Thanks to those who responded... this sure is a friendly helpful list! I'll reply to all the responses in this one post.
Whilst I'm used to taking anything I find on the Net with a grain of salt, I was mainly concerned over the weight after I read "A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE KR2" By Neil Bingham http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/neilb.html. He suggests that a reasonable max gross would be 880lbs. Which would mean that I could get into the plane, but couldn't actually gas it up. (Do you need 30mins reserve if you just sit on the tarmac and make "Brm Brm" noises without actually starting the engine? :-) The article suggests that they get quite squirrely as the weight goes up. What max gross are most people stating for their KR-2s? How well do they fly when loaded to over (say) 900lbs? I don't know what the prop is... it spins at 3000+RPM at cruise, which suggests to my O-320-oriented mind that it needs to be pitched a bit more coarsely. What's the normal max RPM for a VW aircraft installation (I've seen 3,500 mentioned somewhere)? Yes there is a carb heat box... I think its visible in the engine picture, between the conical air filter and the carb. Regarding "homebuilts are works in progress": I'm happy (maybe even looking forward to!) making mods to try to improve the performance. The vendor isn't the builder. From what he says, the engine is probably stock. But he says its 1700cc *and* a Type 3 engine, which my Net research says doesn't compute (only Type 4 engines were 1700cc or bigger as stock). I'll be asking the vendor for some more information on this. My experience in high-performance aircraft is limited (i.e. about an hour total right-seat in RV-6s), a fairly low-performance KR isn't a problem. For a while. My thinking is to get some hours in the aircraft, then start looking at aerodynamic improvements, and then (when I've got a bit more money) improving horsepower. The article suggests that 80hp is the maximum reasonable power for a KR-2. So, would a Subaru conversion be practical? I realise that this would be a *major* rework, but I feel more comfortable with the idea of 80hp out of a Subaru than out of a VW. I will be asking the vendor "Why only 65 hours?". I did ask about accidents/repairs, and the reponse was "Logged". To be fair, that was one of about 70 questions I asked in a single email. The aircraft was originally built in Zimbabwe then imported to NZ. He also didn't give a year of manufacture, but it was first registered in NZ in 1993. My supposition is that the reason its got so few hours is that he bought it as a damaged aircraft and has repaired it (he's an aircraft engineer) for sale. That perhaps also explains why he's put his own-design landing gear on it. Regarding the "optimistic fuel-burn figures claimed by the vendor": In a phone conversation, he suggested that airspeed figures and weights on the Net are optimistic. I'm taking all figures with a grain of salt. Thanks again for all your input. 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 =96 Universal College of Learning. Enrol with a public institute and be certain of your future ____________________________________________________
