X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from blu0-omc2-s17.blu0.hotmail.com ([65.55.111.92] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.3) with ESMTP id 5361672 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 23 Jan 2012 18:27:41 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=65.55.111.92; envelope-from=stol83001@live.com Received: from BLU158-W15 ([65.55.111.72]) by blu0-omc2-s17.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 23 Jan 2012 15:27:05 -0800 Message-ID: Return-Path: stol83001@live.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_88570cd6-121c-40e2-844d-05ffbe92cb3b_" X-Originating-IP: [184.167.7.198] From: ben me To: Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Top 7 reasons for using an auto conversion Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 16:27:04 -0700 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Jan 2012 23:27:05.0091 (UTC) FILETIME=[84588D30:01CCDA26] --_88570cd6-121c-40e2-844d-05ffbe92cb3b_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hmmmmm..... Tracy and I are on the exact same thought process.... =20 =20 Well said sir...... Ben Haas www.haaspowerair.com =20 To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Date: Mon=2C 23 Jan 2012 16:47:24 -0500 From: rwstracy@gmail.com Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Top 7 reasons for using an auto conversion Quote: "Try that same conversation after you just robbed the 401K to spend= $18K on a certified engine without any of the accessories." That's actually a low ball figure. Van's Aircraft offers the Lyc. O - 360 = 180 HP EXPERIMENTAL version (non certified) for $26=2C700.00. And that's I= F you buy it with the OEM discount when you buy an airplane kit. It's more= if you only buy the engine alone or opt for the certified version. But that said=2C I used an alternative engine for only one reason. That w= ould be the kick I get out of being airborne in the cockpit=2C looking down= on the earth below and thinking =2C "Damn!=2C I engineered this installat= ion and it actually WORKS!" That's priceless for me. I don't lie to my= self and say this thing is more reliable than a certified engine. Statisti= cally=2C it isn't but I don't care. This is how I chose to live my life an= d I'm willing to bet my skill and ability against the chance of dying. I h= ave never recommended an alternative engine based on the idea that it is mo= re reliable. Even if the engine itself is much better than a certified AC = engine=2C that has little to do with the reliability of the whole installat= ion. The real reliability of the installed engine is a function of the ind= ividual builder. It might be very reliable or it might be a death trap. I= 've seen instances of both. Tracy Crook On Mon=2C Jan 23=2C 2012 at 2:22 PM=2C Ernest Christley wrote: Patrick wrote: > If it's more reliable and cheaper=2C double bonus. If it's just cheaper= =2C > I start getting scared. > > Imagine the conversation with your spouse if the airplane suddenly > becomes a glider: "But Honey=2C I saved a bunch of money by switching to > cheap parts...." > Can't see that ending well. Try that same conversation after you just robbed the 401K to spend $18K on a certified engine without any of the accessories. I don't see it ending any better by using the defense that you paid to much for crap parts. 8*) > > John Slade's descriptive narration of the failures of several turbos > that he used _because_ they were cheap is an excellent example. In the > end=2C the correct part was more reliable and ultimately cheaper than > the cost of buying three "cheap" turbos and the resulting engine > overhaul. That's what we call "getting an education". John paid dearly so that we can all be smarter. He did the hard work. Now that the education is complete=2C we know the lower limit of acceptibility for a rotary aircraft turbo. There was all sorts of turbo maps flying around that resulted in the requirements parameters getting nailed down pretty well. John could have started with the cheap parts=2C and kept spending more until he got to a reliable solution. Or he could have spent the $20K that some companies want for a certified turbo=2C and possibly still kept spending more until he got to a reliable solution. I believe the final solution is STILL a fraction of the cost of a certified turbo. Looking for a cheaper solution doesn't necessarily mean being stupid. I've looked for the least expensive/lightest weight solution whenever I could=2C but I never gave serious thought to using that really cheap epoxy resin that the hardware store has on the shelf. It is not up to the task requirements=2C and no amount of hand waving will make it so. But I did come down from MGS's expensive 285 system=2C and used cheap ol' West systems for the micro fill-and-sand. -- Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.= html = --_88570cd6-121c-40e2-844d-05ffbe92cb3b_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hmmmmm.....
Tracy and I are on the exact same thought process.... =3B
 =3B
Well said sir......

