch setting of 2.5 gave me 2900 rpm at 70mph
1000
fpm solo climb out, cruise 2750 rpm at 110 mph, WOT 3200 rpm 125 mph. With
this prop I use up less than 200 ft of runway before I'm in the air and
flying.

---[end quote]---

He didn't mention the takeoff gross he was carrying for these results, but
IMHO, with either of those props, the numbers are not too shabby for 120
HP.

The newer hydraulic lifter models have redesigned cylinder cooling fins,
redesigned baffle ducts, better oil pump, better carb tuning, they specify
a
more efficient Positech cooler and reportedly have a bit more demonstrated
HP than the early models. The total width of the 3300 is barely 24" which,
with a properly fitted nose bowl/cowl, makes for a pretty small drag
profile
up front.


Ron
254R
http://n254mr.com




-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------






-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------





-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Walter Klatt

[rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Post by Walter Klatt » Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:56 pm

Yeah, it definitely looks like the finer pitch prop runs out of steam at
higher rpms. And if that Bing carbed engine peaks its hp at 2800, that also
would help explain it.

Walter

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com] On Behalf Of Ron
Shannon
Sent: October 21, 2008 9:41 PM
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Oops! That got sent in the middle of editing, before it was fully baked.
I've tweaked the version below a little more, though I'm not sure it really
adds much to my 1st edition gibberish.


On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 9:36 PM, Ron Shannon <rshannon@cruzcom.com> wrote:
I'll probably put my foot in something here but (here goes) this doesn't
surprise me.

With the std. Bing carb, other things being equal the Jabiru 3300 develops
max HP at around 2800 RPM +/-. As all props "unload" with increased
airspeed
and, if the props being compared are more or less appropriate for the
engine, the more finely pitched prop will be more unloaded at a high
cruise
speed than will a coarse prop. To put it another way, the more coarse
cruise
prop will still be pulling at higher airspeed AND slower RPM, because it's
more loaded AND the latter (2800 RPM) also yields greater HP to cope with
that load. (Notice the difference in WOT: the cruise prop WOT was 300 RPM
less than the climb prop means it was more fully loaded even at slower
RPM,
when at cruise+ airspeed.) Another way to say it is at cruise+ airspeeds,
a
finer pitched prop's thrust-per-RPM will max out at a lower speed.

Of course, the airspeed vs. RPM vs. prop pitch is not a linear set of
tradeoffs, with each one pivoting around the others in perfect
correlation,
in large part because drag increases with the square of airspeed, but also
because of the sweet spot where max HP occurs.

In short, the cruise prop developed more thrust at 2800 RPM (max 120 HP)
than the climb prop developed at 3300 RPM (l~100 HP). Of course, as we all
know, different results occur in the lower speed ranges and different
loads,
i.e., climb.

That makes sense to me... I think.



On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 8:29 PM, Walter Klatt <Walter.Klatt@shaw.ca>wrote:
Ron, why would the coarser prop at 2900 rpm do 130 mph while the finer
one
do only 125 mph at 3200 rpm? That engine should be producing more hp at
the
higher rpm, which should translate into more speed, not less. With my
Rebel,
I have always got more speed out of it if I could pitch my prop for
maximum
rpm at WOT.

Walter

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com] On Behalf Of Ron
Shannon
Sent: October 21, 2008 7:19 PM
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Alright thrill seekers... although the hubbub has settled down of late
[Yea!] I can't resist passing on this contribution to The Great Jabiru
Debate [Ed.: See message archives, this subject line. Thou shalt not
repeat.
<g>]

Some months ago I made my first contact with a real Jabiru 3300-powered
Rebel in the wild. Dan Dyet has one of the earlier mechanical valve
lifter
models on 730R. He reported at first he had problems with cooling, which
he
acknowledged have been addressed in newer models. (He apparently did not
use
a Jabiru nose bowl.) However, he included the following performance data:

---
---

I am using the std Bing carb without the economy tuning kit. Haven't had
any
issues with it at all, good carb.
Engine runs great and starts like a charm (with preheat during winter).
...
I have one of the original models,mechanical lifters.
I started out with the GT wood prop then switched over to a Sensenich
ground
adjustable carbon fiber.
GT prop at 64" dia and 51" pitch is too coarse for the Rebel airframe.
GT prop on climb out at 70 mph gave me 2700 rpm 700 fpm solo, cruise 2750
rpm at 120 mph, WOT 2900 rpm 130 mph.
Sensenich prop 64" at a pitch setting of 2.5 gave me 2900 rpm at 70mph
1000
fpm solo climb out, cruise 2750 rpm at 110 mph, WOT 3200 rpm 125 mph.
With
this prop I use up less than 200 ft of runway before I'm in the air and
flying.

---[end quote]---

He didn't mention the takeoff gross he was carrying for these results,
but
IMHO, with either of those props, the numbers are not too shabby for 120
HP.

The newer hydraulic lifter models have redesigned cylinder cooling fins,
redesigned baffle ducts, better oil pump, better carb tuning, they
specify
a
more efficient Positech cooler and reportedly have a bit more
demonstrated
HP than the early models. The total width of the 3300 is barely 24"
which,
with a properly fitted nose bowl/cowl, makes for a pretty small drag
profile
up front.


Ron
254R
http://n254mr.com




-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------






-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------





-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------






-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Ken

[rebel-builders] Jabiru engines

Post by Ken » Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:56 pm

200 foot takeoff without a headwind would be VERY impressive indeed with
a 64" prop. I figure I'm making perhaps a tad over 120 hp but I'd
estimate at least twice that distance with 20 gal. fuel, a 72" prop, and
mid 70's OAT. My engine is likely 200+ lb heavier.

Our speeds are in the same ballpark but I normally cruise slower for
fuel savings. My climb seems better at easily a 1000 fpm. despite the
weight, which makes me wonder how accurate our respective takeoff
distance numbers are. Doesn't matter though as we both get off the
ground pretty darn quick. It takes a slow speed over the fence, serious
braking, and bravery to stop in that distance ;) ...

Ken
---
---

I am using the std Bing carb without the economy tuning kit. Haven't had
any
issues with it at all, good carb.
Engine runs great and starts like a charm (with preheat during winter).
...
I have one of the original models,mechanical lifters.
I started out with the GT wood prop then switched over to a Sensenich
ground
adjustable carbon fiber.
GT prop at 64" dia and 51" pitch is too coarse for the Rebel airframe.
GT prop on climb out at 70 mph gave me 2700 rpm 700 fpm solo, cruise 2750
rpm at 120 mph, WOT 2900 rpm 130 mph.
Sensenich prop 64" at a pitch setting of 2.5 gave me 2900 rpm at 70mph 1000
fpm solo climb out, cruise 2750 rpm at 110 mph, WOT 3200 rpm 125 mph. With
this prop I use up less than 200 ft of runway before I'm in the air and
flying.

---[end quote]---


-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------


Locked