Eagler's Nest

Airframes => Single Seaters => Topic started by: Sam Buchanan on June 04, 2014, 12:07:44 PM

Title: LE most bang for the buck
Post by: Sam Buchanan on June 04, 2014, 12:07:44 PM: Since Steve locked the thread with the video on it I'll start another one.

Joe, ol' Putt Putt sure looked good with the little tires on him. :)

Wonder how many Eagles have been built in six months as the vid claimed (Joe excepted)? ;)

But the Eagles are certainly a lot of plane for the money, no argument there (even though the cost for nearly all builders is considerably more than the magazine advertisements....wish that could be corrected...).
Title: Re: LE most bang for the buck
Post by: Steve on June 04, 2014, 02:25:02 PM: Quote from: Sam Buchanan on June 04, 2014, 12:07:44 PM
Wonder how many Eagles have been built in six months as the vid claimed (Joe excepted)? ;)

But the Eagles are certainly a lot of plane for the money, no argument there (even though the cost for nearly all builders is considerably more than the magazine advertisements....wish that could be corrected...).

Finding an unfinished project thru the "Wanted" Board on these pages is the way to do that 6 month build for Less...
Title: Re: LE most bang for the buck
Post by: Sam Buchanan on June 04, 2014, 02:51:06 PM: Quote from: Steve on June 04, 2014, 02:25:02 PM
Quote from: Sam Buchanan on June 04, 2014, 12:07:44 PM
Wonder how many Eagles have been built in six months as the vid claimed (Joe excepted)? ;)

But the Eagles are certainly a lot of plane for the money, no argument there (even though the cost for nearly all builders is considerably more than the magazine advertisements....wish that could be corrected...).

Finding an unfinished project thru the "Wanted" Board on these pages is the way to do that 6 month build for Less...
The video didn't include that qualifier, consequently I think it was misleading for a prospective builder, just as the unrealistic "typical" build cost is misleading in the magazine ads.

The Eagles are fine values without trying to shade build time and cost...no need to do that. That just damages credibility when unrealistic numbers are published.

A great-flying, reliable, well-supported ultralight that can be built for $10,000 in 12-18 months is a superb deal in the current market.
Title: Re: LE most bang for the buck
Post by: leshoman on June 04, 2014, 05:17:08 PM: I built two LEXL fuselages and the rest to get one LEXL flying in 7 months. Does that count. Even worked part time. I would think a first time airplane builder working a 40 hr a week job would not mane it but someone retired with some basic understanding, something to work with and a burning desire to fly could easily make it
Title: Re: LE most bang for the buck
Post by: rockiedog2 on June 04, 2014, 05:48:53 PM: Quote from: Sam Buchanan on June 04, 2014, 12:07:44 PM
Since Steve locked the thread with the video on it I'll start another one.

Joe, ol' Putt Putt sure looked good with the little tires on him. :)

Wonder how many Eagles have been built in six months as the vid claimed (Joe excepted)? ;)

But the Eagles are certainly a lot of plane for the money, no argument there (even though the cost for nearly all builders is considerably more than the magazine advertisements....wish that could be corrected...).
the other thing i noticed was a 19 mph stall and a 65 cruise. man thats some envelope.
well it was a good vid especially since PP got a little footage in it. Johnson I'm sure you're gloatin since that prima donna of yours got all the closeups. yeah i know mine is a rag...but notice who got the air footage. well it looks pretty good from 50 feet.
yeah Sam those tars looked ok...they worked good too especially on rough fields but that particular set was especially heavy at 8# each, lawn mower tars and wheels. i know the black maxes youre running wud work as well when run with low pressure and be light too. i got those on this new thing here which BTW got its Polytone paint job today. looks pretty good...satin finish; old school. we gotta be old school.

EAGLES ROCK

Spencer
Title: Re: LE most bang for the buck
Post by: Dan_ on June 04, 2014, 05:52:53 PM: Quote from: Sam Buchanan on June 04, 2014, 12:07:44 PM
Wonder how many Eagles have been built in six months as the vid claimed (Joe excepted)?
The guy in the video is quoting Leonard when he interviewed him at Sun-n-fun in 1998. He asked Leonard how long it would take to build one. Leonard replied "I don't know, it took me six months."
Title: Re: LE most bang for the buck
Post by: Sam Buchanan on June 04, 2014, 08:23:06 PM: I understand the temptation to claim our airplanes are the least expensive, quickest-to-build, easiest-to-build, slowest stalling, air vehicles in existence.........but I still think we are much better served by quoting real-world numbers to a prospective builder.

Not everyone is retired and able to build 50 hours a week, and not everyone is trying to build the cheapest plane possible. So why should the 'official' numbers be based on non-median builder credentials?

My XL was built by an experienced builder with a full-time job nine months out of the year who was able to put in a lot of hours during the two-month summer vacation. But it still took 14 months to get the plane to the airport and I consider that a valid number that represents a balance between retired, full-time building and only being able to work on weekends and a few evenings now and then.

And a new Casler engine is going to cost as much as the complete airframe. So we are talking about a plane that will take on average 12-24 months to build and cost $8000-$10000 depending on engine and finish.

To tell a prospective builder any different is setting him up for disappointment and disillusionment later. Low-balling build time and cost doesn't serve anyone well. I wish advertisements could reflect real-world numbers, not numbers valid a decade or so ago.

The DE is still being advertised in the mags as a $7000 plane. A new Great Plains engine and prop cost that much...........
Title: Re: LE most bang for the buck
Post by: s johnson on June 04, 2014, 09:33:29 PM: It took me 660 hours over three year period to build the slug. Real numbers. I also have about 6200 bucks in the build. Including the first engine. First time builder as well. It's not really how fast you build in my opinion, it the enjoyment in the building process and the people you meet along the way.
Prima donna hey Joe.. What can I say ..... You going to fly the "new thing" up this year?

Scott J
Title: Re: LE most bang for the buck
Post by: rockiedog2 on June 05, 2014, 05:16:54 AM: Quote from: s johnson on June 04, 2014, 09:33:29 PM
It took me 660 hours over three year period to build the slug. Real numbers. I also have about 6200 bucks in the build. Including the first engine. First time builder as well. It's not really how fast you build in my opinion, it the enjoyment in the building process and the people you meet along the way.
Prima donna hey Joe.. What can I say ..... You going to fly the "new thing" up this year?

Scott J
naw not gonna make it this year.
Kiblinger named the new thing the SS-1. well maybe. we'll see.
Title: Re: LE most bang for the buck
Post by: ParQld on June 11, 2014, 07:30:26 PM: Quote from: s johnson on June 04, 2014, 09:33:29 PM
It took me 660 hours over three year period to build the slug. Real numbers. I also have about 6200 bucks in the build. Including the first engine. First time builder as well. It's not really how fast you build in my opinion, it the enjoyment in the building process and the people you meet along the way.
Prima donna hey Joe.. What can I say ..... You going to fly the "new thing" up this year?

Scott J

Scott will the Slug be at Oshkosh this year?
Title: Re: LE most bang for the buck
Post by: s johnson on June 12, 2014, 06:55:21 AM: Yes. That's the plan anyway.

Scott
Title: Re: LE most bang for the buck
Post by: ParQld on June 12, 2014, 12:41:39 PM: Great, I hope to see you there, I am coming across from Australia, so would be good to catch other Eaglers.

cheers Paul