Good old number 29

Contributing Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    149

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Community Reputation

199 Excellent

About Good old number 29

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors


2,724 profile views

Good old number 29's Activity



  1. Good old number 29 added a post in a topic Simonini engines   

    Sun ‘n Fun was a blast, as you might expect. From there, it was right back to blow’n snow. I am ready for some fun again.

    We’re already gearing up for Oshkosh, where we’ll be in the Homebuilts area, in Booth 625, right across from the Kitfox display. We’ll be there with a complete complement of Simonini motors, and Helix props. That will be July 21-27, 2025. 
    I hope to do some thrust testing, possibly this week, if the spring weather breaks. Unfortunately, we sold out the dual exhaust, so we’ll have to wait for the next shipment to come in, to get thrust numbers on it. We have it in the works, along with some other good stuff, like the Victor 2 intake equalizer plenum, and more gear ratios, including the 4:1, which might be used for towing gliders. 
     
    We will be taking a closer look at the Victor 2 Super installation on the Kitfox 1, and the Model 4. There were some changes in the firewall forward, over the years, so we’ll get a good look at how it mounts on the original flat plate, versus Kitfox’s later cradle style side mount, as well as answering how the exhaust fits. 
     
     






    IMG_3766.heic
    IMG_3713.heic
    IMG_3708.heic
    IMG_3663.heic
    IMG_3642.heic
    • 2


  2. Good old number 29 added a post in a topic New beginnings   

    That looks really good. $800 is a great deal for blasting and painting, too.  I rented a sandblaster and compressor when I did the tail feathers on #29. I’ll probably do the same for this one. 
     
    I’d thought about the 912, like Jim suggested. It seems like that’s what everybody wants, too. I just saw a post on one of the Facebook groups, someone asking the price for a Kitfox IV with a basic gauge panel -no glass- and a 912 UL. The answer was $40k-$50k. That’s crazy, but that’s what they’re going for, and it’s what people want.
     
    There were several considerations that kept me from taking that route. I’ve never seen a used 912 for sale, in Alaska, that wasn’t attached to a plane. I’ve seen them in the lower 48, usually going around $6k. That’s not the kind of thing I want to buy without looking at. If I could work it out, I’d be in for $10k before I got it on the plane, just getting it up here and putting a prop on it, and it’s still a used engine. 

    But, I’m not the type of guy that wants the standard Ford. Nothing against it. To tell the truth, I’d take a 172 over a new Kitfox, and have something safer, more practical, and more reliable, for less money. Yes, I just looked down on Ford, only to say I’d rather go for the Buick of airplanes. But, this is a different kind of bird, and it’s going to be light and nimble and fun. If not a Ferrari, at least a Mustang with a six speed to shift. 
     
    Since I just got set up to sell Simonini engines, and I have several Victor 2 Supers, that I already paid for, it makes sense to build the plane with one. I like the two-strokes, personally. I grew up riding snowmachines, and a bad KX 250 that couldn’t keep the front wheel on the ground, besides my little Kitfox. I know that’s not for everyone. Like with the KX, as well as the Rotaxes, people have gotten away from the light and simple, choosing the bigger and heavier machines. 
     
    For some reason, people have a hard time taking a step back, after they make things too complicated. We add more and more, then pretty soon, the cars are driving themselves, the planes fly without us, and we just watch them on YouTube. I don’t  want a $200,000 Kitfox, even if I could afford it. Guys are paying $50k for a basic KF4. That’s stupid. Go buy a Taylorcraft with a C90, and spend the other $20k on fuel. Just my opinion. 
     
    For my money, I’ll take the orphaned fuselage, put some love into it, and keep it light and simple, like it was made to be. Yes, it was designed to handle the 912, but also the 582, and a lightweight two-stroke with a good pedigree, and more power, for less money, makes something a little leaner, a little meaner, and a little more unique than every Model 4 that people are lining up to pay too much for. 
     
    Besides, I like the idea of keeping two-strokes in the mainstream, and supporting a good, family-run business, like Simonini, to say nothing of my own. Since I do have my own business at stake, I think I need to put my money where my mouth is, and show what the engines I’m selling are really capable of. 
     
