OOOHHH look what i found --

[Turbo]

Justin you are correct sir, I was plenty impressed! Specifically cause of the fuel injection setup, that's what I love messing around with... Even installed EFI on my yamaha BWS 100 2Stroke scooter ....hehe yee haw

Oh yes and UL has a 1500hr TBO..... Rotax kiss my @@rse again.

[Sideslip]

Oh and according to the sales dude -- it is certified..... im not interested in that side of things, but whomever is, Id suggest you research it further. now to find a plane that needs this power plant.... mmmhhhhhh

Forgot about UL Power - they got ASTM approval last year...

Fits on a Jab mount, which is already available for the Cheetah, if you are looking for something to play with .

I just spoke to the local agent for UL and he says the motor is NOT ASTM certified yet.

[Sideslip]

Oh yes and UL has a 1500hr TBO..... Rotax kiss my @@rse again.

The later model Rotax 912 (and 914) series has a 2000 hour TBO .....

[justin.schoeman]

I just spoke to the local agent for UL and he says the motor is NOT ASTM certified yet.

Sorry - my fault. Zenith brought out their SLSA aircraft at about the same time as the UL Power FWF. I mistakenly assumed the two were related...

[Sideslip]

I just spoke to the local agent for UL and he says the motor is NOT ASTM certified yet.

Sorry - my fault. Zenith brought out their SLSA aircraft at about the same time as the UL Power FWF. I mistakenly assumed the two were related...

I wish they would hurry up and get the ASTM certification done. Apparently its in final stages ....

Please do not think I am totally committed to Rotax .. I do love the Rotax product but understand full well that there are some equally good motors out there.

[nicow]

I just spoke to the local agent for UL and he says the motor is NOT ASTM certified yet.

Sorry - my fault. Zenith brought out their SLSA aircraft at about the same time as the UL Power FWF. I mistakenly assumed the two were related...

I wish they would hurry up and get the ASTM certification done. Apparently its in final stages ....

Please do not think I am totally committed to Rotax .. I do love the Rotax product but understand full well that there are some equally good motors out there.

...and for a lower price

[Turbo]

Oh yes and UL has a 1500hr TBO..... Rotax kiss my @@rse again.

The later model Rotax 912 (and 914) series has a 2000 hour TBO .....

At what price?? DOUBLE! No thanks you can keep your Rotax! PRICE PRICE PRICE --- FOR QUALITY STILL....

[Sideslip]

Oh yes and UL has a 1500hr TBO..... Rotax kiss my @@rse again.

The later model Rotax 912 (and 914) series has a 2000 hour TBO .....

At what price?? DOUBLE! No thanks you can keep your Rotax! PRICE PRICE PRICE --- FOR QUALITY STILL....

Presuming of course, you religiously stick to the manufactures recommendations - as we are talking NTCA (i stand to be corrected here though) I think you can exceed these numbers if the blow by's, compression etc are still within a certain limit.

Anyhow....

Lets use my 912s cost of R241 000.00. Divide that by 2000hours and you pay R120.50 per hour for your motor if it reaches TBO.

That means the equivalent UL motor would need to retail for less than R180 750.00 (1500 x R120.50) to be at all cheaper than the Rotax 912s by the hour.

Can anyone confirm the local retail price of the UL equivalent of the 912s? It would be an interesting comparison.

The UL looks like a work of art - I have heard no negative comments about it at all but I unfortunately have zero experience with it.

[justin.schoeman]

The 260i (97hp is about the same as a 912S without airbox) would cost around R228,000 from the local agent (based on the price I got at the MISASA fly-in.

Redundant ECU would add ~R15,000 (off the top of my head) to that.

Piston speeds, and BMEP are very similar to the small Lycomings, so I would not be surprised to see TBO raised to 2000 hours once they have some real fleet hours.

[Sideslip]

Oh yes and UL has a 1500hr TBO..... Rotax kiss my @@rse again.

The later model Rotax 912 (and 914) series has a 2000 hour TBO .....

At what price?? DOUBLE! No thanks you can keep your Rotax! PRICE PRICE PRICE --- FOR QUALITY STILL....

Oh dear. Things are not looking in favor of the UL it seems....... pity. (Thanks for price info Justin)

On top of the TBO and price issue, Rotax has already proven its self several times over. UL is still a relatively new kid on the block.

