Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

AV8ORJWC

Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1149
Location: Aurora, Oregon "Home of VANS"

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 12:34 am Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

A comment was made (I believe from Scott) which went unresponded to.  For those few who have not made their decision or are still open to input on the subject of choice.  It has been said that the Law of Primacy prevails in aviation.  That item first learned by instruction or experience is most often retained.  Example, most pilot who learn on High wing prefer High Wing.  Those who learn on Low wing prefer low wing.  Those who fly with Vernier cables, tend to choose cables for their RV-10.  Those who have flown High Performance aircraft (those over 200 hp) with throttle quadrants on turboprop or turbine or multi then tend to chose throttle quadrants.  

  

The choice of throttle quadrants allows the competent pilot to control Throttle-Prop-Mixture with multiple digits - Simultaneously.  Much like piano playing it is a learned skill.  Add Multi-Engine into the mix and the more primitive cables are automatically replaced with a quadrant and the discussion is over.  

  

Just food for thought which no one commented on after the valuable observation.  

John Cox  

#40600  

    [quote][b]

capsteve

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 111
Location: NIAGARA FALLS NY

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 12:47 am Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

There was a lister who pointed out the difference in price of the throttle quadrants from vans and aircraft spruce. I’m ready to pick one up and am also curious as to the quality difference. Anyone have any experience with both from a comparison standpoint???     

   

Steve  

40205  

   

--

AV8ORJWC

Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1149
Location: Aurora, Oregon "Home of VANS"

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 1:25 am Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

Just to benchmark the process.  Take a look at the two variants used on Lancair IV and IVPT through Aerocraft Parts & Avionics. http://www.aerocraftparts.com/SearchForm.aspx?Search=Throttle%20Quadrant   Then the A/S looks pretty nice.  You get what you pay for.  

   

Seek “In the Left seat time” with flying RV-10s, cause it is worth the effort. Once you have flown proficiently with a quadrant, the discussion might just be closed.    

   

John        

  

From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steven DiNieri

 Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 12:44 AM

 To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: RE: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables  

  

   

There was a lister who pointed out the difference in price of the throttle quadrants from vans and aircraft spruce. I’m ready to pick one up and am also curious as to the quality difference. Anyone have any experience with both from a comparison standpoint???     

   

Steve  

40205  

   

--

Tim(at)MyRV10.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 2:38 am Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

I didn't comment on this at the time, but here goes...



I don't know if they're the same quadrant, or not, but I would certainly

recommend at least that it be the identical quadrant.  The one from

Vans is made to such a length as to fit properly in the matched holes.

It's also very smooth and nice.  The only negative is that it doesn't

come with any cool sort of cover for the sides, but I took care of that

myself.  One thing when comparing the quadrants, you need to understand

that from Van's, when you order the quadrant, you're also getting the

3 cables, and some hardware too, so the price difference still might

be there, but it probably isn't that extreme.  Van's isn't known for

overcharging on many items, after all, so I'd be surprised if it were

lots more when compared apples-to-apples.



My one tip for the quadrant:  It does rub between the levers and

body, on the slots.  Take some UHMW tape and put small tape tabs

on the control arms, just about 1" long, where it contacts the slots

on both sides of the lever.  The noise goes away and it's silky

smooth.



I'm sure everyone already saw my reply to Scott's post where I

agreed that it was far nicer and more precise than the experience

I had with Van's push-pulls in N220RV, so I won't do that over unless

requested.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Steven DiNieri wrote:

[quote] There was a lister who pointed out the difference in price of the 

 throttle quadrants from vans and aircraft spruce. I’m ready to pick one 

 up and am also curious as to the quality difference. Anyone have any 

 experience with both from a comparison standpoint???  

