herman pahls

Thanks Joey and Randy for replying.
I am embarrassed that after flying this thing all these years it took a recent post on a forum for me to realize that I have been missing out not using the flap feature of the flaperons.
I thought I needed more power to get the Bushwheels to levitate when using very low air pressure for gravel bars and I find out that cycling the flaperons at the appropriate time gets the job done.
So my question is how much flap in approximate degrees do you use for say long final and then short final?
How much do you use for take off roll and then how much more for rotation?
I realize each Kitfox or Avid may differ in how much flap works best.
Is the limiting factor how much roll control remains for the circumstances like cross wind and how much backpressure one feels comfortable with?
I like the multiple detent idea so I could try different settings to determine the flap position that feels right for both take off and landing.
Thanks Herman

Great advice since I am on the 912 hunt.

I have appreciated all the responses to my "more power than a 582"
Since there does not seem to be any low cost readily available options right now to replace the 582, I will answer my own question.
This answer is not very profound.
Get rid of the FAT.
My model 2 preformed the best 18 years ago when it first flew with a 532, A gear box, with snow mobile single ignition and weighed 465 pounds.
In 450 hours the 532 never let me down.
Every thing I have done since has added a lot of weight but features I do not want to do without.
I was told by others that for reliability I should get a 582 with dual ignition and at least a B gearbox, so to make myself feel better, I had the 532 rebuilt at 300 hours and the A box every 100 hours.
I guess that the 582 and C box added at least 15 pounds and my Kitfox model 2 did not fly as well with that added nose weight.
Plus the 582 did not idle as smoothly or as low in RPM as the 532 because apparently the 582 ignition does not retard the timing at idle like the snowmobile ignition does.
I cannot stand gearbox chatter or too much idle thrust when landing so I installed an RK clutch and love it. Add another 4 pounds up front.
Then I added inflight adjustable to my IVO and another few pounds way up front.
This added weight up front is raising my stall speed and diminishing the handling qualities.
The HACman does not add much weight but I would not want to fly without it especially with the polyswitch idea that came from the "bare footer" on this forum.
I want to land where my son does in his Maule so I installed 29" Airstreaks which add 33 pounds over the 21" ATV tires.
The forward CG is still within limits but it flys poorly and lands even worse especially power off.
I install a taller and wider Matco tailwheel which adds 3 pounds and an additional 12 more pounds of lead to the tail and it now flys and lands great.
The taller tailwheel reduces the A.O.A. by a few inches which is counter productive for STOL but works well in soft sand.
The only reason for Bushwheels is for landing on larger rocks or softer sand which requires very low air pressure to absorb the rock hits.
My Kitfox is noticeably much harder to push around due to the low air pressure and now requires at least 300 feet to levitate at sea level with no wind.
Conclusion; I really do not need "more power than a 582", I need to go back to 21" tires with plenty of air pressure to reduce rolling resistance, go back to the hard rubber Maule tailwheel and get rid of the 12 pounds of lead in the tail.
I will not give up the RK clutch, IFA prop or HACman.
(Big tires also require bigger and heavier brakes which I do not want to give up even with the 21" tires).
By getting rid of the FAT, I will get some useful load back and at least be able to take my wife with a few gallons of gas.
"Big rocks and long props" is all the rage these days in backcountry flying but it comes at a price and sometimes a very steep price due to bent airplanes.
I vividly remember 25 some years ago when Dan Denny landed his Demo Kitfox sideways on the same 4000' runway I fly off today.
These Avid's and Fox's do best when you keep them simple and light.
Now that I have confessed everything I have done wrong to my Kitfox, I do not want to turn back and still want more power.
I am hoping that Leni has immediate and great results with his new engine or I find a 912s in a barn.
Thanks for listening to me talk to myself.

Herman

I wish this 670 issue could be resolved once and for all with a bunch of very recent success story's in Avids and Fox's.
Rotax Rick claims they as reliable and simple to operate as a 582 and have less fuel burn than a 582 at cruise.
I have been waiting to hear about AK Bob's 670 in a Kitfox.
Any idea how Bob's project is coming along?
If I had a spare donor 582 to send to Rotax Rick I might be tempted to try one.
 
Leni: thanks for alerting me about the "service" bulletin issues with the 912's.
You can almost buy a Pacer for the price of a new 912S and add bushwheels you will have a very capable backcountry airplane.
My son just sold a 160HP Pacer with 31" ABW, Borer prop and a long list of mods. .
Problem was that it only cruised at 100 mph burning 9 gal/hour and needs a full sized hanger.
Is it reality for a Model 4 Kitfox (without the under cambered wing) to cruise at 100mph with a 912/912s burning 5 gph on 29" ABW?
 
