FWIW, my KR was started before there were any -2S plans, so my firewall is the smaller KR-2 firewall and the drawing you have is the mount I am using. (My KR started out as a stock KR-2 with an extra 14" bay in the fuselage.) My W&B came out about as perfect as one could want with the mount as is using the C series mount bushings and adapters. However, I did calculate mounting it with the longer O-200 mount bushings and my plane would have been just fine in either case. I only used the C series bushings and adapters so I could avoid extending all my wiring, engine control cables, and cowling.
This really depends on what your plane weighs and how it's distributed. But if you plan to use the standard O-200 mount bushings, I would probably shorten the mount about an inch. I expect this mount is probably a bit longer than the one that was on your plane before. -Jeff Scott Los Alamos, NM ----- Original Message ----- From: mfreem...@indy.rr.com Sent: 06/22/12 04:55 PM To: kr...@mylist.net Subject: KR> Engine mount I'm not trying to beat a dead horse here but looking at the plan sheet for the KR-2S engine mount and the Cont. O-200 engine that Jeff sent me, I noticed that the spacing from the firewall to the O-200 engine mount casting (11-1/2") is just that, it does not show any isolator bushings which in the case of the O-200 would add another inch to the dimensions and make it (12-1/2") from the firewall to the casting and I kind of feel that might be just a little too far forward for the KR-2, so I made two sets of spacers for my jig so it can be made either way, 10-1/2" or 11-1/2". I also made the top horizontal mount spacing 28" for the KR-2 and 30" for the KR-2S. The older KR-2 firewall was narrower than the new KR-2S by 1-3/4" according to both of my plan sets. But, does anyone have real time experiance with the KR-2 and the Cont. O-200 engine mounted farther forward than 10-1/2" from the firewall to the standard O-200 isolator mount bushings?