 

  

 

 Steve

 

 40205

 

  

 

 --

apilot2(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 6:01 am Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

For balance, I'll give you the other side. I'm multi rated, have flown

both twins, where, as you say, there is no argument, and Mooneys with

both quadrant and pushpull. With the Mooney there is no question, the

push pull is better. I recently flew one with a friend checking out an

engine analyzer. It simply wasn't possible to make mixture adjustments

to finer than 2-3 tenths gph, making achieving a desired 20 LOP for

that particular flight very difficult to achieve. I've observed the

same issue on twins for both mixture and trying to sync the props...it

takes effort and concentration. Perhaps you get better at inducing

minute changes with more hours...you are right about primacy, and I

have probably 15 times more time in planes with push pull than

quadrant, but my time in quadrant planes isn't all that small either.

The nicety of being able to operate all three levers(or more) at once

simply isn't needed on a single engine. The prop is rarely changed,

perhaps 2-3 times per flight. The mixture needs to be finely adjusted

for cruise and then mostly left alone.

The throttle is the only control you will change more frequently.

Then there is the maintenance side. Push pull is easier to install,

adjust and maintain.

Just the other side of the coin. Don't expect to change anyone's mind.



On 11/12/06, John W. Cox <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  

 A comment was made (I believe from Scott) which went unresponded to.  For

 those few who have not made their decision or are still open to input on the

 subject of choice.  It has been said that the Law of Primacy prevails in

 aviation.  That item first learned by instruction or experience is most

 often retained.  Example, most pilot who learn on High wing prefer High

 Wing.  Those who learn on Low wing prefer low wing.  Those who fly with

 Vernier cables, tend to choose cables for their RV-10.  Those who have flown

 High Performance aircraft (those over 200 hp) with throttle quadrants on

 turboprop or turbine or multi then tend to chose throttle quadrants.



 The choice of throttle quadrants allows the competent pilot to control

 Throttle-Prop-Mixture with multiple digits - Simultaneously.  Much like

 piano playing it is a learned skill.  Add Multi-Engine into the mix and the

 more primitive cables are automatically replaced with a quadrant and the

 discussion is over.

Tim(at)MyRV10.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 6:44 am Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

To be perfectly straight forward as it relates to the RV-10, and

only the RV-10, if you buy the quadrant from Van's, and compare it

to the push-pulls from Van's as installed on their factory planes,

there is no comparison that the quadrant is better.

I understand that there will be opposite or varied results when

talking about other manufacturers of planes, but on these particular

planes, using the Van's supplied options, that is what my comments

are related to.  To be even more precise, the only quadrants

on RV-10's I've used have been in conjunction with fuel injected

RV-10's, using both AFP and Bendix/Precision systems, and they're

both smooth...not sure about carbs.

The sad thing is, probably 98% of the builders will make this

decision without having the opportunity to directly compare them.

I didn't get the direct comparison until I flew my own plane

with the quadrant.

The reason I bring this up so adamantly, by the way, is that my

transition training experience was not nearly what it could have

been because I was distracted constantly by poor throttle/prop

control.  I wanted badly to fly with precision, and when 2350

RPM was called for, I wanted 2350, not 2390.  On 220RV, with

it's push-pulls, this was a very big challenge and caused me to

spend much more time than I wanted on obtaining this precision,

and no matter what I did it didn't get better.

To further the matter one more step, I am familiar with push-pulls,

having flown probably 10 different models that used them, so I know

they are capable of being pretty good.  But when limiting it to the

Van's available parts, my results are as above.  My main concern is

that for those who really *like* the looks and feel of a quadrant

often get pushed by others to go vernier push-pulls because of opposite

results in other planes....having never flown both RV-10 systems.

I simply want them to be comfortable with the idea that on the RV-10,

they will not suffer for having a quadrant, and it may actually

give them a superior feel.

