From: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Prop Overspeed
To: lml
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 22:11:52 -0500
Message-ID: <web-1045962@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <000f01c64f8d$220713b0$6401a8c0@axs>
References: <list-1045551@logan.com>
 <000f01c64f8d$220713b0$6401a8c0@axs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Posted for "terrence o'neill" <troneill@charter.net>:

  Lancairites,
     I've read these posts every day for the last year, as work proceeds on
  finishing L235/320, and I think everyone would agree that most of the
problems discussed are engine reliability.  After about 60 years of building
what is an essentially unchanged (in reliability) LKycoming or Continental
engine, what can't the manufacturers (who control the designers) get it right?
Bullet-proof reliability, to me, is much more important that another 50 pounds
of engine.  This Lycoming AD on excess RPM to me shows stupid design
decisions.  Cheapo car engines 'redlined' at 4500 RPM will reliably go far
over that with no problems. I modified a Ford 351W, beathing exhaust posts,
roller rockers, and a McCulloch supercharger, and ran it 4500-RPM at 45-inches
for an hour straight, static and staked out on the ground, and everything
stayed in the green. (Sold the plane after 40 hrs flying, but kept the
engine). If my zero-time performance airmotive IO-320 has any problems someone
else can tinker with it., and I'll look at DeltraHawk or TAE Centurion. I
thion k the bean-counting manufacturers are characteristically incapable of
building a reliabile GenAv engine. How does anyone else feel about this?
  Terrence O'Neill
  N211AL
  L235/320