Randy trotted out the S-20 fuselage today in preparation for Osh...

svanarts wrote:Without rounded wing tips though it looks a little out of place. If I were to build one and wanted the round tail I'd build in wing tip bows.

Hey now! What are you trying to say about my 170.

We thought about the S-20 instead as the 1st one is most likely headed to their AK dealer. It's cool, but it is going to be heavier than the S7S.

There is some new landing gear for the S7S from the factory coming soon to a theatre near you, so stay tuned.

robw56 wrote:

svanarts wrote:Without rounded wing tips though it looks a little out of place. If I were to build one and wanted the round tail I'd build in wing tip bows.

Hey now! What are you trying to say about my 170.

At least you have rounded horizontals go to with the rounded vertical. I asked. Randy already said NO to the rounded elevators.

Contemplating an S-20 with a 914 turbo. Tough decisions as I got used to the space of the 182 - frequently travel with mtn bikes and/or dogs and that would be out with the S-20.

29 - Randy is trying a new UL Power 200hp motor in on of the S20 demonstrator. Yep, you red that right. I am not sure what the LBS/HP will be, but it sounds cool. That would be a shit hot combo - if its reasonably light - which knowing Randy, its got to be (relative to a Lyc anyway).

Give it big tires, VG's, hopefully the S6 Roberts gear (forthcoming) with RAGE shock system. Dude. You would probably spend the next few years just working up to its capability.

From Randy on FB today

Randy Schlitter In comparison testing, we saw it a bit stronger than the 100 HP Rotax, so looking at 200HP version of the ul power for one of our demo Ravens.

Yeeehaaaa!!!!

Quick calculation, based on spec'd empty weight and UL listed installed wight for 390is. 3 ish lbs/hp vs my 4.11 lbs/hp in my old S7S (at its spec'd empty weight of about the same - 720lbs

http://www.ulpower.com/news/blog/wp-con ... 3/2-A5.pdf

The Raven is looking good...

This is what's under the hood: http://www.ulpower.com/engines/ul350iS/

svanarts wrote:The Raven is looking good...

This is what's under the hood: http://www.ulpower.com/engines/ul350iS/

Thats an S7!

Duh! You're right. But I have an excuse; it was early and I am stupid.

Like the rest of you, I am anxious to see the S-20 with its "clothes" on and some first flight videos.

Has anyone seen any pricing on the ul engines?

Crzyivan13 wrote:Has anyone seen any pricing on the ul engines?

They are not cheap.

I just did the conversions on the website. Engine price looks like $26k USD. Fuel burn at 65% looks to be 6.2 GPH (I extrapolated a bit. ~85 HP at ~2250RPM = ~23.7 LPH).

That's for the 130 HP UL350iS.


On a side note, are there many props that operate at 3300 RPM? I've not (in my very limited experience) seen a direct drive engine operate that high. At 2700 RPM that engine looks to make 110 HP.

Am I the only one to think that fuel burn sounds high?

I'd be more proactive in looking for the next great engine, if my damn Rotax didn't run so good. It's like every Toyota I've ever owned, and I mean that in a good way. I LIKE the liquid cooling, and view it as a plus, not a minus. No shock cooling worries, tighter internal tolerances, some say quieter, and an additional way to heat the cabin. I have both a muffler heat muff and a auto type hot water heater.

I look forward to more news on the S-20, whatever engine it has, especially empty weight.

I grabbed this off of the Zenith Website. I'm Sure Rans will have similar pricing:



Go to the 3:30 mark in this video.


It seems like the FADEC would take the human error out of things like mixture control, detonation, carb sync, and other things that an average Joe may not even be aware of that might do harm to the engine. As far as what CG said, I don't know about shock cooling, but I'm guessing that the pilot is still ultimately in control of that. Maybe the engine would lean itself out thus creating a higher internal temp? I don't know.

Zenith shows a fuel burn in this blog post of 4.0 GPH.
http://www.zenith.aero/profiles/blogs/zenith-ch-650-performance

Install Video Preview:


I'm pretty excited about the S-20 and this engine combo.

i would sure like them to be less coy about the rpm that HP is made, notice it's not displayed along with the other numbers. Any other or most engine model specs, (Rotax, Lycoming, etc.) the rpm is right there front and center. I see that 97 horse model for example, and just automatically think 80, at more usable prop rpm's.

The shock cooling or lack thereof is an issue more important to some then others guess, depending on the terrain flown and how. Often I am cresting a ridge and then dropping down a few thou to the next valley, I constantly bounce around between 4 and 8 or 9, and think nothing of a major throttle back and pushing the stick forward, did so just this morning on a photo shoot in the next valley over. Not a huge issue, but enough to where when I see air cooled touted as a big advantage, I go "yeah, but". On the other hand, if Randy S. is considering this engine , that says a lot for it, as he is about as conservative as Dick V. It sure looks pretty and the price is in line. Good point on maybe the FADEC somehow controlling somewhat the shock cooling issue, like a modern car engine being less prone to ignorant drivers lugging it. I know my CAT engine in my crane is smarter then I am, it will reduce power is it senses the coolant is low for example, add coolant to the over flow tank and the power is miraculously restored

courierguy wrote:i would sure like them to be less coy about the rpm that HP is made, notice it's not displayed along with the other numbers. Any other or most engine model specs, (Rotax, Lycoming, etc.) the rpm is right there front and center. I see that 97 horse model for example, and just automatically think 80, at more usable prop rpm's.

I guess I'm a little confused. What numbers are you looking for? The HP/ torque / RPM curves are all over their web site. Most of the engines have very linear power curves and create top HP at a little over 3000rpm.
I'm seriously thinking of dropping one in my S-7 instead of a 914.
I just wish there were more in the field to get a better idea of reliability.
My Rotax is dependable as a stone ax but it gets a bit anemic at strips above 8000'.

I know that torque is what matters, and I see they get max torque at reasonable rpms, big prop useable rpms. How that relates to the much higher rpm's where they get max horsepower, I don't know. I'd just like it a lot better if I didn't see "3300 rpm" at all in there!

I just got on their site, and like you said they have the info there, I guess I was just referring to the post reference of horsepower with no mention of at what rpm, where any other time and engine it is common to see rpm immediately after the horsepower. 5800 for instance with the 912S and the gearbox ratio of 2.43, so a max prop rpm of 2386 and some change. Or if it's the 2.27 ratio it's 2555 rpm max at the prop. To me that means I can swing a bigger prop slower and get more thrust and efficiency out of the hole. Now if I was flying a go fast (hey it's all relative, anything over 100 is fast to me) like the Zenith 601 or whatever it was, it may be a different story.

It would be very interesting to take a 70 or 72 " Warp or Kiev set up for a 912S on a S-7 or Highlander or other "go-slow" STOL LSA, and hang it on a 97 horsepower UL and see what happens. That would really clear things up, and do a fuel flow at the same time on both engines. My Stratus Subaru I had in my first S-7... that's what they did. And, it swung the same metal prop that a good strong 0-200 did, but 300 rpm faster (static), that showed pretty clearly it had more power on takeoff anyway. The marketing of the UL is obviously biased towards the traditional aircraft engine pilot, being air cooled and no re-drive, but you sure don't see 3300 rpm mentioned anywhere in any Lyc or Cont specs. Nice looking engine none the less.

They seem to me to be an upgraded version of the Jabiru. I do like the keep it simple idea with no gearbox, one carb, and air cooling but then all those thing have their limitations as well. 130 horses and fuel injection sure is tempting. Just think what that would do to an S-7 or the S-20. The 914 is a huge improvement over the 912. I wonder if the 130 horse UL would show similar gains.