One last comment... For people buying things like EFIS systems, or

debating on panel layout, or picking throttle systems, interiors,

or heck, even the RV-10 kit in general, demo flights are money

well spent.  It's well worth spending a little extra cash to seek out

a plane or two that has the equipment you're questioning, and

go for a flight.  I only wish these options were easily available

to me when I was building, but there just weren't enough -10's

flying yet.  Buy my offer is open to RV-10 builders....if you

can drag yourself up to Wisconsin on a time that we can agree on, I

will be happy to take you for a flight.  Most people know how my

plane is equipped, so for anyone interested in similar stuff, it

would be worth it...especially for things like the Cheltons.

You can learn a lot from the more relaxed atmosphere of a flight

with another builder.

--

Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Kelly McMullen wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

 For balance, I'll give you the other side. I'm multi rated, have flown

 both twins, where, as you say, there is no argument, and Mooneys with

 both quadrant and pushpull. With the Mooney there is no question, the

 push pull is better. I recently flew one with a friend checking out an

 engine analyzer. It simply wasn't possible to make mixture adjustments

 to finer than 2-3 tenths gph, making achieving a desired 20 LOP for

 that particular flight very difficult to achieve. I've observed the

 same issue on twins for both mixture and trying to sync the props...it

 takes effort and concentration. Perhaps you get better at inducing

 minute changes with more hours...you are right about primacy, and I

 have probably 15 times more time in planes with push pull than

 quadrant, but my time in quadrant planes isn't all that small either.

 The nicety of being able to operate all three levers(or more) at once

 simply isn't needed on a single engine. The prop is rarely changed,

 perhaps 2-3 times per flight. The mixture needs to be finely adjusted

 for cruise and then mostly left alone.

 The throttle is the only control you will change more frequently.

 Then there is the maintenance side. Push pull is easier to install,

 adjust and maintain.

 Just the other side of the coin. Don't expect to change anyone's mind.

 On 11/12/06, John W. Cox <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> wrote:

>

> A comment was made (I believe from Scott) which went unresponded to.  For

> those few who have not made their decision or are still open to input 

> on the

> subject of choice.  It has been said that the Law of Primacy prevails in

> aviation.  That item first learned by instruction or experience is most

> often retained.  Example, most pilot who learn on High wing prefer High

> Wing.  Those who learn on Low wing prefer low wing.  Those who fly with

> Vernier cables, tend to choose cables for their RV-10.  Those who have 

> flown

> High Performance aircraft (those over 200 hp) with throttle quadrants on

> turboprop or turbine or multi then tend to chose throttle quadrants.

>

> The choice of throttle quadrants allows the competent pilot to control

> Throttle-Prop-Mixture with multiple digits - Simultaneously.  Much like

> piano playing it is a learned skill.  Add Multi-Engine into the mix 

> and the

> more primitive cables are automatically replaced with a quadrant and the

> discussion is over.

ed(at)muellerartcover.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 6:47 am Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

Kelly,

Next time you want to make fine adjustments on a quadrant, try this (if 

I can explain it):  get the mixture close to the proper setting then 

pull the lever towards you (rearward) slightly.  Place your thumb on the 

faceplate sideways across the slot and against the stem of the lever.  

Holding your thumb solid against the faceplate, roll (don't push keep 

your thumb keep it stationary on the faceplate) your thumb forward, it 

will move the lever in very small increments.  I personally like the 

quadrant.

Ed Mueller

#40525

Kelly McMullen wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

 For balance, I'll give you the other side. I'm multi rated, have flown

 both twins, where, as you say, there is no argument, and Mooneys with

 both quadrant and pushpull. With the Mooney there is no question, the

 push pull is better. I recently flew one with a friend checking out an

 engine analyzer. It simply wasn't possible to make mixture adjustments

 to finer than 2-3 tenths gph, making achieving a desired 20 LOP for

 that particular flight very difficult to achieve. I've observed the

 same issue on twins for both mixture and trying to sync the props...it

 takes effort and concentration. Perhaps you get better at inducing

 minute changes with more hours...you are right about primacy, and I

 have probably 15 times more time in planes with push pull than

 quadrant, but my time in quadrant planes isn't all that small either.

