But, Bob, Ben is the one who has done the research, designed and built a
working auto-conversion, while you continue to point out its difficulty
while offering no information on how or why it won't work. Do you have
anything to offer, other than that you have been holding a stick for 50
years? We've all heard that one once or twice.

Logically, remaining simplistic and ignorant would apply to the one in
the same intellectual position as where they started. Can you tell us
anything about engines other than that you like Lycomings and
Continentals, because you've been flying behind them for 50years (again,
anyone who cares has heard that one by now.)?


He can't say it won't work because too many are flying. But he, and
people like him, say there's some secret boogeyman (usually it's
torsional resonance) just waiting to kill anyone who dares defy
Lycoming by not bowing down at their temple and paying up. Fly 500
hours without incident and he'll say at 600 the crank will
disintegrate or the drive will blow up and throw the prop.

Or that car engines really only put out 20 horsepower continuous
because that's the average you use in a small car on a flat highway. I
guess all those boats using Chevy and Ford V8s are a figment of
someone's imagination.

I think if you want the safety and assuredness of testing that a
certified engine has, then fly behind one-in a nice certified airframe
that you can buy cheaper than building a homebuilt. A structural
inflight failure will get you killed far more reliably than an engine
failure. If you are opposed to experimenting, you shouldn't be in
experimental aviation.