Turbo, I don't understand your comments about double the price. What am I missing?

[Turbo]

Oh dear Mike it seems we doing the incorrect comparison here.

1) FACT -- the UL engine makes more power and costs less than Rotax
2) FACT -- Justin you wrong VERY wrong. I spoke to the UL agent here at Kitty hawk and the price for the COMPLETE 130HP fuel injected engine with drive is 18K euro. So Mike dont compare your baby 912 cheaper rotax engine, bring in your 914 FULLY LOADED with reservoir, exhaust, radiator, fuel pumps, etc etc and lets do the math
3) who gives a hoot about NTCA, abcd, XYZG and whatever else, WE FLY HOME BUILT CATEGORY PLANES, NOT CESNAS!!!
4) FACT rotax has a 12 year shelf life no matter the hours you fly!!! -- BET YOU NEVER KNEW THAT!

-- how many hours on AVERAGE does one fly n a year?? 80-100 ... (NOT INSTRUCTORS)
-- rotax lifespan is 12 years ... At an AVERAGE of 100hours a year, good luck seeing 1200hours FAR from the TBO
-- at 12 years the UL is not at TBO yet it has another 300hours or 3 more years to go
-- at 1200 hours the rotax must be REPLACED!!!!!

5) FACT UL power does NOT have a shelf life ....

Now do the math again mike.... How about DOUBLE the price of the 914 due to shelf life replacement and then divide it by the hours again, and you will see three times the cost of the UL for less power, less features, and MUCH higher maintenance costs, parts costs and stupid bulletins being released every week. It seems like rotax are like Microsoft, every product gets tested in the field and then bulletins are released!!

Oops not looking so good for rotax now is it.

Point is Rotax is a RIPP OFF -- PERIOD

[Blue Max]

Julle ouens raak baie technical dan verloor ek die storie.!!
Se net vir my een ding.
Is daar n engine wat die selfde HP kan spoeg as die 582 Rotex en wat dieselfde gewig het en wat n 4 stroke is nie n two-troke nie.?? ( en obvious goedkoper is)
Die enginne mountings is nie so ingewikkeld nie.! Jimmy hier op die plaas kan dit sommer op n agtermiddag vir my weld.( ek sal hom wys hoe!)
En die papierwerk kan nie so n ingewikkelde saak wees nie. No way!
Laat weet my.
Tx

[justin.schoeman]

Julle ouens raak baie technical dan verloor ek die storie.!!
Se net vir my een ding.
Is daar n engine wat die selfde HP kan spoeg as die 582 Rotex en wat dieselfde gewig het en wat n 4 stroke is nie n two-troke nie.?? ( en obvious goedkoper is)
Die enginne mountings is nie so ingewikkeld nie.! Jimmy hier op die plaas kan dit sommer op n agtermiddag vir my weld.( ek sal hom wys hoe!)
En die papierwerk kan nie so n ingewikkelde saak wees nie. No way!
Laat weet my.
Tx

Praat met KFA oor die ASE engine...

[Sideslip]

Oh dear Mike it seems we doing the incorrect comparison here.

1) FACT -- the UL engine makes more power and costs less than Rotax
2) FACT -- Justin you wrong VERY wrong. I spoke to the UL agent here at Kitty hawk and the price for the COMPLETE 130HP fuel injected engine with drive is 18K euro. So Mike dont compare your baby 912 cheaper rotax engine, bring in your 914 FULLY LOADED with reservoir, exhaust, radiator, fuel pumps, etc etc and lets do the math
3) who gives a hoot about NTCA, abcd, XYZG and whatever else, WE FLY HOME BUILT CATEGORY PLANES, NOT CESNAS!!!
4) FACT rotax has a 12 year shelf life no matter the hours you fly!!! -- BET YOU NEVER KNEW THAT!

-- how many hours on AVERAGE does one fly n a year?? 80-100 ... (NOT INSTRUCTORS)
-- rotax lifespan is 12 years ... At an AVERAGE of 100hours a year, good luck seeing 1200hours FAR from the TBO
-- at 12 years the UL is not at TBO yet it has another 300hours or 3 more years to go
-- at 1200 hours the rotax must be REPLACED!!!!!

5) FACT UL power does NOT have a shelf life ....

