Need a bottom cowl (or ideas)

[Carl E. Carson]

My bottom cowl on my '40, BC-65 is serviceable but has lots of cracks, several repairs and many, many rivits. Does anyone know where there is a better one? I talked to a guy today who does aluminum welding and he turned down my request to have the crack welded. He sent me to a street rod shop where the guy would do it this winter, many $$$. Looking for alternatives and soliciting suggestions.

Carl Carson
[email protected]
(in Cedar Rapids, Ia.)

[rdwater]

Re: Need a bottom cowl (or ideas)

We had a similar condition and built our own. Our 46 BC12D has the simple bottom cowl with no compound curves. We had an auto sheet metal guy do the bends. He does work for a racing family in town named Unser and he's good (and cheap for simple work like this). I made a mold of the air intake piece and made a fibergalss replacement. (I can make others if folks are interested. I also have the molds for the top sparkplug blisters and am just fitting new bottom blisters for the Hanlen-Wilson mufflers that we have. Send me a PM if you're interested in any of these parts.) I made the bottom cowl reinforcements and installed all the Dzus fasteners (Ilearned that you don't need that $100+ Dzus tool that Spruce advertizes). It takes time to get the bottom to match and fit to the top but it looks good now. (That's what cost a lot if you have someone custom make it.) Good luck! Bob

[hangarb7]

Re: Need a bottom cowl (or ideas)

I find it interesting that you need blisters for your Hanlen Wilson mufflers.

I have an Aeronca exhaust with the same mufflers installed and although one rubs the nose bowl on one side, they haven't caused any problem since they were put on in the early 1970's.

It is probably because every cowl is a little different shape I guess.

Can't beat the carb and cabin heat of those mufflers. The sound is different tho'

I use the original exhaust hole for my preheat flex hose. Screws in by a turn and stays there. Blanket on top of the cowl and in 45 minutes, she's toasty.

Jack Dernorsek
N44057

[dedrekon]

Re: Need a bottom cowl (or ideas)

That tight cowl is one of the main reasons our little TCrafts are so fleet in the air. Take a look at a Chief, Champ, Cub or any of those same vintage 65hp birds next to your T and you'll see they have a MUCH larger frontal nose area. That's how they can fit the spark plug cups, mufflers, etc under there without much work and we can't. That's also why we go sooooooo much faster.

V

[1938BF50]

Re: Need a bottom cowl (or ideas)

Ambiguous question, but how much quieter are the mufflers than the std A-65? On a scale of 1-10 (an open exhaust A-65 being 10), where are the muffled jobs?

[hangarb7]

Re: Need a bottom cowl (or ideas)

That tight cowl is one of the main reasons our little TCrafts are so fleet in the air. Take a look at a Chief, Champ, Cub or any of those same vintage 65hp birds next to your T and you'll see they have a MUCH larger frontal nose area. That's how they can fit the spark plug cups, mufflers, etc under there without much work and we can't. That's also why we go sooooooo much faster.

V

I'm sure you are correct. I also own a damaged Aeronca Chief sitting in my hangar. It looks like dumbo sitting next to my T. I think the rear fuse has something to do with the speed also, because the fuselage of the Taylorcraft is "pinched" in to a narrower width behind the cockpit.

Here's the funny part. This Chief does not have the Hanlon Wilson mufflers and only has that Y pipe with aluminum skin muffs. It's so big in there, it looks like you could climb in the cowl to work on the motor.

I bought the Chief before the T, but I'm having so much fun, I might never rebuild it.

Jack D.

[dedrekon]

Re: Need a bottom cowl (or ideas)

I have some time in a Super Chief with an 0-200 in it....they're a nice flying airplane, but even with the big engine it's quite a bit slower than the TCraft.

There are a couple of immaculate Chiefs and Champs at my home airport that make my ratty old TCraft look terrible, but I love to fly in the pattern with them. The TCraft is much quicker on and off the ground (IF you're on the numbers) and it will roar by them in cruise. Old Mr. Taylor knew how to design low horsepower airplanes!

Still, I've never flown an airplane I didn't like and a Chief would be a fun project. They have very elegant lines.....sort of stately looking, almost regal compared to the little snub nose T.

V

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: Need a bottom cowl (or ideas)

Be careful if you replace your cowl. The pre and post war cowls were different. The 46 (I think) and on 65HP cowls were all single curvature (you can lay them flat since they are only bent in one curve). The pre-war (and I know at least the 45s) used a compound curve cowl. They DON'T exchange without some major work. I found out my 45 didn't have the prop hole at the same height as a 46 or my 41 (all with original cowls and bowls). Haven't ever figured out why the engine on the 45 is mounted higher than the 41 or 46. Flys nice, looks nice, built different.

[Winston L.]

Re: Need a bottom cowl (or ideas)

The pre and postwar cowlings were the same except for the air filter hole. The cowling you have may not be original if it was off that much. The postwar cowling was made from the same blueprint as the prewar with a few revisions. I would say that you do need the compound curve for it to fit properly. The drawing called out 3003-o for the material, so it would be easier than you think to form one.

