It is indeed amazing that Rotax don’t have more competition. One would think that the market they are in is a lot easier to get into – especially the homebuilt side.
Finally somebody creates an aero version of the Weber engine. Funny enough, its roots are very similar to Rotax: snow mobiles, jet skis etc. To me the engine seems to be a good fit for aircraft. Power to weight is excellent and it’s a proven design by a credible company.
It is indeed amazing that Rotax don’t have more competition.
Why should the “alternative” markets (ultralight, experimental, &c) be less conservative than the Lycosaur users? Rotax themselves recognised this very clearly by waiting so long (too long, according to some) to come up with fuel injection. The 912 and, to a lesser degree, the 914, 912S and 912i have given proof of reliability and economy.
That said, there do be a few competitors around and they seem to be doing not that bad. ULPower, D-Motor, Verner, probably more. None achieves large volumes, but they may be taking their time, or they may be suffering from lack of risk bearing investors.
Afterthought: expensive though the Rotax may be considered, none of the alternatives are significantly cheaper – and that includes this newcomer.
Afterthought: buying from a startup is always a risk: even if the engine is ok, if the maker goes bust who will supply spare parts? Newcomers in any market need a clear advantage over the competiton, to make up for this unavoidable disadvantage. What is the Weber’s clear advantage over a Rotax?
Several has already made aero engines of the Weber. A Swiss company and Sauer amongst others.
Why would anybody chose a two cylinder engine when they can get a 4 cylinder?
The competition for rotax is Jabiru, D-motor, Verner and ULPower. Next year they also has to compete with the diesel 2 stroke produced by Superior.
Why would anybody chose a two cylinder engine when they can get a 4 cylinder?
Why choose a 4-cylinder when you can get a 8-cylinder? Maybe weight has some relevance in aviation, don’t you think so?
It say the weight is 85 kg. A Rotax is 75 all together, a Jabiru is 65. A Jabiru 3300 is 85.
I don’t know much about the Weber, but it has been around for a while now, several aero versions have been available, but none seems to make it.
Besides, how would you design the cowling and the engine mounts and still get the thrust line correct on existing planes?
Evaluating this one, I’d first be interested in the balance shaft arrangement, its drive scheme etc. Obviously vertical twins shake like crazy unless externally balanced and historically the balancers have been a source of problems, as well as weight. Rotax has a pretty good vertical twin balance scheme that they invented for the F800 BMW engine, a reciprocating bob weight under the crankshaft, pivoting on a long lever. At least that one doesn’t include chains or failure prone chain tensioners!
I generally like my twin cylinder engines with 90 or 180 degrees between cylinders, generally meaning no extra balance hardware required. The reason to do a vertical twin would be packaging and compactness, which I think is more of an issue for a motorcycle or ATV than an aircraft.
perhaps a potential competitor
diesel
82kg
turbo
125hp.
http://www.aicta.com/aviation.html
How about the Rotec, that gets over the horizontally opposed vibration issues:
http://www.rotecradialengines.com
