pa-12 with 0-320 kenmore stc

[pelican-12]

goodmorning everyones !!

is there any of you operate a -12 with 0-320 kenmore stc and happy of the result?
i am asking myself if its worth it i fly 90% of the time alone with no heavy loads ,my plane is a straight 0-235-c1 weight 966 pounds with the goodyears 26" bush wheel ,will it be a drastic change to compare the ias ,rate of climb ,and take off? with that stc can i use a borer prop on the 0-320 ? or i need an other stc for the prop ,will it worth all the change ,i was interessted in that stc because you dont need to change all the front end ,engine mount,muffler,and cowling and the price is cheap. i have a borer prop 82x42 in hand almost new (400 hrs) what i need is a 0-320 conical mount . i herd about nose heavy , can i correct that by moving the battery ferther back to correct it ? all answer will be listen good or bad :roll:

thank you

pelican-12

i leave in quebec, canada i dont know if there is any difference compare paperwork

 

[Gordon Misch]

I used the Kenmore STC on my 12 for a number of years and it works fine. You can use your existing engine mount, but will need to be reinforced. Your rate of climb and takeoff performance will increase a lot, but not IAS with 8242. You'll also need PA-18 tail feathers. It will be a little nose-heavy, especially without flaps, and will feel quite a bit different especially on landing. I'd think if you don't need the takeoff / climb performance, leave it the lightweight and well-balanced stock configuration.

Once you start with the mods, it seems they're never-ending. My 12, which has quite a few mods, is now 200 lb heavier than yours and is definitely slower than when it was when I bought it in stock configuration. I like many aspects of the mods, but I do not like the heavier weight. Just an opinion - - -

 

[PIPER J5.5]

Do your research first because every stc is different and you can only use specific model numbers of O-320's.

The O-320 I purchased happened to be a 160 horse off a super cub. B2B

I purchased the Charlie center stc. Turns out I had most of the parts I needed for the switch.

 

[mike mcs repair]

you might consider
http://www.crosswindsstol.com and give him a call he IS the 12 guy....

his is a short engine mount, swings like a -18....

 

[12Geezer2]

to answer your question---I have a 12 with Kenmore STC (wide deck 0-320 A2B) YES--very happy---empty weight 1084---do NOT have ALL bells and whistles--what I have is a fun flying 12 that suits my needs. Have flaps and VGs--consider these my two best mods aside from the 0-320. Yes the tail is light (53lbs) but still have stock brakes so over braking , although possible, is not a big issue. Have flown MANY different cubs over the past 30 some years and try not to get into situations that require heavy braking. Am on skis at the moment ---come fly my 12---form your own opinion.---geezer Dan

 

[MrT]

I've had a 12 with the Kenmore STC for about two years. It is a well balanced airplane and performs great when light. Its not an 18 and may seem nose heavy/tail light to someone used to 18s. I like how quickly I can get the tail off the ground and think the lighter tail keeps the stress off the tailwheel when operating on rough tundra or larger diameter alluvium. However, I also have the large battery in the stock (behind baggage) location, which I think helps out a lot with the Kenmore STC CG issues. I looked at replacing the old battery with one of the new lightweight models, but it would result in more forward CG than I would prefer. As with everthing 12, it just seems to depend on how your individual bird is configured. All that said, I would probably go with one of the shortmounts if I was starting from square one.

 

[MikeJ]

Mine has the Kennmore STC. My tail is a little heavier - I think about 85 lbs. We left the battery in the stock location, and the addition of extended baggage, flaps, and Scott 3200 tailwheel maybe mitigated the effect. Plane is very well balanced and has no aft-CG issues to worry about. I fly mine fast (I'm a flatlander) with a 74x58 prop. Controls are heavy in cruise, but I've not noticed any issues at all with lack of elevator or noseheaviness on approach. All around, it is a great airplane and I would recommend the Kennmore STC.

Mike J.

 

[scruiser]

I did my Kenmore install 25 yeas ago. I think it may be the most "economical", because of modified (not replaced) engine mount,cowling stays the same( not replaced). Admittedly , it is somewhat nose heavy. I happen to have extended baggage, and carry a sleeping bag max aft, seems good. I think the real advantage of the Kenmore
STC is that t allows virtually any conical mount engine, regardless of suffix.