Winston

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: Need a bottom cowl (or ideas)

Got to differ with you. I bought a lower cowl from Dorthy at the factory for the 45 and it was shipped flat as a pancake. Wouldn't even come CLOSE to fitting on the 45. I sold it to a guy with a 46 and he snapped it on in less than a minute. The 45 lower cowl I have fits on the 41 and the 41 lower cowl fits the 45. Problem is the bowls have the prop holes in a different place! The 41 center hole is the same as the 46 and in fact I have put a 46 bowl with the larger cooling holes on the 41 lower cowl and it fits. The 45 lower cowl looks like it is made from the same blank as the pre wars but the engine mount actually holds the engine higher up than a 41 or 46. The original 45 bowl has the prop hole higher up. If you put a 41 or 46 engine mount on the 45 the 45 cowl doesn't fit any more. That 45 bowl was the one that came with the plane. There is no sign it was ever modified to move the prop hole to fit a "funky" mount. It still has the wire folded under the aluminum around the hole.
Right around the war I think they were using a lot of parts that were left over and those early post war planes are NOT all the same!
Just trying to urge some caution if folks are putting new (or used) cowls on. Sometimes they are not going to fit. I would hate to see a 45 cowl butchered up to make it fit a 46 (or the other way around) and the pre war cowls have a lot of "bowl" in them and can't be shipped flat. They stand up real nice on the hangar floor.

[Winston L.]

Re: Need a bottom cowl (or ideas)

The cowlings that the Feris's made were not like the original cowlings for the postwar. For ease of manufacturing they got a flat cowling approved. I saw the prints for that cowling. We made one with the compound curve and one flat, the compound curved cowl fit much better so we decided to make that one from the original 1939-46 drawing.


Winston

[Forrest Barber]

Re: Need a bottom cowl (or ideas)

Winston is correct. The lower cowl and nose bowl fixures did not come to Charlie & Mrs. Feris from Univair..... They had George Kirkendahl make a new nose bowl "mold" out of Kirksite (sp) by hand in about three weeks. The original operation called for three draws on the old hydro press a pierceing die was used first then a forming die then a final forming die was used in the 1940 for all the nose cowls. Then are all compound lower cowls came from another die system that the Feris's did not have, we built a mold from hard maple and sort of pulled the lower cowl around the form with another press it needed a lot of hand work to complete. Bill would ahnd work the lower cowls for about 4 hours each to get them right. I have no comment on the hole placement except to say they were all the same. However there were THREE type fits of boot cowl to front cowlings to accomidate erros in manufacturing. Sooooo I always advise folks that many times the cowling from one ship will not fit another, especially the dzus fasteners as they were all in stalled to fit the boot cowls.. Except for the BC12D1 ( aces) they were just sort of thrown together...

[Winston L.]

Re: Need a bottom cowl (or ideas)

Okay, that clears up some things for me. I didn't know why there was a change at that time.

Winston

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: Need a bottom cowl (or ideas)

WOW! So there could have been four or more different 65 HP lower cowls! The original pre-war curved cowls from the Taylorcraft factory made on Kirksite (could have also been Zamak2, just a competing material) dies, The post war factory cowls (same tooling? How would we know?), the Univair Cowls (probably the same tooling again) the Feris lower cowls from the hard maple molds Bill used with all the hand work, the flat sheet lower cowls like Dorthy sold me, and then add in all the differences between the long and short mount cowls and the larger engines! Lord knows what the factory in Texas was making.
The Feris/George Kirkendahl nose bowls sound like a whole NEW bag of snakes! I know there were at LEAST two sizes of main cooling holes because the pre-war cast grills are completly different from the stamped light grills. Now you add in that I have about 4 or 5 bowls available to me and there are at least two distinctly different heights for the prop shaft hole and we got ourselves ONE BIG HONKIN BASKET OF SNAKES HERE!
I have seen some planes in pictures that looked like the nose was a little drooped or up-turned. Could be the angle of the picture, or? Did they ever cover the cowl fit problem by mounting the cowl to the boot with a slight up or down angle to get the prop hole centered?
Forrest, if you remember, my 45 was one of the two "45 Deluxe" prototype planes with all the "funky" mods on it like the factory skylight and mix of pre and post war parts. Could they have not pierced the prop hole when they made the nose bowl and hand formed it to make it fit after the rest of the cowl had already been drilled for the fasteners? Maybe this nose bowl is a one of a kind "fix" to get the mod plane out and later they just tilted the whole cowl a few degrees. If you remember this is the plane that had all the hand formed sheet ribs in it (not stamped like the new ones and not built up like the pre-wars. All hand made, but ink stamped with Taylorcraft numbers on them!) They did a LOT of things the hard way on my 45.
They also did a LOT of "make it work" line mods right after the war in most factories as they spooled up production. Could this be evidence of Taylorcraft trying to find the best way to get production working?

[Winston L.]

Re: Need a bottom cowl (or ideas)

The cowlings we made in texas were identical to the 39-46 cowlings in form. The differnces were that we didn't fold the aluminum around the edges. We riveted the doublers like they did on the f models. All of the f models were flat and they were a newly designed part for those aircraft. As far as the nose bowls we compared ours to the univair bowls and they were identical. The holes are cut and formed during the forming process. The reason you see so many different looking cowlings is because nobody has manufactured them for so long that owners and mechanics have been manufacturing their own. I have seen some pretty bad cowlings that were made by the owners and mechanics. The flat cowlings I think look the worst.

Winston