![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:33:11 GMT, "Colin W Kingsbury"
wrote: My friend (the one who quit working on his license) had to replace the engine in his 2001 Audi when the timing belt slipped. It cost him close to $20,000. He'd done maintenance religiously and didn't abuse the car. My 0-320 will cost $15k for a major overhaul, $25k factory new (ish). Not to knock your buddy, but either he's driving one of the S8 Bi-turbos or he got royally hammered. New recent model Audi engines in the same HP range, normally aspirated are running $3000 brand new. Installation is $1000-2500. These, however, are water cooled. Funny you bring up Porsche. They actually did try and build an airplane engine with Mooney back in the late 80s and it was a disaster. http://www.seqair.com/Other/PFM/PorschePFM.html for one opinion. I don't disagree that we're dealing with some pretty bronze-age technologies in our engines, but the homebuilt set has been f---ing around with auto conversions for 30 years with no really great success stories. If it were so simple, somebody would have figured it out by now. Actually, I think the VW engines are quite popular. However, I'm not talking about conversions. I'm comparing technologies. VW/Audi and Porsche produced aircooled engines that are similar to the Lycoming and Contential powerplants. The point I'm trying to make is that if Porsche ($$$$$) can produce an aircooled engine for a reasonable amount, then other other companies using the same technology targeted for aircraft should be able too as well. There is nothing inherently different about aircooled automobile and aircraft powerplants, excluding building to FAA certification standards. IIRC, the reason for the spectacular failure of the Porsche Mooney was that instead of redesigning the powerplant from the ground up, the Porsche design used existing technology adapted for flight; i.e. A conversion. I don't neccessarily want glass, but alot of people do. All I'm after is cheap technological growth. I see FADEC, GPS w/ WAAS approaches and Sirius WX as important technologies for fuel efficiency, safety and convienence. Tech growth is cheaper without FAA certification. Now you're mixing metaphors. I agree that a glass cockpit in an LSA adds sex appeal, but zero utility. However we are getting to the point where non-certified pseudo-glass panels are starting to cost less than round gauges. It will be a long time before the FAA allows easier certification of IFR instrumentation, and likely they never will. As the skies get more crowded, they will become more exclusive. Look at RVSM for an example. Glass can add MASSIVE utility. Automatic performance calculations, Synthetic vision, GPS terrain avoidance, built-in airport databases with autotuning radios. FADEC based auto-leaning, spark advance tied to EGT to prevent detonation. I could continue for quite a while. A well designed, centralized glass system could be as expandable as a PC. Want Sirius WX weather? Add a $300 receiver and upgrade the software instead of a $3000 brain/receiver. If you have autopilot, complete flight management is only a software upgrade away. Remember, we are talking microprocessor vs. steam gauge. My opinion is that LSA is something of a parallel track. Basically, if all you want to do is pull back on the stick and see the houses get smaller, LSA will offer a substantially lower-cost path to licensing and ownership. If you want to use airplanes as real transportation, you will need to go the traditional GA route with its higher costs. You could be right and only time will tell. However, there would be a great amount of utility available to the businessman to be able to fly himself and a cohort to a customer site in a LSA. How about a couple for a quick weekend? I see far more possibilities. Jim |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jimbob wrote:
: On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:33:11 GMT, "Colin W Kingsbury" : wrote: :My friend (the one who quit working on his license) had to replace the :engine in his 2001 Audi when the timing belt slipped. It cost him close to :$20,000. He'd done maintenance religiously and didn't abuse the car. My :0-320 will cost $15k for a major overhaul, $25k factory new (ish). : Not to knock your buddy, but either he's driving one of the S8 : Bi-turbos or he got royally hammered. New recent model Audi engines : in the same HP range, normally aspirated are running $3000 brand new. : Installation is $1000-2500. These, however, are water cooled. A factory-reman 2.8 liter VR6 engine for my Volkswagen Corrado was $7,700 at the friendly VW dealer (in 1995!). That was for a long block. It's a water cooled iron block V-6, 180 HP at 5700 RPM. A (very low quality) reman was $2,000. Installation was $1,000. YMMV. I don't want to think about the cost of the engine in my M3. -- Aaron C. |
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 |
Dover short pilots since vaccine order | Roman Bystrianyk | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 29th 04 12:47 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | October 2nd 03 03:07 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 4 | August 7th 03 05:12 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently-Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | July 4th 03 04:50 PM |