Ben Haas
www.haaspowerair.com

 =3B
To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net
Date: Mon=2C 23 Jan 2012 16:47:24 -0500<= BR>From: rwstracy@gmail.com
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Top 7 reasons for u= sing an auto conversion

Quote: =3B "Try that same conversation a= fter you just robbed the 401K to spend $18K
on a certified engine withou= t any of the accessories."



That's actually a low ball figure= . =3B Van's Aircraft offers the Lyc. O - 360 180 HP EXPERIMENTAL versio= n (non certified) for $26=2C700.00. =3B And that's IF you buy it with t= he OEM discount when you buy an airplane kit. =3B It's more if you only= buy the engine alone or opt for the certified version.

But that sai= d=2C =3B I used an alternative engine for only one reason. =3B That= would be the kick I get out of being airborne in the cockpit=2C looking do= wn on the earth below and thinking =2C "Damn!=2C =3B I engineered this = installation and it actually WORKS!"  =3B That's priceless for me. = =3B =3B =3B I don't lie to myself and say this thing is more reliab= le than a certified engine. =3B Statistically=2C it isn't but I don't c= are. =3B This is how I chose to live my life and I'm willing to bet my = skill and ability against the chance of dying. =3B I have never recomme= nded an alternative engine based on the idea that it is more reliable. = =3B Even if the engine itself is much better than a certified AC engine=2C = that has little to do with the reliability of the whole installation. = =3B The real reliability of the installed engine is a function of the indiv= idual builder. =3B It might be very reliable or it might be a death tra= p. =3B I've seen instances of both.

Tracy Crook



<= BR>
On Mon=2C Jan 23=2C 2012 at 2:22 PM=2C Ernest C= hristley <=3Bechr= istley@nc.rr.com>=3B wrote:
Patrick wrote:
>=3B If it's more reliable and cheap= er=2C double bonus. If it's just cheaper=2C
>=3B I start getting scare= d.
>=3B
>=3B Imagine the conversation with your spouse if the air= plane suddenly
>=3B becomes a glider: "But Honey=2C I saved a bunch of= money by switching to
>=3B cheap parts...."
>=3B Can't see that = ending well.
Try that same conversation after you just robbed the = 401K to spend $18K
on a certified engine without any of the accessories.=  =3BI don't see it
ending any better by using the defense that you = paid to much for crap
parts.  =3B8*)
>=3B
>=3B John Slade's descriptive narration of t= he failures of several turbos
>=3B that he used _because_ they were ch= eap is an excellent example. In the
>=3B end=2C the correct part was m= ore reliable and ultimately cheaper than
>=3B the cost of buying three= "cheap" turbos and the resulting engine
>=3B overhaul.
That'= s what we call "getting an education".  =3BJohn paid dearly so that we<= BR>can all be smarter.  =3BHe did the hard work.  =3BNow that the e= ducation is
complete=2C we know the lower limit of acceptibility for a r= otary aircraft
turbo.  =3BThere was all sorts of turbo maps flying a= round that resulted in
the requirements parameters getting nailed down p= retty well.  =3BJohn could
have started with the cheap parts=2C and = kept spending more until he got
to a reliable solution.  =3BOr he co= uld have spent the $20K that some
companies want for a certified turbo= =2C and possibly still kept spending
more until he got to a reliable sol= ution.  =3BI believe the final solution
is STILL a fraction of the c= ost of a certified turbo.

Looking for a cheaper solution doesn't nec= essarily mean being stupid.
I've looked for the least expensive/lightest= weight solution whenever I
could=2C but I never gave serious thought to= using that really cheap epoxy
resin that the hardware store has on the = shelf.  =3BIt is not up to the
task requirements=2C and no amount of= hand waving will make it so.  =3BBut I
did come down from MGS's exp= ensive 285 system=2C and used cheap ol' West
systems for the micro fill-= and-sand.

--
Homepage:  =3Bhttp://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub: =  =3B http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.= html

= --_88570cd6-121c-40e2-844d-05ffbe92cb3b_--