 The nicety of being able to operate all three levers(or more) at once

 simply isn't needed on a single engine. The prop is rarely changed,

 perhaps 2-3 times per flight. The mixture needs to be finely adjusted

 for cruise and then mostly left alone.

 The throttle is the only control you will change more frequently.

 Then there is the maintenance side. Push pull is easier to install,

 adjust and maintain.

 Just the other side of the coin. Don't expect to change anyone's mind.

 On 11/12/06, John W. Cox <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> wrote:

>

> A comment was made (I believe from Scott) which went unresponded to.  

> For

> those few who have not made their decision or are still open to input 

> on the

> subject of choice.  It has been said that the Law of Primacy prevails in

> aviation.  That item first learned by instruction or experience is most

> often retained.  Example, most pilot who learn on High wing prefer High

> Wing.  Those who learn on Low wing prefer low wing.  Those who fly with

> Vernier cables, tend to choose cables for their RV-10.  Those who 

> have flown

> High Performance aircraft (those over 200 hp) with throttle quadrants on

> turboprop or turbine or multi then tend to chose throttle quadrants.

>

> The choice of throttle quadrants allows the competent pilot to control

> Throttle-Prop-Mixture with multiple digits - Simultaneously.  Much like

> piano playing it is a learned skill.  Add Multi-Engine into the mix 

> and the

> more primitive cables are automatically replaced with a quadrant and the

> discussion is over.

ddddsp1(at)juno.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:01 am Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

Kelly, 

Your thoughts are great for those considering which option to go with.  Like most other decisions we make while building they need to FIT your needs...........not your friends who you are trying to impress.  The bottom line on these equipment choices is that "most" of the time both options will fly the plane well.  For newbies though it is nice to get different perspectives as they may not know the questions to ask at that stage of the build.  I know I am MUCH smarter now than 6 months ago largely due to posts and opinions on this list that made me consider other options than my own.  However, at the end of the day I make the choice on the equipment that fits my needs........quality, cost, type of flying, ergonomics, etc.    I went vernier because I like an OPEN, SPACIOUS cabin.  Quadrants look cool but take up space albiet not much but appear to intrude into the cabin from the panel.  Call me old fashion but I like a flat panel........contours are ok as long as it doesn't take away from my cabin space.  LOL   If I could change the plans I would even eliminate the stick between my legs and go to the side joystick like Cirrus or Columbia to give me more cabin "comfort" space.  Anyway, for all the newbies...don't discard the vernier controls just because you read a POST stating how great a pilot loves his/her quadrant.  Do what you want and what will meet your needs....looks only count on the ground. 

Just my 2 cents worth. 

Dean 40449 



________________________________________________________________________

 Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!

    [quote][b]

kdbelue(at)charter.net
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:17 am Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

Tim, I'd like to add another point of view to this discussion: I flew 220RV 

also and like you found that it was difficult to set the rpm's where I 

wanted. I have the same type of push-pull controls in my RV-6A but it is 

very precise, easy to set the rpm's and I've had the same experience in 

other RV's. I'm not refuting that the quadrant is good,  I just believe 

there is something other than the controls on 220RV that makes it harder to 

adjust. At the time I was flying it, I thought it may be how the 

instrumentation was set up because I would adjust the manifold pressure and 

tach but then a minute later it would be all different.



I haven't decided on which controls to put in my RV10; I like push-pull, but 

the quadrant is nice also. I suppose I'll have to fly a 10 with a quadrant 

to really know.



Kevin Belue

RV-6A flying

RV-10 finish



---

mritter509(at)msn.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 11:41 am Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

I've had a quadrant in a Piper Lance and vernier in a Bonanza.  Went with 

the vernier cables in my RV-10 and find them very precise and easy to use.



