| Author | Message | ||
     Dr. Bernie Garrett Unregistered guest |
Hi all, I (like many before me!) am considering buying an older 1989 model semi complete kit. Up until now I had not considered this model because of the price. It has the 90 model tail conversion and is pretty complete and about 80% done - wings and fuselage closed. I was wondering: a) Are there any major concerns re. safety/handling of the older wing design b)would I be able to upgrade the landing gear to the newest version fairly easily (is it worth doing - it is the original steel version as far as I can tell), and lastly, c)can I put in a 200-210 hp engine and still have a usable 4 seater? Many thanks for any feedback/pointers | ||
| Mark Rich New member Username: Mrich Post Number: 8 Registered: 01-2003 |
I've been flying an 89 vintage kit CT for two years (others have been flying far longer) and have the same wing and an even older, smaller tail. I wouldn't be concerned about the safety/handling of the older wing, its tough and well behaved. I have the new Al landing gear (I might have been the first CT using it) and its worked fine. No changes needed to switch from Steel to Al, as far as I can tell the only difference is that the tail sits a few inches taller on the ground. I'm not sure its worth doing if you already have the steel gear (I had original fiberglass gear aka boat anchors, so I didn't have an option). Your empty weight and max gross might change a little but you'll have to consider the cost of the new gear. I have a 300hp engine so I can't say much about performance with a 200/210. I've gotten >500ft/min at 10k feet at gross (800lbs pax, 100lbs baggage and 400lbs fuel) so I would characterize it as a very usable four seater. With a four cyl engine you would have a lower empty weight so you would have more carry capacity but less climb performance so it really depends on how you want to use the plane. When I built mine, I thought most of my flying would be with four pax but it turns out most of my flying is solo or with one other pax and mostly straight and level, long trips. Needless to say, climb performance is impressive but I would probably reconsider using a smaller engine. | ||
| Rob Jordan Unregistered guest |
Mr garrett, my father and I are the owners and builders of an "Old Style" Express CT with the second generation composite gear and a 250 HP IO 540. We finished the aircraft a year and a half ago and could not be happier with our choice. I have put 170 hours myself on the aircraft including a 4500 Nm tour of the US this summer with my whole family and numerous other long trips. Including gross departures from a density altitude of 7300 ft on 5000 FT runway with half the runway to spare. I've put it through tropical rain storms, 15 deg temps in driving snow, 104 deg mid day high desert takeoffs, Hours of solid IMC including a tropical storm, and I can say without hesitation the express as originally designed is an outstanding aircraft with no bad habits. I have no reason to believe the modern version is anything less and they build much quicker. I like the six cylinder for the smoothness and extra climb but I know from others the four cylinder planes were fine. I would be happy to discuss the aircraft in greater detail please feel free to contact me. | ||
| CBROS Unregistered guest |
The CBROS Express CT, started in 1989 and first flown in Aug 2000 has an IO-540 Lyc rated at 250 HP. We now have nearly 500 hours on the Hobbs, averaging about 140 hrs per year. Our example routinely cruises at about 200 mph burning 12 to 14.5 gph. We have found it to be a stable IFR platform and have flown in icing conditions several times. We have found no adverse characteristics save for a tendency for the tail to wander in turbulance, and consider the airplane to perform as advertised. I would caution that while 200 hp is adequate, we feel that you would be better served with something in the 250 hp range. I know of a CT that has an IO-360 Continental that performs very well and is somewhat more economical. FYI I have been publishing a newsletter for Express builders since 1990 and would be happy to forward copies of the most recent issues which might give you a better feel for current Express progress. Bill C | ||
| Mark Rich New member Username: Mrich Post Number: 9 Registered: 01-2003 |
I just recived an email from a builder with glass gear and want to clarify my comment about my original glass gear being "boat anchors". I had the original wheeler gear that was determined to be unsafe, unusable as landing gear but possibly suitable for holding things down in the wind (unless you live in Florida). I know several other builders have perfectly acceptable glass gear of a later vintage, better design so don't take my comments as disparaging of glass gear in general. My apologies. | ||
| Reinhard Metz New member Username: Reinhard_metz Post Number: 50 Registered: 03-2003 |
Bernie, I have one of the 200HP, four cylinder versions, with the Lycomming I/O360. I have over 600 hours on hte plane. I love it! I burn 10.5 to 12.8 G/hr, depending on altitude, and cruise from 192 to 200mph, depending on altitude and temperature. Yes, if I lived in denver, I would want the bigger engine for climb performance. And on hot days, at gross, the climb at higher altitudes is noticably weaker. But on longer trips, my range is exceptional - less stops. The Lycomming I/O360 is not the smoothest engine in the world, but is fairly reliable. And, I have NO heat problems - cruise CHTs 310 to 330, climb never over 390. That's good for engine life. Reinhard Metz | ||
| Dr. Bernie Garrett Unregistered guest |
Hi everyone, Many thanks for all the help. I am convinced! However I am trying to figure out the cheapest option for transporting the kit from Siren, WI 1500 miles to where I live. I can get the project in a 24" U-Haul which looks like the cheapest option, but any other suggestions welcome" Cheers Bernie | ||
| Jeff Dingbaum New member Username: Aviators Post Number: 23 Registered: 12-2000 |
I brought mine home with a 24' Ryder. They have a flat bed in the back. All of the Uhauls that I've seen have bumps for the rear wheels. Also got a car trailer (not dolly) and towed my minivan home. Take plenty of old carpet, blankets, towels, straps, etc. Tying down the cruciform tail (if you have that model) was the toughest part. They don't lend themselves to lying down flat. Jeff | ||
| Jim Butler Unregistered guest |
Reinhard, What do you mean your engine "is not the smoothest engine in the world"? ;>) Jim | ||
| stan susman New member Username: Stanpfa Post Number: 9 Registered: 01-2003 |
Hi, Stan here, I have 2 airplanes one with a Lyc. IO-360 and the other (my Express) With a Cont. IO-360 (6 cylinder) And I must say that the airframe and the pilot of the cont.powered bird are much in favor of the smoothness. | ||
| Reinhard Metz New member Username: Reinhard_metz Post Number: 51 Registered: 03-2003 |
Jim, Ha, Ha! What Jim is referring to is that we checked my prop balance the other day and tuned it up, and it came out ~0.0 inch/sec vibration - perfect, and simply amazing! And it is very smooth! The general "feel" of a four cylinder Lyc '360 is still a little rougher than a good six, but overall I am very happy with my drive train. Reinhard | ||
| CBROS Unregistered guest |
... and can we discontinue using the term "old model"? What you are referring to is the "original" model, like original Kentucky fried chicken, or a CT. None of us appreciate being described as "old" - except perhaps Sjostrand or Thordarson!!! Bill C | ||
| Mark Rich New member Username: Mrich Post Number: 10 Registered: 01-2003 |
We CT owners may have a "vintage" model but no one will refer to our planes as having a "large behind"... | ||
| Chaz King New member Username: Chazking Post Number: 37 Registered: 01-2005 |
Does anyone have the Express S-90 dimensions? Wing length, fuselage, tail feathers? Need to find a trailer. Chäz |