Jim Stewart writes:

Have you ever read how to conduct engine-out
training in a real GA aircraft, let alone
experience it?

I've discussed it with pilots, and I know of the problems and false sense of
security that improper simulation in a real aircraft can provide. Simulation
on the ground is more accurate.

Engine-out training is typically done by pulling
the throttle to idle, not shutting down the
engine.

When real engines fail, they don't just throttle back to idle, they stop.

It's a bit like practicing "landings" without ever actually touching down.

In the country, the plane is flown down to about
50-100 feet off the deck, depending on terrain
and obstructions, followed by a climb-out and
evaluation of landing site selection and approach
speed and altitude.

So a large part of the experience is missing. In real life, the landing
doesn't end at 50 feet above the ground. And it doesn't matter much how well
you handle it to that point if you mess it up thereafter.

This is why simulators are useful. In the simulator, you can fly all the way
to landing, and learn and pratice things that may prevent you from being
killed if it ever happens in real life. But that's too dangerous in a real
airplane.

Engine-out training is one of the most interesting
and satisfying flight training drills there is.

I think that's a matter of opinion.

I've never felt that it's particularly dangerous.
But then, I fly and you don't.

How many engine-out emergencies have you experienced?

I thought you knew all about it?

About the curriculum for private pilots? No, I haven't examined it in depth.

There's not much difference in drag between
a prop in front of an idling engine and a
stopped engine, at least not on my plane.

That's not what other pilots have told me. But perhaps your plane is
different.