Thanks Herman

I started this thread since I convinced myself that I need more take-off power than my 582 with a 2.62 gearbox and IFA IVO prop offer for my model 2.
IVO said a 3.47 gearbox with their 3 blade medium prop would make a big difference in take-off and climb.
I called a Rotax repair shop here in Oregon to see if they knew of any used 912's for sale not realizing they were also a Hirth dealer.
Are Hirth engines the latest and greatest that I have somehow not been exposed to?
I still want a 912 but it makes little financial sense to repower this Kitfox, versus finding a Model 4 with a 912S already installed.
Any advice?
Thanks Herman

SuberAvid
You responded with "Wide bungee gear fan" and Leni said the after market bush gears have had failures.
So who makes the gear you suggest?
Thanks Herman

Av8r3400
You emphasized the light weight of the 912.
Any idea the weight difference between the 912 and a 582?
My 582 has the inflight adjust ivo, clutch, Hackman , c box which all ad weight.
I would go with a 912 if my model 2 could tolerate the added weight.
I already add 8 pounds of lead to the tail if I use the 29" air streaks.
Years ago some one in Utah or Idaho said that he powered his model 1 Kitfox with a 912 and had to add some tail weight.
Does anyone know who that may be ?
Do the 80 and 100 hp 912's weigh the same?
My model 2 has a never exceed speed of 100 mph and a gross weight of 950.
With the bush wheels this Kitfox is already a single place airplane so why not go with a 912 if the CG works out.
Thanks Herman

Regarding landing these little Avids and KF's.
I learned to fly in T- craft and Champs 36 years ago and thought I was a real tail dragger pilot.
18 years ago I flew my Model 2 Kitfox for the first time, having flown a Champ the day before and almost lost it.
These airplanes are to be respected since they react quickly to control inputs.
I have never flown a Pitts, but I am sure they would be another step above in control management.

I now land much differently than I did in the past when trying to land as short as possible.
I always wondered why on the extreme backcountry videos why the pilots were doing wheel landings which normally have higher approach speeds.
I have learned that what looks like a wheel landing is really a modified full stall 3 point landing approach, that as soon as the mains touch you get on the brakes and elevator as needed and the tail wheel never touch's till you are stopped.
Using this technique I have found that for the first time in all these years and hundreds of hours that I can land my Kitfox shorter than I can take off.
It does not help that everything I have done to land in short rough strips has added weight but huge amounts of confidence.

I still use the original Model 2 bungee gear with no issues so far and have considered the after market gears for better Angle of Attack.
This thread has cautioned me to reconsider because of the mentioned failures.
I always thought the Grove gear was too heavy to consider so I would like some input from this forum.
Ed; would you please call me regarding your Grove.
Thanks Herman Pahls Oregon cell 541-404-6464

Leni
Thanks for pointing out the Iron Designs tailwheel.
I will let you know how my modifications work.
How do you feel about flying a full swiveling tailwheel not connected to the rudder?
That design is exactly how I wanted to modify my Matco to not lose angle of attack.
Regarding cross winds free swiveling tail wheels and having adequate brakes.
My Kitfox came with worthless go kart brakes which I upgraded to what I call the external mounted caliper versus the internal caliper I have seen on model 4 kitfoxes.
Even with 29" tires , the Matcos I am using are plenty to nose over at any time.
I have not yet flown with a full swiveling tailwheel that is not connected to the rudder so I will find out what I am in for.
It seems like most serious "big rock" pilots set up their tailwheels this way so it must work.
Herman
 

Some where today I noticed that a Kitfox or Avid was back flying again after an incident in which a carb cable broke and that carb going to full throttle apparently did not help preventing damage to the airframe
The Bing on the Jabiru I flew for a year also had the spring set up to go full throttle if the cable failed but it only had one carb.
How does a 912 run when one carb is full idle or full throttle and the other one is still controlable with throttle?
Herman

After 500 hours without a clutch I cannot imagine flying a 582 without one.
I do not miss the start up and shut down gear box rattle and prop shake or high idle speed.
They say a windmilling prop has more drag than a stationary prop if engine out.
I have not done any scientific tests to compare but the windmilling prop does not seem to reduce the engine out glide on my Model 1 Kitfox.
Herman

