Return-Path: Received: from m3.boston.juno.com ([205.231.100.198]) by truman.olsusa.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.1 release 219 ID# 0-64832U3500L350S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Sun, 12 Mar 2000 21:51:10 -0500 Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for <"7LRIubhLn1VLcKB8GrXnbRmJuVgqJzsh9PfI4aeA4wgzf+0Gq752qqz0bX5Pkl+i"> Received: (from earl_schroeder@juno.com) by m3.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id E2ZSQB28; Sun, 12 Mar 2000 21:55:46 EST To: lancair.list@olsusa.com Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 20:48:52 -0600 Subject: Fw: New IO360B1F Message-ID: <20000312.210026.-813435.1.Earl_Schroeder@juno.com> From: Earl E Schroeder X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com Mime-Version: 1.0 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> << Lancair Builders' Mail List >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Angier wrote: "... negative feedback from the local EAA tech counselor today when he heard I had bought a NEW engine..." I too have a new engine so I'm very interested in this subject...... After much discussion during a Lyc rep presentation at Osh a year or two ago, he suggested running the 'new' engine as little as practical on the ground, limit taxi tests to the minimum and when finally airborne keep the power in as much as possible. He reminded us that the engines are 'run in' at the factory to some degree and the worse thing would be a higher oil consumption during the life of the engine. He said there were no 'safety' concerns and just do the best that you can. I considered taking my engine to a shop with capabilities to break in the engine but decided the cost of extra oil would probably be less and I would have the pleasure of hearing the sucker run. Earl >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LML website: http://www.olsusa.com/Users/Mkaye/maillist.html Builders' Bookstore: http://www.buildersbooks.com/lancair Please send your photos and drawings to marvkaye@olsusa.com. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>