"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
[...]
Perhaps auto engines aren't as feeble as people like to make out?

I've never seen anyone claim that auto engines were "feeble" or "fragile".

What they ARE is complex, and lacking in the necessary redundancy to be
operated in an airplane. They are generally too heavy, as they are made
stronger by adding material. They also lack an interested party to go to
the effort to certify them for aviation use.

Even with those impediments, some auto engines are being translated into
aviation use. Of course, the aviation-certified ones are significantly
different from their auto-based ancestors in some respects, but in many
other respects they are very similar. And of course, in the homebuilt
arena, many people operate auto engines for extended periods of time quite
successfully.

Now, all that said, one engine does not a proof or disproof make. Just
because your Jaguar engine running your winch has held together for 30
years, that doesn't mean that engines generally do well under that kind of
stress. Also, I seriously doubt that the engine has been left unmaintained
for its entire lifetime. In fact, I'd guess that someone is taking care of
it, and an engine that's being properly maintained can survive quite well.

Finally, without a doubt there are *some* auto engines that would never
survive in an aviation environment, and which *would* self-destruct in a
short period of time if operated for hours at a time at 75-80% power, with
extended 100% power climbs.

Perhaps your strawman was every bit as flimsy as one might have expected
from a strawman.

Pete