    Nothing against the 9 series, but if we all do that, that will be all there is. 
    • 3


  3. Good old number 29 added a post in a topic New beginnings   

    That looks really good. $800 is a great deal for blasting and painting, too.  I rented a sandblaster and compressor when I did the tail feathers on #29. I’ll probably do the same for this one. 
     
    I’d thought about the 912, like Jim suggested. It seems like that’s what everybody wants, too. I just saw a post on one of the Facebook groups, someone asking the price for a Kitfox IV with a basic gauge panel -no glass- and a 912 UL. The answer was $40k-$50k. That’s crazy, but that’s what they’re going for, and it’s what people want.
     
    There were several considerations that kept me from taking that route. I’ve never seen a used 912 for sale, in Alaska, that wasn’t attached to a plane. I’ve seen them in the lower 48, usually going around $6k. That’s not the kind of thing I want to buy without looking at. If I could work it out, I’d be in for $10k before I got it on the plane, just getting it up here and putting a prop on it, and it’s still a used engine. 

    But, I’m not the type of guy that wants the standard Ford. Nothing against it. To tell the truth, I’d take a 172 over a new Kitfox, and have something safer, more practical, and more reliable, for less money. Yes, I just looked down on Ford, only to say I’d rather go for the Buick of airplanes. But, this is a different kind of bird, and it’s going to be light and nimble and fun. If not a Ferrari, at least a Mustang with a six speed to shift. 
     
    Since I just got set up to sell Simonini engines, and I have several Victor 2 Supers, that I already paid for, it makes sense to build the plane with one. I like the two-strokes, personally. I grew up riding snowmachines, and a bad KX 250 that couldn’t keep the front wheel on the ground, besides my little Kitfox. I know that’s not for everyone. Like with the KX, as well as the Rotaxes, people have gotten away from the light and simple, choosing the bigger and heavier machines. 
     
    For some reason, people have a hard time taking a step back, after they make things too complicated. We add more and more, then pretty soon, the cars are driving themselves, the planes fly without us, and we just watch them on YouTube. I don’t  want a $200,000 Kitfox, even if I could afford it. Guys are paying $50k for a basic KF4. That’s stupid. Go buy a Taylorcraft with a C90, and spend the other $20k on fuel. Just my opinion. 
     
    For my money, I’ll take the orphaned fuselage, put some love into it, and keep it light and simple, like it was made to be. Yes, it was designed to handle the 912, but also the 582, and a lightweight two-stroke with a good pedigree, and more power, for less money, makes something a little leaner, a little meaner, and a little more unique, than every Model 4 that people are lining up to pay too much for. 
     
    Besides, I like the idea of keeping two-strokes in the mainstream, and supporting a good, family-run business, like Simonini, to say nothing of my own. Since I do have my own business at stake, I think I need to put my money where my mouth is, and show what the engines I’m selling are really capable of. 
     
    Nothing against the 9 series, but if we all do that, that will be all there is. 
    • 0


  4. Good old number 29 added a post in a topic New beginnings   

    I found the starter problem when I removed the motor. Loose ground lead on the starter. That explains why it would crank fast occasionally, but barely crank over other times. It had a really poor ground, through the motor mounts, with enough resistance to make it crank slowly, but worked like normal when the arc of the loose connection, or torque of the starter and vibration of the motor, stuck the connection in place while it cranked. Always something simple. 
    • 0


  5. Good old number 29 added a post in a topic New beginnings   

    The registration has transferred. I can finally start doing some real work on it, whenever I find the time. So far, I’ve gotten the motor off, and gotten the ice thawed out of everything. 
     
    My plan is to mount a Simonini Victor 2 Super, with a Helix electric in-flight adjustable prop. I’d like to keep it close to 600 pounds, empty weight, with equal useful load. 
     
    We have a shipment of engines that was delivered to the warehouse. My first small prop order is almost finished, having been submitted on Friday. It’s great to be working with companies that go right to work on your order, like Helix Propellers and Simonini have done for me. I waited around six months for my last Powerfin prop, which was originally supposed to ship out the next week. No issues like that here. 
     