Now do the math again mike.... How about DOUBLE the price of the 914 due to shelf life replacement and then divide it by the hours again, and you will see three times the cost of the UL for less power, less features, and MUCH higher maintenance costs, parts costs and stupid bulletins being released every week. It seems like rotax are like Microsoft, every product gets tested in the field and then bulletins are released!!

Oops not looking so good for rotax now is it.

Point is Rotax is a RIPP OFF -- PERIOD

You seem to begetting a little worked up Chris ... Im just trying to have a discussion.

I worked on the price quoted by Justin for the 97HP motor. That's pretty close to the output of the 912s. Yes the price needs confirmation but until someone can confirm in black in white what the price is, that's all I had to go on. I asked Philip (Bundu Aviation) to get online and get involved in the discussion a few days ago - I hope he finds the time to. Although I have only met him a few short times he seems to be a really good bloke.

Very importantly Chris - you do fly an NTCA so I would look that one up if I were you. The point I was making is that you don't need to stick to TBO on NTCA (that covers aircraft such as home builts - not Cessnas etc). I also said I stand to be corrected on this point so don't take my word for it.

I am quite aware of the 12 year Rotax issue but again for NTCA (thats home builts etc Chris) I am not sure if it absolutely has to be complied with or if it is a factory recommendation.
Most importantly, you seem to think im 100% pro Rotax and I am arguing against you. While I do think its (Rotax) a quality product, I do agree its over priced and that there are equally good products out there.

I have mentioned this several times. So no need to get hoity with me .... lets just have a civilized conversation why don't we?

The discussion started off about ending the Rotax monopoly.. I stated reasons why I don't see that happening for some time. Don't shoot the messenger

[Turbo]

Julle ouens raak baie technical dan verloor ek die storie.!!
Se net vir my een ding.
Is daar n engine wat die selfde HP kan spoeg as die 582 Rotex en wat dieselfde gewig het en wat n 4 stroke is nie n two-troke nie.?? ( en obvious goedkoper is)
Die enginne mountings is nie so ingewikkeld nie.! Jimmy hier op die plaas kan dit sommer op n agtermiddag vir my weld.( ek sal hom wys hoe!)
En die papierwerk kan nie so n ingewikkelde saak wees nie. No way!
Laat weet my.
Tx

Praat met KFA oor die ASE engine...

Agree with Justin -- ASE is a good option too.
There is always the Chinese 4 cylinder 2 stroke engine which sells for just over R40K with EVERYTHING and makes 80HP and uses the 582 mount pattern. I posted pics in another post.



[/quote] You seem to begetting a little worked up Chris ... Im just trying to have a discussion.

I worked on the price quoted by Justin for the 97HP motor. That's pretty close to the output of the 912s. Yes the price needs confirmation but until someone can confirm in black in white what the price is, that's all I had to go on. I asked Philip (Bundu Aviation) to get online and get involved in the discussion a few days ago - I hope he finds the time to. Although I have only met him a few short times he seems to be a really good bloke.

Very importantly Chris - you do fly an NTCA so I would look that one up if I were you. The point I was making is that you don't need to stick to TBO on NTCA (that covers aircraft such as home builts - not Cessnas etc). I also said I stand to be corrected on this point so don't take my word for it.

I am quite aware of the 12 year Rotax issue but again for NTCA (thats home builts etc Chris) I am not sure if it absolutely has to be complied with or if it is a factory recommendation.
Most importantly, you seem to think im 100% pro Rotax and I am arguing against you. While I do think its (Rotax) a quality product, I do agree its over priced and that there are equally good products out there.

I have mentioned this several times. So no need to get hoity with me .... lets just have a civilized conversation why don't we?

The discussion started off about ending the Rotax monopoly.. I stated reasons why I don't see that happening for some time. Don't shoot the messenger [/quote]

Mike - agreed, not arguing, just stating point for point fact for fact -- and Rotax honestly does not look good in the example listed above.
ALAS - talk is cheap money buys the whiskey --- what I mean by this is its not somer a simple thing to end a monopoly, but the message needs to get out there that there is "opportunity" and a requirement for an alternative - so companies who manufacture engines, need to start marketing accordingly to capture this.

no matter what Rotax is reliable - Rotax is proven, but Rotax is a RIPP OFF -- period.