My Max is a 1030 (I don't know anything about an "F" variant?). I fly it as an ultralight. Rotax 277powered. I bought it as a crash damaged project, so it had flown before. The plans that came with it had hand drawn changes to make it a 1030. It has the flap feature, which was dropped as a standard feature early on, and became an option. All this together with an early kit number makes me believe that my airplane may have been one of the first customer built 1030's? It's a good little airplane, and other then several engine out, un-planned arrivals it's been a fun journey. I haven't flown in two years because of many things. I had hoped to fly this year before it got too cold, but that didn't happen. I estimate I have 80 to 90 hours, but I haven't kept accurate records! My only concern for using it as a back country flyer is the landing gear. With the standard straight axle, any tall vegetation will flip the airplane on it's back. I found this out the hard way when I had an engine out, and I landed in a "re-growth" wheat field. Because it was next to an Interstate I attracted a lot of local rescue attention, but fortunately no Federal attention, because it had no N number. I had short flights in two other 277 powered Mini Maxes, and I like flying them. They aren't over savage on performance with the 28hp engine, but you fly it like any other airplane by respecting it's limitations. I been following your other thread, so I would like to say I'm sorry for your misfortune. We are all a product of our past, so what someone else suggests as a "path" forward doesn't always mesh with our personal experience. My recommendation about "legal" ultralights has always been don't worry about most of the part 103 regulations, as long as it "looks" like an ultralight, but more important don't DRAW attention to yourself.
My Max is a 1030 (I don't know anything about an "F" variant?).
I have only started reserching the Max line this year. "F" is for Hirth F-33 and "R" is for Rotax 277 I thought the "Z" would be perfect, but then learned "Z" meant Zenoah engine, not Zendaya sitting next to me in an extra-wide seat.
I fly it as an ultralight. Rotax 277powered. I bought it as a crash damaged project, so it had flown before. The plans that came with it had hand drawn changes to make it a 1030. It has the flap feature, which was dropped as a standard feature early on, and became an option. All this together with an early kit number makes me believe that my airplane may have been one of the first customer built 1030's? It's a good little airplane, and other then several engine out, un-planned arrivals it's been a fun journey.
I don't know if you would care to elaborate on those engine stoppages. I have read several accounts, all concerning aircraft equipped with the Rotax, but then again the Rotax was the primary engine for decades...
I haven't flown in two years because of many things. I had hoped to fly this year before it got too cold, but that didn't happen. I estimate I have 80 to 90 hours, but I haven't kept accurate records! My only concern for using it as a back country flyer is the landing gear. With the standard straight axle, any tall vegetation will flip the airplane on it's back. I found this out the hard way when I had an engine out, and I landed in a "re-growth" wheat field. Because it was next to an Interstate I attracted a lot of local rescue attention, but fortunately no Federal attention, because it had no N number. I had short flights in two other 277 powered Mini Maxes, and I like flying them. They aren't over savage on performance with the 28hp engine, but you fly it like any other airplane by respecting it's limitations.
C.G. Taylor's original Cub parasol had a 20 hp engine, the first enclosed Cubs had a variety of 25, 30, 35 and 37 hp engines fitted before Continental released the A-40. Giving the 25 - 28 hp Max a slightly better hp to weight ratio.
I been following your other thread, so I would like to say I'm sorry for your misfortune. We are all a product of our past, so what someone else suggests as a "path" forward doesn't always mesh with our personal experience. My recommendation about "legal" ultralights has always been don't worry about most of the part 103 regulations, as long as it "looks" like an ultralight, but more important don't DRAW attention to yourself.
Small Rotaxes are becoming rare, as they are not being reproduced. I'm thinking the Hirth would be your best bet. Zenoah G50 hasn't be produced in many years.
The two most serious stoppages came from a bad spark coil, and an air leak.
Thank you.
I have flown two ULs more than once or twice. I have over a hundred hours in each of those two. Both have Hirth F-33's mounted in the (single) cylinder down position and two independent ignition circuits, the Mid Wing has a pull starter with the handle on the front bulkhead (wooden firewall?) right between the rudder pedals which is nice on a low or mid-wing. Actually the only thing I really don't like about the middie is getting into the #$@^%!! thing. (Downward vision is also more restricted compared to a high wing, but I tend to be looking up a lot more than I am looking down.)
The december 1986 ultralight aircraft magazine had an introductory article on the minimax ultralight.Two examples were mentioned having been built simultaneously as prototypes by a certain TEAM company.One was listed at 248 LBS and the other a few pounds more.Both had 277 engines.It is clear from the article that a single cylinder engine is essential to conform to ultralight weight regulation.One such engine is the polini Thor 280cc water cooled engine.The weight is 55 lbs and power 38Hp.The company recommends top overhaul at 100 hours and Bottom overhaul at 300 hrs.Looks like a good choice for ultralight minimax.
Logged
