Return-Path: Received: from imo14.mx.aol.com ([198.81.17.4]) by truman.olsusa.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.1 release 219 ID# 0-52269U2500L250S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 02:17:10 -0400 Received: from RWolf99@aol.com (8054) by imo14.mx.aol.com (IMOv20) id kPOKa06727 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 02:19:27 -0400 (EDT) From: RWolf99@aol.com Message-ID: <4dbeec00.244ec7e2@aol.com> Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 02:19:14 EDT Subject: Continental Engine Failures To: lancair.list@olsusa.com Reply-To: RWolf99@aol.com X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com Mime-Version: 1.0 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> << Lancair Builders' Mail List >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> In a message dated 4/20/99 9:38:00 PM, you wrote: <> I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. But only with respect to the basic warrantee of merchantability. If a manufacturer sells me an engine with a 2000 hour TBO, I expect to get 2000 hours out of it or get a pro rata portion of my money back. After all, that's the kind of warrantee I get on my car tires and car battery, why should I expect any less for a $20,000 airplane engine? Certainly, the engine must be maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, but assuming I have done so, I think I'm entitled to a guaranteed amount of life from it. I must admit, I have not been following the AD history on the big Continentals. I'm planning on putting a Lycoming 330 in my LNC2, and my Cessna 150 has a little Continental. But there's no excuse for a manufacturer "suggesting" a given lifetime (a recommended TBO comes to mind as just such a suggestion) and not delivering, or worse, requiring $9000 of repairs. Tell me if I've missed the boat here... - Rob Wolf rwolf99@aol.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LML homepage: http://www.olsusa.com/Users/Mkaye/maillist.html