Having been involved in the building of three KR-2's I would suggest that the weight is very average,...mine were 580, 595 and 619 Lbs. Many builders that I know have been in this ball park. The speeds mentioned are pretty honest for the size engine installed and weight of aircraft. Climb or cruise prop? Totally stock engine? I believe the 1700CC refers to the stock 1680 CC bug engine. If true, then converting to 1800 cc piston/cylinders would be a simple task. REMEMBER, homebuilts are works in progress, almost never completed. The fotos indicate nice workmanship. Did i miss something on the engine,...like a carb heat box?? A little ram air into that carb might improve things also. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frank van der Hulst (Staff WG)" <f.vanderhu...@ucol.ac.nz> To: <kr...@mylist.net> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 5:50 PM Subject: KR> Advice sought on buying a KR-2
Hi, I'm new to this list and to KRs (but have just sold an RV-6 project I'd been working on for 10 years). I'd appreciate some advice/opinions/thoughts on a KR-2 I'm considering buying. Here's the ad: "Rand KR2 homebuilt 65 hrs Total Time Airframe and Engine 100 Kts Cruise on 2.5 GPH Ian Henry Prop VW powered, dual ignition, twin plug heads and carb heat. Narco Com 11a radio Ameriking ELT" Some photos can be seen at http://www.saa.org.nz/modules.php?name=ZClassifieds&file=detail&cat=9&de =34 I've emailed the owner a couple of times, and got a whole lot more details. I'm mostly concerned about two things: low airspeeds and high weights... He says that it cruises at 100kts (115mph) at 3000+RPM and 2.5GPH, and maximum speed is 115kts (132mph). The engine is a 1700 Type 3 VW, good for about 50hp. Secondly, he describes the empty weight as "600+lbs", and useful load as "370+"lbs. That adds up to a max gross of over 970lbs. I've spent a couple of days researching KR-2's on the Net and listening in to this list, and this just seems awfully slow and awfully heavy for a KR-2. So, my questions: 1. Is this plane particularly slow? 2. Is this plane particularly heavy? 3. If it is slow, then why? My thoughts include some combination of: 1. 50hp just ain't enough (what the vendor is suggesting) 2. The prop is too short or needs re-pitching 3. The heavy weight 4. High drag a. Wings have been lengthened by 8" b. a slightly taller-than-usual canopy to accomodate a 6'2" pilot c. No gear leg or wheel fairings d. The bottom of the cowl has some squarish mouldings on it (I guess to clear the carb) e. Improper rigging perhaps As I said, I'd appreciate thoughts/opinions/ideas from KR-2 owners -- how good or bad is this plane? Thanks in advance, Frank ____________________________________________________ Learn real skills for the real world - Apply online at http://www.ucol.ac.nz or call 0800 GO UCOL (0800 46 8265) or txt free 3388 for more information and make a good move to UCOL - Universal College of Learning. Enrol with a public institute and be certain of your future ____________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html
