Vw Tdi

[Rob Wright]

seems like you would be better off just selling the bio-diesel and buying a deltahawk.

[Hans S]

To sell the biodiesel, I'd have to tax it and who knows what else.

 

Actually, I still want to build up a tdi. I'll probably build what I want, get a prop to match, bring it out to the country so as not to make the neighbors mad, and run it through a test phase.

 

I still think a 1.9TDI would be a viable solution.

[Edge 513]

What luck...I found just the airframe for you on a European homebuilders website. Those rascally Euro-guys, keepin' all the good stuff to themselves.

Plenty of room for any engine desired and plenty of fuel stowage for those long flights. Its only drawback is it appears to be a two place, but that view from up above must rival the Cozy.

[Hans S]

Did that thing even fly? That would be cool. Like a flying whale shark.

[Hans S]

[satch]

See, I'm thinking something bad from about someone from "the other" forum .... I must restrain self ... must contain self ... the horror.

[Edge 513]

Sorry Satch, I think I was channeling his spirit. There was this insistent mantra going on in my head like a thrumming noise to "go wider, Wider, WIDER, but I didn't post that. ....I shook my head several times and refused to type "move back the mains" and put blended winglets on it. It was quite a battle of wits...and Dam, now I've got a lightning shaped scar on my forehead to try and explain to my wife.

Yow...

Yea, and It did kinda look like a whaleshark. Those guys that came up with the 'skyshark' a few years ago must have put a twist on that.

[Cozy Girrrl]

Well eventually one of those guys will widen their cozy to the point the fuselage absorbs the wings and the winglets are attached to the longerons, sort of a flying saucer with winglets.

 

The greatest difference a builder can make in the comfort of their Cozy project is at the dinner table, you have at least four years to figure that out.

 

...Chrissi

[quisveritatemest]

Was the Horsepower that you have listed for the TDI WHP or SHP? I have heard that some of the VW TDI engines were manufactured for industrial use, in which case they would probably do OK at full load for extended periods of time. However, that is probably only at the intended manufacturers power rating. Another thing to consider with the TDI is torque. Diesels generally produce much more torque than and equivalent gasoline engine. This is very important, since it directly relates to the force produced by the prop in relation to the RPM's. In the end, I would still think that there is going to be a trade off between performance and economy.

If you are looking for economy, maybe you should look at an 8V149 or similar. Everyone would hate you for the noise and the fact that you are raining oil from the skies, but it would get great economy and last forever, even under a continuous full load. I guess, you would need a bigger airplane too.

[Pumperdemon]

I've been looking into this myself lately, and from what I'm seeing across the interwebs:

Weight: 1.9 TDI (ALH version) weighs in around 290 dry and accessory free - give or take, or 330ish with the flywheel (making a test stand runnable engine) Throw in another 50 for plumbing, fluids, and alternator (playing loose on the high side) - so around 380 for a runnable engine package.

Power: the US spec of 110 hp is grossly underpowered by global standards. The engine was built for, and comes stock with (in other countries) up to 245hp for use in cargo vehicles. It still maintains longevity just fine.

Longevity: On these engines, the first thing to go south is usually the turbo at around 200k miles. I just rebuilt the wife's turbo at 230k miles - it gave lots of warning and didn't fully fail, it just got noisy and smoky. Found 1/4" of play in the center section on teardown. She drove it like that for about 6 months and isn't one for keeping up on maintenance. I drove it to work one day and about lost my mind when I heard the racket and saw the mosquito fog out back. 

Needed for reliable aircraft use: (humble opinion colored by research) the flywheel is needed to smooth out reversion. A DMF might be better for harmonics, but that's usually a response for vehicle drivetrain rollover and not harmonics. Wood prop takes a lot of bite out of harmonics. I'm thinking something along the lines of a motorcycle rear wheel cush drive to ease the last of the harmonics. Its proven and easily available.

Power upgrades would be EGR delete to remove the carboned intake tract problems, MAF sensor delete, injector upgrade, aftermarket chip to run off the MAP sensor exclusively, and possibly a turbo. These mods will give around 200 hp very reliably, and fairly cheaply. I know a slightly stupid non-mechanic who has done these exact things and is currently giving hell to the local subaru crowd - until they get above 80mph and he runs out of steam! 😁😂 

 

[Kent Ashton]

I suggest you will not find much enthusiasm for auto-engined canard airplanes in this forum.  This thread is 11+ years old.  You would probably find more on Homebuiltairplanes.com.  Aside from the engineering, the weight and balance is more tricky in a Rutan canard.  Then there is the flight-testing: canards are not good test airplanes.  They glide shallow, land fast, the gear is somewhat fragile and they are prone to swapping ends in crash due to the engine weight in back.  Mazdas have been tried but most of them get taken off AFAICT.  Gary Spencer used a direct-drive aluminum V-8 that was pretty reliable.   There are some Subaru-engined efforts surviving the cut but they don't fly much, apparently.  Another chap just removed his Subaru for a Lycoming.  Nah, I would stick to regular airplane engines for the canards.  🙂

http://cozybuilders.org/wick/index.html

[Pumperdemon]

I did see the Gary spencer v8 version, it looks pretty neat. From what I see, the TDI will have comparable power in direct drive as the v8 does (his was direct wasn't it? I forget), it has a little less weight, and a bit smaller profile. As seen in Gary's bird, weight and balance can be figured and adjusted for. An o320 sits around 270 or 290 and puts out around 150 hp, if memory serves, so the HP increase should counter the weight increase. My only question would be where the center of balance for both engines would be. I can only imagine that an i4 would bee further out from firewall, but just how much, and can it be set farther enough forward to compensate is my big question.

[Voidhawk9]

Tricky, but not impossible.

For as new type of conversion, mounting it on something slow and rugged would be a safer start. If it is a 'proven' conversion, then by all means. Just know what you are getting into, but this is experimental aviation, after all.

[Gary]

I know how old this thread is...but builds take this long. This guy was flying his TDI conversion when the arguments were flying here. There's a link to his website, where there is no further information. I did message him, and he's still flying it...