X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 23:33:04 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [64.97.157.155] (HELO n034.sc1.he.tucows.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.11) with ESMTP id 2271418 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 18 Aug 2007 20:51:23 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.97.157.155; envelope-from=micah@froese.com Received: from [192.168.1.101] (71.31.93.47) by n034.sc1.he.tucows.com (7.2.069.1) (authenticated as micah@froese.com) id 467DB62F00A1338C for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 19 Aug 2007 00:50:46 +0000 X-Original-Message-ID: <46C793E4.2060301@froese.com> X-Original-Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 20:50:44 -0400 From: Micah Froese User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Subject: Re: [LML] Performance Engines References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I am very happy with Performance Engines. Engine was late, but was a work of art when I received it. It has performed beautifully since installed, just hit 200 hours on it yesterday coming back form Florida.

Compared to many of the other vendors I used, Performance wasn't that bad when it comes to being on time, the engine was about a month or so late, but at least it was on budget. The same can not be said for some other parts in my Legacy, which were 9 months late and considerably more expensive than quoted.

Micah Froese
Lancair Legacy
Performance Engines IO-55-EXP

Robert Pastusek wrote:

Has anyone on the list had difficulty in getting delivery of engines or required engine components from Performance Engines?

Bob Pastusek