![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:41:37 -0600, Big John
wrote: Corky Have you enough ammunition on auto engines to stop the nit picking in this group? Both Lyc and Con started life with auto engines G Big John Big John, to the best of my knowledge, I try not to nitpick. I try to present facts as I know them. I believe that there are various auto engines that can be successfully converted and I believe it strongly enough that I'm assembling a Ford V6 in my shop that will be the engine I fly behind. You weren't here when this subject was first aired many years ago, but there were many sceptics... actually that's not a strong enough word. There were some extremely vocal critics of the concept who felt that no auto engine would work in an airplane. One of them was an auto engineer, a guy who used to work for the Chaparal Racing Team with Jim Hall. He was absolutely positive that V configured auto engines would disintegrate (literally) under the stress. He also believed they could not cool because the coolant passages were too small and the cylinders too close together. He was wrong. In order to build a reliable auto conversion, you do have to do your homework. You have to safety wire just about everything that could come off including the oil pan bolts. You have to build using accepted aviation practices. There have been guys who screwed gas or oil lines into the block and then ran them to the firewall. They broke. You can't mount pipes solidly to the block and run them for any distance, prop vibration will eventually crack them. The guy who developed the Ford V6 discovered that the stud that holds the air filter can and will unscrew and drop into the engine, if you don't safety wire it. How did he discover this? Because it did. It was one of the many flights in which he coasted back to the runway. By now, many guys have successfully built and flown the Ford V6. One guy accumulated more than 2,000 hours without anything falling off or failing. Others are in the over a thousand hours hobbs time category. For some reason, success stories like this don't seem to matter to those who feel using an auto engine won't work. I do intend to test run the engine extensively. I'm fabricating an engine test stand along with the engine assembly process. While it's true this doesn't exactly duplicate the stresses encountered during flight, it's the best I can do, and better than just hanging it on the airframe and testing the engine during the very first flight. One thing at a time please. Corky Scott |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Single-Seat Accident Records (Was BD-5B) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 41 | November 20th 03 05:39 AM |
Objective Engine Discussion | Rick Maddy | Home Built | 26 | October 14th 03 04:46 AM |
FS: O-235C1 Lycoming engine (core) | Del Rawlins | Home Built | 0 | October 8th 03 09:46 PM |
Corky's engine choice | Corky Scott | Home Built | 39 | August 8th 03 04:29 AM |