Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Message #68190
From: swaid rahn <indigoaviation@gmail.com>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Difference between 235 & 320 airframes
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 12:38:05 -0500
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>
Thanks Bob,
Sounds like the landing roll is the limiting factor. I think I would prefer the O-320 also.
Happy Landings,
Swaid


On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 8:09 AM, bob mackey <n103md@yahoo.com> wrote:
My experience is very similar to Gary Edwards'. Having flown a few differently equipped Lancair 235 aircraft, I am perfectly happy to have a high-compression O-320. It has well over twice the climb rate of a similar airframe with an O-235. Like Gary, I need much less room to takeoff than to land. 3000' of pavement is a comfortable minimum. On smooth grass, the runway could be shorter, as there will be more drag on the landing roll. 

Also, the O-320 properly set up is happy to fly LOP, down to about 6.5 to 7.0 gph. 

Personally, if I had a 235 with an O-235 engine, I would sell it and buy an O-320. 

Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster