I’m not quite so skeptical. Keep in mind that for racing the prop would be changed to run the engine at 4200 rpm’s. That allows the motor to put out around 150 hp. The speed was measured by lap times so it’s going to be fairly accurate. With that being said Steve Alderman told me last year that he visited Kevin and flew formation with that plane with his O-200 powered KR. Steve’s KR was pretty fast and he said that he was a little faster than the KR-100. I believe that it did go that fast but it certainly wouldn’t do it for long at 4200 rpm.
Victor Taylor Irvington, Alabama > On Sep 29, 2023, at 10:29, Larry Flesner via KRnet <krnet@list.krnet.org> > wrote: > > > > > On 9/29/2023 9:20 AM, Mark Langford wrote: >> I didn't know there was a straight and level thing at Reno, but am highly >> skeptical of the 262 mph top speed. > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > I was beyond "skeptical" when first reading that. I flat out didn't believe > it. Maybe on a mile long dive to the finish line, maybe. At that speed I'm > guessing the prop itself would be acting as a speed brake. Read all the data > on the web page. It had the same Sterba prop, 60X68, I had on 211LF and > there is no way it was 100 mph faster. No way. I even question the "195 mph > cruise on 6 gph. At that fuel burn the 0-200 couldn't have been turning more > than 2550 to2600 rpm max and 195 cruise is a bit past doubtful. At 2750 rpm, > factory rated 100 hp, the fuel burn is listed at 8 gph as I recall. With all > that said, what a slick looking example of a KR. > > Larry Flesner > > -- > KRnet mailing list > KRnet@list.krnet.org > https://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet
-- KRnet mailing list KRnet@list.krnet.org https://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet
