X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com
Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To:  lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:00:17 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-4174607@logan.com>
X-Original-Return-Path: <troneill@charter.net>
Received: from mta21.charter.net ([216.33.127.81] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.4)
  with ESMTP id 4174606 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 11:59:54 -0400
Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.33.127.81; envelope-from=troneill@charter.net
Received: from imp10 ([10.20.200.15]) by mta21.charter.net
          (InterMail vM.7.09.02.04 201-2219-117-106-20090629) with ESMTP
          id <20100322155920.FWLC75.mta21.charter.net@imp10>
          for <lml@lancaironline.net>; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 11:59:20 -0400
Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([75.132.241.174])
	by imp10 with smtp.charter.net
	id wFzK1d00M3mUFT705FzLFJ; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 11:59:20 -0400
X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=fLuM78UsAAAA:8
 a=HHGDD-5mAAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=VeJLFfWKbOoUO_0gbMEA:9
 a=tR5JzazSBtKQAMCuFn4A:7 a=9tdGVd8ji9Y0JpoXghsMtkvLBaIA:4 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10
 a=VQWZxD7wvt0A:10 a=6e4CQMaF2vYA:10 a=3jk_M6PjnjYA:10 a=i1zE5R4R5dEA:10
 a=Whv8HLVs5OMA:10
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077)
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Lancair 235
From: Terrence O'Neill <troneill@charter.net>
In-Reply-To: <list-4173957@logan.com>
X-Original-Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 10:59:19 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Original-Message-Id: <244D450A-95CA-41A7-8548-EC64BA18C816@charter.net>
References: <list-4173957@logan.com>
X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" <lml@lancaironline.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077)

Lorn,
Quick question:  why is the 320 some 15 knots faster than the 235 w/ 320 =
engine with less wetted area (slightly smaller fuselage)?
Terrence (w/ 235 w/ 320 engine) N211AL

On Mar 21, 2010, at 8:41 PM, Lorn H Olsen wrote:

> Gus,
>=20
> You ask if it flies as well as it looks. What are you looking at? The =
Legacy looks almost the same and yet cruises at 240 kts. Why not a =
Legacy? The answer is pretty simple, money. Not only the initial cost =
but the cost of operation. I think that, depending on your size, the 235 =
is a great flying aircraft.
>=20
> Here is an unofficial table of about what the different Lancairs cost =
(used, built), how they operate, and the direct operational cost:
>=20
> <LancairCostSpec.jpg>
>=20
> <Lancair Cost Specs.xls>
>=20
> These numbers are from my own from experience. They do show some =
interesting facts. Followup comments are more than welcome.
>=20
> Lorn
>=20
> On Mar 21, 2010, at 6:00 AM, Lancair Mailing List wrote:
>=20
>> rom: marv@lancair.net
>> Date: March 20, 2010 3:34:11 PM EDT
>>=20
>> Posted for Gus Virginis <gvirginis0819@me.com>:
>>=20
>> I am negotiating on the purchase of a 235 built in early 1991. Does =
the=20
>> airplane fly as well as it looks? Not sure how old this address is =
but any=20
>> information will be appreciated..  Thanks, GUS>>>>>>>>>
> --
> Lorn H. 'Feathers' Olsen, MAA, ASMEL, ASES, Comm, Inst
> DynaComm, Corp., 248-345-0500, mailto:lorn@dynacomm.us
> LNC2, FB90/92, O-320-D1F, 1,700 hrs, N31161, Y47, SE Michigan
>=20
> --
> For archives and unsub =
http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html