Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20040423194728.025f7e08@mail.teleport.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 19:52:55 -0700
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
From: Michael McGee <jmpcrftr@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Wanted RV-4 dynafocal mount
In-Reply-To: <list-3187377@logan.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 19:28 2004-04-23, you wrote:
>Looking for an old mount for a bargain price.  Any of you guys that
>converted to long legs have a short leg mount you want to part with for a
>salvage price?  I'm working on an engine stand project and need a dynafocal
>1 mount preferably for an RV-4.
>
>Located in Portland, OR, so closer is better but I'll consider anything
>within reasonable shipping distance.
>
>No need to reply to the whole list, email me back directly.
>
>Do not archive
>
>Thanks,
>Mike
>
>Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Hillsboro, OR
>13B in gestation mode, RD-1C, EC-2
>--------------------------------
>Mike,
>I bought my RV-4 mount about 2 years ago - do I have the short or the long 
>legs?  How do I know, ie., how long are the 'short' and how long are the 
>'long'?
>
>Thanks,
>Ken Powell


You've got the long legs.  I don't have measurements for the difference 
between the two.  I think the original was designed to accommodate a 70" 
prop and the later revision will accommodate a 72".  This is in order to 
have a certain ground clearance as specified by Van.  I think it's 6" when 
the fuse is level.

You have to go back to about the mid 90s to find the short legs.  The long 
legs were a revision to accommodate longer props on 180 hp engines.  The 
original RV-4s were designed for an O-320, not an O-360.  Then all those 
old ex-hot-rodders got into building airplanes...

Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Hillsboro, OR
13B in gestation mode, RD-1C, EC-2