X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 07 Sep 2013 15:50:33 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from omr-m08.mx.aol.com ([64.12.222.129] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.6) with ESMTPS id 6458530 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 07 Sep 2013 15:19:23 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.222.129; envelope-from=vtailjeff@aol.com Received: from mtaomg-mb05.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-mb05.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.41.76]) by omr-m08.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id AB899700EBA8E for ; Sat, 7 Sep 2013 15:18:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from core-mne004a.r1000.mail.aol.com (core-mne004.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.29.107.77]) by mtaomg-mb05.r1000.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id 5FE67E000082 for ; Sat, 7 Sep 2013 15:18:48 -0400 (EDT) References: X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [LML] Re: IO470 in a Legacy In-Reply-To: X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: vtailjeff@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8D07A1636995E8B_17F0_60DB8_webmail-m131.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 38023-STANDARD Received: from 12.110.229.82 by webmail-m131.sysops.aol.com (149.174.9.18) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Sat, 07 Sep 2013 15:18:48 -0400 X-Original-Message-Id: <8D07A163688B500-17F0-191B4@webmail-m131.sysops.aol.com> X-Originating-IP: [12.110.229.82] X-Original-Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2013 15:18:48 -0400 (EDT) x-aol-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d294c522b7c180f85 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ----------MB_8D07A1636995E8B_17F0_60DB8_webmail-m131.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" All the guys I know who tried auto engine conversions more than doubled the= ir build time. -----Original Message----- From: Mark Sletten To: lml Sent: Sat, Sep 7, 2013 11:18 am Subject: [LML] Re: IO470 in a Legacy Wow, that didn't take long. I knew I was going to get some I-TOLD-YOU-SOs, = but I kinda hoped I'd get some help first... Ba da bing! But seriously... Here's the scoop for you Hyenas. Deltahawk is STILL working on getting an engine FAA certified. When I origi= nally considered a Deltahawk the company planned on selling experimental en= gines and using in-service data towards development of a certified engine. = Then they shifted gears and decided to get an engine certified first--mainl= y, I believe, because they see much potential in the UAV market, and the FA= A has decreed UAVs cannot operate in U.S. airspace without FAA-certified en= gines, but also because it's prolly not a good idea to use your aviation en= gine customers as beta testers. Then funding problems (ongoing), one of the= company founders passed away, a few engineering issues (mostly fixed) and = so on and so on... Bottom line, I couldn't wait for Deltahawk any longer. Next up, the Subaru debacle. I was still determined to use something "21st = century," so I looked at auto conversions. A company in FLA was selling a "= fully engineered" auto conversion based on the vaunted Subaru boxer design.= Seemed like a great fit: a horizontally opposed engine with liquid cooling= and modern EFI, and BONUS, everything I could find online at the time (inc= luding discussions with many happy customers) suggested the product was top= shelf. Even discussed the issue with underwriters who all said the product= had a good history and was insurable. Well, not everything was as it seemed during my research, and new info has = come to light. There are issues with the gear reduction unit raising questi= ons about its reliability (at best, it will require frequent tear downs for= inspection--a worrisome prospect rife with the possibility of maintenance-= induced failure), and based on the performance users are reporting (there a= re many flying; one of the reasons I was convinced to become a customer) it= 's clear the engine as designed is not producing even close to the claimed = horsepower, likely due to poor intake/exhaust design. There are a few other= nitnoid issues, but those are the biggies.=20 I'll be operating off a 2,600' runway (granted, it's near sea level, but st= ill), so I needed all the ponies the designer was advertising. Plus, as we = all know, the Lancair design does not leave much room for error when it com= es to in-flight power loss (although I believe the wing cuffs for the Legac= y offer much promise to ameliorate the worst of those issues), so it began = to seem more and more unwise to start off with an engine that might be more= failure prone. The nail in the coffin came when the "manufacturer" shut do= wn his Subaru-based business--because of the bad economy, he says--and has = announced he will no longer support customers who purchased his Subaru-base= d kit. In the mean time, he has started another company producing auto con= versions (Honda-based) for LSA use. Hmmmmmm. (There is more to this story = I cannot discuss at present; accusations, investigations, recriminations an= d all that.) SOOOOOO, after YEARS of wasted time, it looks like I'll be using a good old= tried and true old-timey/tech passe air-cooled engine of yesteryear... jus= t like (most) everyone else... And that's what happened to the diesel idea... and the Subaru too... And to= all of you here on the LML who told me this would happen... Yeah, yeah, yo= u were right and I, the maverick, was wrong. I now see that resistance is (= and always has been) futile. As a single, lonely figurative tear rolls slow= ly down my cheek (not because you guys are mean--that's one of your more en= dearing qualities--but because of the thousands of dollars I had to tell my= wife I wasted) I realize I will now be assimilated into the collective and= that you, the Borg, have won. DO YA feel better now? Back to business: Anybody got a spare 550 engine mount for a Legacy? I can = trade a nice Subaru-inspired paperweight... :) --Mark ____________________________________________ From:=09"Gary Fitzgerald" Sender:=09 Subject:=09[LML] Re: IO470 in a Legacy Date:=09Fri, 06 Sep 2013 23:59:18 -0400 Or the Subaru?? =20 Gary Fitzgerald LNC2 ~70% St. Charles, MO (Still) Looking for a good deal on a rebuildable or used (I)O-360 ____________________________________________=20 From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net]=20 Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 2:41 PM Subject: [LML] Re: IO470 in a Legacy =20 Mark, what happened to the diesel idea?? =20 Bill ----------MB_8D07A1636995E8B_17F0_60DB8_webmail-m131.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
All the guys I know who tried auto engine conversions more t= han doubled their build time.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Sletten <mwsletten@gmail.com>
To: lml <lml@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Sat, Sep 7, 2013 11:18 am
Subject: [LML] Re: IO470 in a Legacy