Mark (N410MR Flying)





 	  Quote: 	
		  From: "ddddsp1(at)juno.com" <ddddsp1(at)juno.com>

Reply-To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com

To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 16:00:18 GMT



Kelly,

Your thoughts are great for those considering which option to go with.  

Like most other decisions we make while building they need to FIT your 

needs...........not your friends who you are trying to impress.  The bottom 

line on these equipment choices is that "most" of the time both options 

will fly the plane well.  For newbies though it is nice to get different 

perspectives as they may not know the questions to ask at that stage of the 

build.  I know I am MUCH smarter now than 6 months ago largely due to posts 

and opinions on this list that made me consider other options than my own.  

However, at the end of the day I make the choice on the equipment that fits 

my needs........quality, cost, type of flying, ergonomics, etc.    I went 

vernier because I like an OPEN, SPACIOUS cabin.  Quadrants look cool but 

take up space albiet not much but appear to intrude into the cabin from the 

panel.  Call me old fashion but I like a flat panel........contours are ok 

as long as it doesn't take away from my cabin space.  LOL   If I could 

change the plans I would even eliminate the stick between my legs and go to 

the side joystick like Cirrus or Columbia to give me more cabin "comfort" 

space.  Anyway, for all the newbies....don't discard the vernier controls 

just because you read a POST stating how great a pilot loves his/her 

quadrant.  Do what you want and what will meet your needs....looks only 

count on the ground.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Dean 40449



________________________________________________________________________


	


_________________________________________________________________

Try the next generation of search with Windows Live Search today!

ddddsp1(at)juno.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 12:23 pm Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

Tim & Kevin, 

  Take a look at the pic attached.  I believe this may fix the problem with the venier cables on Vans RV 10.  With the much wider panel in the RV 10 the panel flexes and the controls are not as stiff and accurate.  I put this on to strengthen the lower panel in the middle where the control are.  All but eliminates the flex when you push and pull on the controls. 

Just a thought, 

DEAN 40449 



________________________________________________________________________

 Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!

rv10_096.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

471.52 KB

Viewed:

210 Time(s)

Tim(at)MyRV10.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:10 pm Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

You may very well be right that it is specific to that plane.

That plane is miserable in that area.   I also don't want to

discourage people from verniers if that's what you like, because

I can't see why you couldn't make them work well for you if you

tried....and they cost less.  It is definitely something that

you can develop a preference for.  I just want people to be

assured that you definitely can go quadrant with Van's

quadrant on the -10 and be happy....so don't make your

decision not to go with it based on some perceived lack

of smoothness or precision.  It was one of the decisions I

agonized over myself, because the push-pulls do take up

less space in the cabin, and give some different options for

panel layout.  Dean is right, in his post, that you should

go with what fits your style the best.



Thanks for your input Kevin, it's nice to know you noticed the

same thing on that plane, but still like the controls in

other RV's.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Kevin Belue wrote:

[quote] 

 

 Tim, I'd like to add another point of view to this discussion: I flew 

 220RV also and like you found that it was difficult to set the rpm's 

 where I wanted. I have the same type of push-pull controls in my RV-6A 

 but it is very precise, easy to set the rpm's and I've had the same 

 experience in other RV's. I'm not refuting that the quadrant is good,  I 

 just believe there is something other than the controls on 220RV that 

 makes it harder to adjust. At the time I was flying it, I thought it may 

 be how the instrumentation was set up because I would adjust the 

 manifold pressure and tach but then a minute later it would be all 

 different.

 

 I haven't decided on which controls to put in my RV10; I like push-pull, 

 but the quadrant is nice also. I suppose I'll have to fly a 10 with a 

 quadrant to really know.