Joey
I am curious which Ivo prop you went with? Diameter, # of blades and ultralight or medium blades?
Chris B is the one that told me about the polyswitches which cost a whooping 65 cents each and you need 2 of them and do not go without them IMO.
I am convinced that polyswitches make life easier on the IVO IFA electric motor.
The IVO breaker is 20 amps and I feel having to reset that breaker is Mickey Mouse plus it takes several seconds to reset.
I am using 6 amp polyswitches and I know when the prop has reached it's high or low pitch by watching my volts reading go down momentarily till the polyswitch opens.
The polyswitches reset instantly and I have yet to reset the 20 amp breaker since using polyswitches.
Joey already has the HACman which is very nice since pitch changes influence the EGT's significantly on the 582.
Herman

av8r
I want to buy.
I believe the model 4-7 with a 912S and 26" air streaks will meet my needs.
What speed will these Kitfoxes cruise at burning 5 g/h with 26" Air streaks?
I spoke with Sky raider regarding their Frontier and got the impression they are marketing the pilots that prefer Lycomings over 912's.
Their wing loading is higher than Kitfoxes and Highlander which I assume would feel more solid in turbulent air.
My model 1 feels like a toy airplane in anything but mild turbulence.
My wish would be a Highlander with a faster wing even if it gives up a little short field performance.
Or a Kitfox with adjustable seats and more open baggage area.
Any one know of 912 Kitfox's for sale?
Herman

Thanks for responding Av8r3400 again on this forum and also Bob
Last night a googled Kitfox versus Highlander and learned a lot from threads regarding what you call splitting hairs.
Most seem to agree that the Kitfox model 4-7 airfoil is faster than the undercambered airfoil of older Foxes, Avids and Highlanders.
Most agree that the Highlander lands slower and shorter and baggage area is better.
One Kitfox 5 owner suggested that a Kitfox in the hands of Steve Henry could make a Kitfox land similar to a Highlander.
While doing my search I found the SkyRaider Frontier.
This seems to be a fairly new model with Highlander style open baggage area and it appears they chose to use the undercambered wing like Highlander did.
Seems to me the Kitfox wing with Highlander baggage would be ideal for me but this combination does not exist.
It was also mentioned that maybe why the Kitfox wing is faster other than not being undercambered is that the flaperons are airfoil shaped.
Maybe the Kitfoxes do not land as slow is because flaperons can not be lowered like flaps do to limiting aileron control.
I do not use the flaperons on my model I for that reason.
In order to have open baggage, cables instead of pushrods are used for the ailerons and flaps.
As everyone already knew, these airplanes are all compromises.
I need a folding wing airplane.
Anyone have any thoughts on the Glastar.
I understand the wing folding is not something you want to do everytime you fly like I do now.
Do they land slow enough to be a serious backcountry airplane or only in Steve Henry's hands?
Thanks Herman

My son Brent and his family just returned from Anchorage by Airlines.
I am so jealous of the great experience he had flying Alaska.
He left his Pacer tied down at Merrill field till he returns to fly it home.
Does anyone know of hanger space for rent in case we leave it for the winter?
His family of 4 is out growing the Pacer so it is for sale or trade up for a Maule or light weight C-180 or C-185
1960 PA 22-20, 0-320 160 HP, 400 SMOH, Borer Prop, 31 inch Alaskan Bushwheels and ABW tailwheel, Ron Sullivan wing tip extensions, VG's, Very clean inside and out with leather upholstery.
Oregon Herman 541 404 6464 Brent 541 404 2775
Thanks

My son Brent arrived in Anchorage on Monday.
He flew the "trench".
He and the 2 other planes must have done their homework because the border crossings were non events.
They were carrying shotguns for bear protection.
He was carrying 3 Alaskan Bushwheel 5 gallon fuel bladders but said he could have made the trip without them but will use them while exploring Alaska this week.
He has commented repeatedly how friendly the people they have met in Canada and Alaska are.
A pilot a Hood airport came up to his family on the ramp and offered the use of his cabin 30 miles north of Anchorage and also gave them a ride to a restaurant.
I hope to make this trip myself soon.
Canada, Alaska and Airplanes make for a great adventure.
Herman

Ed
I did not know about the transponder requirement in Canada.
Good to know.
Herman

My kid just landed in Anchorage.
He was a day late due to weather in the lower 48.
Leni; can't do the woodshed idea because he lets me use his hanger and fly his Bonanza.
This all started 20 years ago when he was 12 years old.
He flew and I just sat there.
When he soloed the Kitfox on his 16th birthday I got to fly again.
My wife raised a great kid.
Herman

Leni
Thanks for making the engine mount comparison with Bob.
The past post with photos you directed me to give a good idea the difference between the Kitfox and Avid 582 install and engine mounts.
The Kitfox engine mount attaches to the fire wall at 5 points all on the same flat plane, 4 of which look similar to the Avid and the 5th attachment clear at the bottom and middle of the fuselage seems not to exist on the Avid.
Your engine sits very low, but the gear box is still quite high.
This may be the reason Joey's gear box is in the breeze which would make for a smaller, lower and narrower cowl which would be easier to see around.
Joey; where did your cowl come from or is it a one off?
Anyone have photos showing the Avid 582 exhaust layout.
Thanks to all
Herman