X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com
Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Received: from [67.8.181.30] (account marv@lancaironline.net)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro WEBUSER 5.1.9)
  with HTTP id 2089321 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 07 Jun 2007 10:38:19 -0400
From: marv@lancair.net
Subject: Re: [LML] What's better than a Continental IO-550 fuel system? 
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>
X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser v5.1.9
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 10:38:19 -0400
Message-ID: <web-2089321@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <bd4.fcf08ec.339964b4@aol.com>
References: <bd4.fcf08ec.339964b4@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<div id="_htmlarea_default_style_" style="font:10pt arial,helvetica,sans-serif"> Posted for MikeEasley@aol.com:<br><br> This is just a pilot, non A&amp;P opinion.  But I think a properly  maintained <br> and operated IO-550 is a very reliable powerplant.  When I'm  crossing the <br>rock <br> pile west of Colorado Springs with solid clouds below me, I  like the <br> long-standing track record of my Continental.  It may not be  perfect, but <br>the fleet <br> has a ton of hours on it.  I would venture  to say that the vast majority of <br> bent aircraft with IO-550s in them  weren't caused by the failure of the <br>engine.<br> <br> Mike Easley<br> Colorado Springs<br>
<br></div>