Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net> (Marvin Kaye)
To: lml
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 10:10:46 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-1790648@logan.com>
X-Original-Return-Path: <glcasey@adelphia.net>
Received: from smtprelay2.dc3.adelphia.net ([24.50.78.5] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0b8)
  with ESMTP id 1790607 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 25 Sep 2002 08:55:21 -0400
Received: from worldwinds ([207.175.254.66]) by
          smtprelay2.dc3.adelphia.net (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15)
          with SMTP id H2ZVW704.H03 for <lml@lancaironline.net>; Wed, 25
          Sep 2002 08:55:19 -0400 
From: "Gary Casey" <glcasey@adelphia.net>
X-Original-To: "lancair list" <lml@lancaironline.net>
Subject: V8 engines
X-Original-Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 05:53:32 -0700
X-Original-Message-ID: <NEBBIBKBKLGPNKKOGMMBOEPJEKAB.glcasey@adelphia.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Importance: Normal

<<I am installing a 500 hp Zehrbach engine in my IVP also.  Direct drive,
liquid cooled inverted V8, electronic fuel injection, electronic ignition,
ceramics.  650 cubic inches.>>

I have been an "engine design hobbyist" for many years, and I have concluded
that for our size aircraft the ideal piston engine configuration is the
inverted direct drive turbocharged liquid-cooled V8.  It has the potential
for greater power/weight, more reliability and less noise than existing
engines.  I think the Zehrbach approach is close to the "correct" one, but
not quite.  I don't see the value in the dry sump or the long propshaft
extension.  Also, for lower-powered applications like my ES it looks like a
bit of an overkill.

Gary Casey