Wow, that didn't take long. I knew I was going to get some I-TOLD-YOU-= SOs, but I kinda hoped I'd get some help first... Ba da bing!

But seriously... Here's the scoop for you Hyenas.

Deltahawk is STILL working on getting an engine FAA certified. When I = originally considered a Deltahawk the company planned on selling experiment= al engines and using in-service data towards development of a certified eng= ine. Then they shifted gears and decided to get an engine certified first--= mainly, I believe, because they see much potential in the UAV market, and t= he FAA has decreed UAVs cannot operate in U.S. airspace without FAA-certifi= ed engines, but also because it's prolly not a good idea to use your aviati= on engine customers as beta testers. Then funding problems (ongoing), one o= f the company founders passed away, a few engineering issues (mostly fixed)= and so on and so on... Bottom line, I couldn't wait for Deltahawk any long= er.

Next up, the Subaru debacle. I was still determined to use something "= 21st century," so I looked at auto conversions. A company in FLA was sellin= g a "fully engineered" auto conversion based on the vaunted Subaru boxer de= sign. Seemed like a great fit: a horizontally opposed engine with liquid co= oling and modern EFI, and BONUS, everything I could find online at the time= (including discussions with many happy customers) suggested the product wa= s top shelf. Even discussed the issue with underwriters who all said the pr= oduct had a good history and was insurable.

Well, not everything was as it seemed during my research, and new info= has come to light. There are issues with the gear reduction unit raising q= uestions about its reliability (at best, it will require frequent tear down= s for inspection--a worrisome prospect rife with the possibility of mainten= ance-induced failure), and based on the performance users are reporting (th= ere are many flying; one of the reasons I was convinced to become a custome= r) it's clear the engine as designed is not producing even close to the cla= imed horsepower, likely due to poor intake/exhaust design. There are a few = other nitnoid issues, but those are the biggies. 

I'll be operating off a 2,600' runway (granted, it's near sea level, b= ut still), so I needed all the ponies the designer was advertising. Plus, a= s we all know, the Lancair design does not leave much room for error when i= t comes to in-flight power loss (although I believe the wing cuffs for the = Legacy offer much promise to ameliorate the worst of those issues), so it b= egan to seem more and more unwise to start off with an engine that might be= more failure prone. The nail in the coffin came when the "manufacturer" sh= ut down his Subaru-based business--because of the bad economy, he says--and= has announced he will no longer support customers who purchased his Subaru= -based kit.  In the mean time, he has started another company producin= g auto conversions (Honda-based) for LSA use.  Hmmmmmm. (There is more= to this story I cannot discuss at present; accusations, investigations, re= criminations and all that.)

SOOOOOO, after YEARS of wasted time, it looks like I'll be using a goo= d old tried and true old-timey/tech passe air-cooled engine of yesteryear..= . just like (most) everyone else...

And that's what happened to the diesel idea... and the Subaru too... A= nd to all of you here on the LML who told me this would happen... Yeah, yea= h, you were right and I, the maverick, was wrong. I now see that resistance= is (and always has been) futile. As a single, lonely figurative tear rolls= slowly down my cheek (not because you guys are mean--that's one of your mo= re endearing qualities--but because of the thousands of dollars I had to te= ll my wife I wasted) I realize I will now be assimilated into the collectiv= e and that you, the Borg, have won. DO YA feel better now?

Back to business: Anybody got a spare 550 engine mount for a Legacy? I= can trade a nice Subaru-inspired paperweight...

:)

--Mark


____________________________________________


From:=09"Gary Fitzgerald= " <gbfitz@swbell.net>
Subject:=09[LML] Re: IO4= 70 in a Legacy
Date:=09Fri, 06 Sep 2013= 23:59:18 -0400


Or the Subaru??
 

Gary Fitzgerald

LNC2 ~70%
St. Charles, MO
(Still) Looking for a good deal on
a rebuildable or used (I)O-360


____________________________________________ 



From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] 
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 2:41 PM
Subject: [LML] Re: IO470 in a Legacy

 

Mark, what happened to the diesel idea??

 

Bill
 ----------MB_8D07A1636995E8B_17F0_60DB8_webmail-m131.sysops.aol.com--