 

 Kevin Belue

 RV-6A flying

 RV-10 finish

 

 ---

Tim(at)MyRV10.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:18 pm Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

Dean, that's a great idea on that brace for the panel.   I'm wondering

though if it might not make it more directly stiffer to the cable mount

plate if you put some angle tabs on the end of the mounting plate for

the controls, and attached it to the braces there.  That way the actual

place you're pushing on is braced tightly.  I'm not sure that this

is what caused 220RV to suck so bad, but if you're right on  your guess,

that could be a really good fix.  But, Mark also said his work well, so

perhaps it's just 220RV.  Maybe it's even more that Continental

engine's injection system.

Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

ddddsp1(at)juno.com wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   Tim & Kevin,

 

   Take a look at the pic attached.  I believe this may fix the problem 

 with the venier cables on Vans RV 10.  With the much wider panel in the 

 RV 10 the panel flexes and the controls are not as stiff and accurate.  

 I put this on to strengthen the lower panel in the middle where the 

 control are.  All but eliminates the flex when you push and pull on the 

 controls.

 

 Just a thought,

 

 DEAN 40449

 

 

 

 ________________________________________________________________________

 

 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

apilot2(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:35 pm Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

I agree Dean. I don't care if I get the prop within 10 rpm, although

it is easy with most verniers. I want mixture adjustable to the 0.1gph

resolution..which is very hard to achieve with a quadrant..I've tried

every trick in the book on certified airplanes, and a nudge gets you

0.2-0.3 every time. Easy with vernier.  I want power precise as well,

as 100rpm over the fence makes difference between planting plane and

floating down the runway.

but for all those that are convinced that quadrant is better for them, so be it.



On 11/12/06, ddddsp1(at)juno.com <ddddsp1(at)juno.com> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  



 Kelly,



 Your thoughts are great for those considering which option to go with.  Like

 most other decisions we make while building they need to FIT your

 needs...........not your friends who you are trying to impress.  The bottom

 line on these equipment choices is that "most" of the time both options will

 fly the plane well.  For newbies though it is nice to get different

 perspectives as they may not know the questions to ask at that stage of the

 build.  I know I am MUCH smarter now than 6 months ago largely due to posts

 and opinions on this list that made me consider other options than my own.

 However, at the end of the day I make the choice on the equipment that fits

 my needs........quality, cost, type of flying, ergonomics, etc.    I went

 vernier because I like an OPEN, SPACIOUS cabin.  Quadrants look cool but

 take up space albiet not much but appear to intrude into the cabin from the

 panel.  Call me old fashion but I like a flat panel........contours are ok

 as long as it doesn't take away from my cabin space.  LOL   If I could

 change the plans I would even eliminate the stick between my legs and go to

 the side joystick like Cirrus or Columbia to give me more cabin "comfort"

 space.  Anyway, for all the newbies....don't discard the vernier controls

 just because you read a POST stating how great a pilot loves his/her

 quadrant.  Do what you want and what will meet your needs....looks only

 count on the ground.



 Just my 2 cents worth.



 Dean 40449



 ________________________________________________________________________

dmaib@me.com

Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Posts: 455
Location: New Smyrna Beach, Florida

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 5:05 pm Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

Dean,

Are the two pieces of aluminum angle running from the firewall to the lower panel the mod you have done? If so, do they connect to the back of the plate that the verniers are mounted in, or to the bottom edge of the panel.



Thanks,



David Maib

40559



On Nov 12, 2006, at 2:19 PM, ddddsp1(at)juno.com (ddddsp1(at)juno.com) wrote:



Tim & Kevin,

  Take a look at the pic attached.  I believe this may fix the problem with the venier cables on Vans RV 10.  With the much wider panel in the RV 10 the panel flexes and the controls are not as stiff and accurate.  I put this on to strengthen the lower panel in the middle where the control are.  All but eliminates the flex when you push and pull on the controls.

Just a thought,

DEAN 40449 



________________________________________________________________________

 Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!

