Cost of gas is beginning to hurt

Larry Stimely wrote:

I think the future of general aviation belongs to diesel. I've been
doing a little research on the Thielert 172/182 and the economics of it
are compelling. You're talking about the difference between ~17.5 gph
and ~11.5 gph on a 182...and the diesel has seventy percent fewer moving
parts in it.


I suppose you could get 17.5 gph thru a 182 but the tail pipe would be
dripping wet. Top of the green, 23" and 2450, figure 12-12.5 gph. I
don't run 17.5 thru my Bonanza with the 520, figure 14.5 at 75%.

On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:52:20 -0700, Larry Stimely
wrote:


So...all I have to do is sell my wife on the idea of buying a Thielert
172 with a glass panel.

I priced out a diesel for a 172. It came to $75,000 installed. We need
a lot of people like you to buy now so eventually the price will come
down to a reasonable level.

"ArtP" wrote in message ...
: On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:52:20 -0700, Larry Stimely
: wrote:
:
:
: So...all I have to do is sell my wife on the idea of buying a Thielert
: 172 with a glass panel.
:
: I priced out a diesel for a 172. It came to $75,000 installed. We need
: a lot of people like you to buy now so eventually the price will come
: down to a reasonable level.

As it is now there is no such thing as an overhaul on those Thielert engines. Apparently run them to 'tbo' and throw
them away...

On 2007-04-24, Orval Fairbairn wrote:
In article HDcXh.4499$0d2.3629@trndny02,

Kerosene is very LOW octane!

Interesting!

In that case I'll have to post the source of my comment:

http://www.malcopro.com/cgi-win/malmsds.exe/1088

I'm not endorsing that product or anything.. In fact I'm more inclined
to question it at this point.

--
PM instructions: do a C4esar Ciph3r on my address; retain punctuation.

On 2007-04-20 18:26:28 -0700, Al said:

C J Campbell wrote:

(snip)


We have another gas tax hike coming in July here in
Washington, but that was decided by a Democratic controlled legislation
in Olympia.

Actually...the autofuel tax increase in Washington that kicks in July 1
was passed by the Republican-controlled legislature in 2005.

Al
1964 Skyhawk
KSFF
Spokane, WA

Really? I was out of state in 2005, but I was under the impression that
Democrats have had a nearly 2/3 majority in both houses for several
years now. In fact, I recently got a call from a Republican fund-raiser
demonizing the Dems for the gas tax. If Republicans controlled the
legislature in 2005, how come Republican Mike Hewitt was the minority
leader?
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On 2007-04-20 18:26:28 -0700, Al said:

C J Campbell wrote:

(snip)


We have another gas tax hike coming in July here in
Washington, but that was decided by a Democratic controlled legislation
in Olympia.

Actually...the autofuel tax increase in Washington that kicks in July 1
was passed by the Republican-controlled legislature in 2005.

Al
1964 Skyhawk
KSFF
Spokane, WA

Okay, doing some further checking, Democrats controlled both houses in
2005. The Dems had a 26-23 majority in the Senate and a 55-43 majority
in the House.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

"Larry Stimely" wrote in message
...
Matt Barrow wrote:
"gatt" wrote in message
...
"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

It is the oil companies that are doing the stiffing.
Bull **** in spades.

Oil Companies have averaged 12-15 cents profit on each gallon;
Meanwhile, quarter after quarter they're making the highest profits in
the
history of human civilization, while the national economy--not to
mention
GA itself--slowly bleed out due to high costs of transportation.

There are several industries with higher profit margins; they just don't
have the volume or the breath of market. Exxon pumped something like 250
billion gallons last year.

BTW, while the oil companies make 12-15 cents, take a look at the
government
take:

Federal rate of 18.4 cents/gallon and the states (Excise & Other) at 18
(Montana) to
64 cents (NY), 60.1 (Hawaii), California (60.0) per gallon.

The average tax on gas is 45.9 cent/gallon (Federal & State) as of last
fall (2005).

And don't give that BS about government using it for infrastructure; our
roads are deteriorating since half goes into the general funds and the
remainder goes largerly to politically connected pork projects.

So who is doing the bleeding?

Here's a dollar: buy a clue.

I think the future of general aviation belongs to diesel. I've been doing
a little research on the Thielert 172/182 and the economics of it are
compelling. You're talking about the difference between ~17.5 gph and
~11.5 gph on a 182...and the diesel has seventy percent fewer moving parts
in it.

There's also significant concern about the ongoing availability of 100LL.

So...all I have to do is sell my wife on the idea of buying a Thielert 172
with a glass panel.

Fat chance.

Any lowdown on something in the range of 300-350 HP?

"Matt Barrow" wrote ...


Any lowdown on something in the range of 300-350 HP?


Check out Thielert's latest 4.0 V8. 350 HP derated to 310, available for the
C206. Empty weight increases some 150 lb, performance otherwise broadly
similar.

Dunno if it's a viable option with US fuel prices, but in Europe it's quite
interesting.

Blueskies wrote:
"ArtP" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:52:20 -0700, Larry Stimely
wrote:


So...all I have to do is sell my wife on the idea of buying a
Thielert 172 with a glass panel.

I priced out a diesel for a 172. It came to $75,000 installed. We
need a lot of people like you to buy now so eventually the price
will come down to a reasonable level.

As it is now there is no such thing as an overhaul on those Thielert
engines. Apparently run them to 'tbo' and throw them away...

Business Plan Alert....

Seems like there might be some engines available in the future that would be
great for experimental aircraft. To bad Thielert will probably MAKE you give
them your old engine in order to buy a new one.

In article 8CAXh.1143$YI1.985@trndny04,
Justin Gombos wrote:

On 2007-04-24, Orval Fairbairn wrote:
In article HDcXh.4499$0d2.3629@trndny02,

Kerosene is very LOW octane!

Interesting!

In that case I'll have to post the source of my comment:

http://www.malcopro.com/cgi-win/malmsds.exe/1088

I'm not endorsing that product or anything.. In fact I'm more inclined
to question it at this point.

Nowhere in the website does it give the octane rating for the kerosene,
which it lists as "86%-98%." The octane boost has to come from the other
2%-14%. If there is so much kerosene in it, I would not trust its
efficacy.