    I haven’t quite decided on the prop diameter and reduction gearing, yet. With 110 hp, constant speed prop, and a relatively clean plane, I would like to be able to cruise at something close to the max structural cruising speed, if I choose to, without compromising too much short takeoff capability. So, I’m weighing that tradeoff between the taller gearing and smaller prop, for cruise, versus lower gearing and bigger diameter for takeoff performance. I’m going to take some time to talk with the experts at Helix, in person, and get their recommendation.
     
    If I could, I’d consider repowering and propping both planes (I can dream, right?), extending the gear on the Model 1, with a 4:1 ratio and huge prop, and build the Model 4 to cruise fast and clean. One to warp space, and the other for time. 
     
    Back to work. 
    IMG_3441.heic
    • 0


  6. Good old number 29 added a post in a topic Helix Props   

    Helix isn’t yet well known in America, but they are very well established in other markets. They produce over 10,000 props per year, and have over 1,000 different props. They have props stocked here in the US, so it’s quick and easy to get what you want. They can do custom orders, going from concept to production in fourteen days. 
     
    I talked with guys who fly Helix props, prior to getting into this. I got nothing but great reviews. Not a single bad thing from those I talked to. Interestingly, one of the most common words I heard from different people, was durability. One of those people referred to the durability of the props, in the context of kicking rocks into the prop on a foot-launched parachute, and compared it favorably to its closest competitor. 
     
    They can also do cool designs, as seen in this pic:

    • 0


  7. Good old number 29 added a post in a topic Helix Props   

    How about this Helix H40A? Electric, in-flight adjustable, with two choices of panel-mounted control box, and the option of constant speed or manual adjustment at the flick of a switch. This would be a great match for your Jabiru. There are a total of seven blade profiles to choose from, including two more straight profiles, besides those shown in the pictures. We can get one to you as soon as a couple weeks. 








    • 0


  8. Good old number 29 added a post in a topic Helix Props   

    A little more for the EA-B crowd. The pdf has better resolution. 
    2024_Helix_Flyer_UL_21cm_square.pdf

    • 0


  9. Good old number 29 added a post in a topic Helix Props   

    Here is a taste of what is available. 

    2024_Helix_Flyer_General_21cm_square.pdf
    • 1


  10. Good old number 29 added a topic in Avid and Kitfox parts Suppliers   

    Helix Props
    We have made arrangements for Straight Aero, LLC to be an authorized dealer of Helix Props. We’ll be updating the website soon. I’m excited about this.
    We have a wide range of prop options, from small, fixed pitch props for paramotors, to lots of ground-adjustable and in-flight adjustable props, with options of electric, hydraulic, manual, and automatic pitch adjustments. Also available for certified aircraft. Lightweight, carbon fiber blades, and anodized aluminum hubs. A good selection of blade profiles to suit your style and performance requirements  
    If you’re interested in a quote, or purchasing one before I manage to get them added to the website, you can contact me here, or via our website, Straight Aero. 

    For a ground adjustable prop, suitable for the Rotax 503, 582, 670, 912 series, or Simonini Victor 2 Super, you’ll be looking at the H50V, with the appropriate blade length, profile, and configuration for your specific gear ratio, engine, and aircraft. There are six blade profiles to choose from, for this model, with options of 2, 3, or 4 blades. 
     
    Helix Props have a great reputation as durable, proven performers. 

    I’m attaching the pdf manual for the H50V, for more complete information. 
    H50V_en_28-08-2012.pdf
    • 6 replies
    • 513 views


  11. Good old number 29 added a post in a topic New beginnings   

    My day job keeps me fairly occupied, but I got the time to pull 582 off the airframe. It was good to hear it run, but I just can’t trust it, having been sitting this long. I wish there was a good way to check the rod and crank center bearings. With no idea how many hours it has, and knowing it sat idle for years, the bearings most likely need to be replaced, like it or not. 
    I got a couple pics, comparing the model 1 (with extended tail feathers) to the 4-1200. I finally got the adapters to put the 25” tires back on #29, but it’s sitting on 8.00s. 
    For curiosity, I tried the M1 turtle deck on the 4. Basically the same dimensions, but the fasteners don’t align. 
    I took some better pics of corrosion on the airframe. You can see there’s orange peel, so there’s definitely pitting. How deep that goes remains to be seen. 








