Return-Path: Received: from imo24.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.68]) by ns1.olsusa.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-64832U3500L350S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2000 17:19:15 -0400 Received: from Bahahud@aol.com by imo24.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v25.3.) id k.a5.4a5504f (14374); Tue, 18 Apr 2000 17:24:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Bahahud@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 17:24:55 EDT Subject: Re: lancair.list V1 #4 To: lancair.list@olsusa.com CC: david@photopro.com X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com Mime-Version: 1.0 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> << Lancair Builders' Mail List >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> David: I am not kidding. I didn't even use the radical comparison. Try a Cummings Diesel in a freightliner at 500,000 miles between overhauls most of the time running at or near full load. The only reason for an engine failure in an auto engine assuming reasonable maintenance is heat. There is no engineering justification for the common theory about auto engines being designed for low hp output. The cooling systems on many cars IS marginal for continuous high output. If an auto engine will develop 150 hp, keep it within operating heat parameters and it will do it without problems. This low horsepower out put theory was probably started by the aircraft engine makers to help sell their expensive dinosaurs. Lets have an arguement. Hank - San Mateo, Ca. LNC2 ROTARY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LML website: http://www.olsusa.com/Users/Mkaye/maillist.html Builders' Bookstore: http://www.buildersbooks.com/lancair Please send your photos and drawings to marvkaye@olsusa.com. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>