Return-Path: Received: from imo18.mx.aol.com ([198.81.17.8]) by truman.olsusa.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.1 release 219 ID# 0-52269U2500L250S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Thu, 8 Jul 1999 09:54:33 -0400 Received: from IKOR1@aol.com by imo18.mx.aol.com (IMOv20.21) id kNWJa17576 (4200) for ; Thu, 8 Jul 1999 09:56:30 -0400 (EDT) From: IKOR1@aol.com Message-ID: <6e4171ba.24b6080d@aol.com> Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 09:56:29 EDT Subject: Extended Tanks and Continental in a IV To: lancair.list@olsusa.com X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com Mime-Version: 1.0 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> << Lancair Builders' Mail List >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> These concerns about the poor performance of the continental TSIO 550 are valid. They have needed to be topped regularly at 500 hours and are getting replaced by a 1000 - 1200 hours. I chose to go with the Walters turbine because it was more reliable and cost less. Another route to go is to use the continental but to fly conservatively and not expect the published numbers of a 300 knot cruise. The engine is not a bad engine, just too small for the needs of a Lancair pilot trying to get the published performance. I have not flown yet, but my wings are fuel tanks. Every inch is used. I even changed the push pull aileron tube to a torque tube so that I could seal it easier. I have a two place airplane when the aux. tank is filled. Since I have not flown my kit as yet, I offer not that your ideas work, but that they have been chosen to be tested by another. Intend to fly by this time next year. Ross Tye Walters Lancair IV >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LML homepage: http://www.olsusa.com/Users/Mkaye/maillist.html