<rv10 096.jpg>



 [quote][b]

_________________
David Maib
RV-10 #40559
New Smyrna Beach, FL

ddddsp1(at)juno.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:26 pm Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

Tim, 

I went just next to the cable mount because I wanted to be able to remove the cable bracket and lower the controls to work under the panel.  Moving it out that much does not effect how ridgid the controls are.  It is like nite and day from the original design.  Also I am tying up the controls forward of the panel instead of running them through the useless bracket attached to the subpanel. 

Dean 40449 



________________________________________________________________________

 Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!

    [quote][b]

ddddsp1(at)juno.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:27 pm Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

Dave, 

To the bottom edge of the panel. 

Dean 



________________________________________________________________________

 Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!

    [quote][b]

bldgrv10450(at)comcast.ne
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 9:57 pm Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

Changes?

  

 Wouldn't you know it, I just drilled out the SS oil  cooler recess for cables. Then Scott brings up the quadrant and Tim tells  us again how much he likes them. Feels like I made a mistake. In  the spring of 05' I was planning to build a 9A until Randy Debauw  showed up at the EAA105 fly in. That changed my mind. Life  is all about change, isn't it? Tim how did you cap off those cable holes?  I remember you drilled them out and then later found the quadrant runs in a  different location? 

  

 Bill DeRouchey, I am going to be in Santa Cruz for Thanksgiving. Will you  be around home? I'd love to see the paint job.

  

 Paul Grimstad

RV10 40450 with holes to  fill

Portland, OR 97219



 [quote]   ---

Tim(at)MyRV10.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 3:55 am Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

Hey Paul, basically what happened to me wasn't that the cables

were in a different location (they probably can be the

same from quadrant to vernier), but that I wanted to use

eyeball passthroughs because the dual snap-bushing thing just

didn't cut it for me.  My eyeballs are aluminum, which some

would disagree with (they don't disagree with the aluminum rivets

holding the firewall on though), but it's got to be better than

snap bushings.  They allow you to start angling that cable

so it comes out of the firewall at an angle that you wish for

better routing, and aluminum allows you to drill the bore

to your cable size for perfect fit.



The situatio that happened is that I had already drilled the 3

holes out for snap bushings.  To use eyeballs, I only wanted

to use the 2 outer holes and then drill another below them

in the middle.  (the holes would run together if I drilled

all 3.   Well, as I unibit drilled the outer 2 holes, they

ran into the drilled center hole, and that whole area

got chewed up.  Had I not pre-drilled the holes, it would

have been simple, but I made the mistake of first attempting

snap bushings.



So to fix it, I cut out the mangled metal, went to a metal

shop where they gave me some stainless scrap, and bought

a "patch" that I could drill properly, and then rivet and

red RTV in place to make it all good again.  I got slightly

thicker stainless as well.



For what it's worth, I'm not saying you made a mistake not

going with the quadrant.  If you like Verniers, you may like

them here too if they don't work like 220RV.  But you can

be reassured that the quadrant offers smoothness and precision...

and yes, even on the mixture side to the .1 gph resolution

Kelly.  If you haven't flown one (of this type specifically,

it's worth a try.  They're nice.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Paul Grimstad wrote:

[quote] Changes?

  

 Wouldn't you know it, I just drilled out the SS oil cooler recess for 

 cables. Then Scott brings up the quadrant and Tim tells us again how 

 much he likes them. Feels like I made a mistake. In the spring of 05' 

 I was planning to build a 9A until Randy Debauw showed up at the EAA105 

 fly in. That changed my mind. Life is all about change, isn't it? Tim 

 how did you cap off those cable holes? I remember you drilled them out 

 and then later found the quadrant runs in a different location? 

  

 Bill DeRouchey, I am going to be in Santa Cruz for Thanksgiving. Will 

 you be around home? I'd love to see the paint job.

  

 Paul Grimstad

 RV10 40450 with holes to fill

 Portland, OR 97219

 

     ---

bldgrv10450(at)comcast.ne
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 6:27 am Post subject: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables

Thanks Tim

Where did you purchase the eyeballs and do you recall the hole size?

Paul

---

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum