Larry,
The numbers are indicated. But i believe they are very close. The
GPS and the VSI agree within 50' of each other as will as the altitude
and the airspeed all seem to be nearly right on. I will time things when
I get more proficient. RPM's are the most suspect for accuracy and I will
have that checked on the next flight.
The only thing that I se for the different number in climb is the rpm you
posted. At 90 mph I am turning 3000 rpm. At 80 mph it drops of to 2800
plus or minus. I had hesitated to post numbers yet because I knew that I
did not have complete accuracy but I am sure they are in the ball park.
Like I mentioned also my plane is completely faired and gap seals all on.
So I have no way of knowing how they affect things.
Joe Horton, Coopersburg, PA.
joe.kr2s.buil...@juno.com
> >58" x 64 Sterba prop
> > The numbers:
> >normal climb-90 mph indicated-- 1200'/min
> >best angle climb-- 80 mph -- 1500'/min
> >75%power cruise -- 2800 rpm-- 145mph
> >WOT--3150 rpm--170mph
> >cruse climb-- 2800 rpm--700'/m-- 130 mph
> >Joe Horton
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Joe,
>
> Are your climb numbers measured or indicated on a VSI ?
>
> The reason I ask is that you Corvair fliers seem to get
> better climb performance than my 0-200. I'm talking
> anywhere from 200 to 700 feet. I'm running a 60X64 Sterba
> prop and I'll get 800 fpm climb max but I still get 170mph the
> same as you in cruise at 2650 rpm. I know I'm not getting
> the hp out of my engine on climbout (2350 - 2400 rpm) but
> a 50% better climb rate is hard to fathom.
>
> You Corvair fliers are all running the new wing , I think, and
> I'm running a stock KR wing but the numbers difference is
> hard for me to believe.
>
> Larry Flesner