    • 0


  12. Good old number 29 added a post in a topic Simonini engines   

    I was surprised by an email, yesterday morning, offering us an exhibitor space at SUN ‘n FUN. As it turned out, the short notice of the availability, due to a canceled reservation, worked out very well for us. It’s a great spot, between two great companies, Helix Props and Sideslip Aviation. We took the opportunity, and started making the arrangements for our display. The engines are ready to ship. All we had to do is turn the rudder South, a little, and arrange for a stop in Lakeland, along the way. So, if you happen to be in the area, during the show, stop by and check out the Simonini engines. We’ll be at exhibit LP-011, in the light planes area of Paradise City. 
    • 1


  13. Good old number 29 added a post in a topic Simonini engines   

    The manufacturing process for our first order is nearly complete. We received these pics from Simonini, showing some of our motors being near completion, this morning. They also gave us the great news that the shipment should be ready to send out early next week. These will soon be in stock, and available to our customers. I’ll update the website with current inventory as soon as they arrive. If anyone is wondering, the base Simonini Victor 2 Super is priced at €8,700, with twin pipes, from the manufacturer. I want to move some motors into the hands of happy customers, and have priced accordingly. 
    I’ll post some good pics, along with all the information I can gather, when they arrive. If anyone around here is interested in observing or helping out with some static test runs of one of the motors, I’m planning to make that happen. I want to be able to stand behind my products, 100%, and have firsthand information for anyone who needs it. I’ll be fitting that test motor to my Model 1 and the Model 4, to check fit and clearances with the different motor mounts, bracing, and cowlings, and see how the different exhaust systems fit. 




    • 3


  14. Good old number 29 added a post in a topic New beginnings   

    Got the fuel line from the panel tank de-iced, but there’s still a half cup of ice in the bottom of the tank. The Heet didn’t do the trick, so I had to add heat. The shop is unheated, so that means a heater inside. I’ll have to pull the fittings to get that last bit out. 
    One possibly positive discovery, is that the #1 carb float bowl was clean and dry, and #2 was full of oil. Not a bad thing either way, as far as I’m concerned. 
     
    The cables are bound up, but I was interested to see that it has Mike Jacober’s mixture adjustment device. It’s a cool setup. I’d like to make that work again. 

    • 2


  15. Good old number 29 added a post in a topic New beginnings   

    I’ll try to get some good side by side pics of the two foxes, comparing #29 to 1,875 Kitfoxes later. . I got some good measurements, comparing the original to the Model 4-1200. What was most interesting, to me, is how much of it didn’t change. The turtle deck measurements are the same, with the difference of where the flaperon torque tube passes through. The panel tank is the same, and width of the fuselage under the panel (33”) is the same. Width (36” on center of the pins) and spacing at the spar carry-through tubes is the same. Horizontal stabilizer is the same. The width at the back of the seat increased from 36”, to 39”. That’s to the outside of the tubing. The bubble doors add another 1.5”, at the lexan, so max width is 40.5” on the M4, vs. 36” on the M1. But, the top of the fuselage is the same width, as it also is at the front of the doors. The often quoted 10” increase in the fin and rudder height turned out to be 9”, from 44” at the tailpost of the original, to 53” on the M4. The elevator gained 2” of chord, and the rudder gained 4”, though the taper continues to shorten the chord of the rudder and fin, at the top, so it’s not all that. #29’s has been lengthened, so the max rudder chord is the same, and minimum is greater, with its lower aspect ratio, and the elevator is 2” longer chord, with the same span. The fuselage of the Model 4 measures 6.5” longer, not exactly the 7” figure from the factory, but close enough. 1.5” additional inches from the center of the lift strut bolt to the firewall, and the other 5” stretched back. That extra 1.5” forward on the fuselage only translated to 5/8” from the front of the seat to the bottom of the firewall, and it looks like the M4 pedals are further aft. Maybe its seat is longer. I’ll have a closer look to see how similar the firewalls are. It appears that they’re about the same, but hard to tell with the motor hanging in the way. I just had the motor off the old one, too, to adjust the points. It’s easier to measure, anyway, with the fan-cooled, pull-start motor. One other difference is that the Model 4 gear legs are longer, and angle forward from the same front attach point, inline with the seat truss. 
     
    • 0