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 |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 17:55:47 -0500, Barnyard BOb --
wrote: Are you kidding yourself? How can your database grow past more than a few hundred units with Chevy having most of the action and Soob, etcetera taking the rest of the interested market? Barnyard BOb -- BOb, you're the guy asking for the database, not me. I'm content to note that the Ford V-6's now flying are continuing to do so without encountering any major problems. Of course the Fords, Chevy's and Subaru's are no threat to Lycoming. They aren't intended to be. They are intended as an alternative to outworldly expensive certified engine technology. Personally, I'm having a lot of fun building the engine and assembling the PSRU. Corky Scott |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
As far as Lycomings go, they seem to have had too much trouble in recent years building their existing designs (i.e. O-540 crankshaft AD) to be considered a threat to whoever brings out the first commercially successful diesels. Del Rawlins- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Got any evidence to supporting your 'pie in the sky' Lycoming sour grapes conjecture and assertions? How do you define... "commercially successful"? Barnyard BOb -- |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
On 19 Sep 2003 04:48 AM, Barnyard BOb -- posted the following:
As far as Lycomings go, they seem to have had too much trouble in recent years building their existing designs (i.e. O-540 crankshaft AD) to be considered a threat to whoever brings out the first commercially successful diesels. Del Rawlins- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Got any evidence to supporting your 'pie in the sky' Lycoming sour grapes conjecture and assertions? Nope, it's pure speculation and no less valid than your assertion that new manufacturers will never amount to anything. Last I heard that was still allowed here. How do you define... "commercially successful"? I would define it as you can call them up and order one and expect to have it delivered within a reasonable time, and some undefined degree of longevity for the company. Dynacam, BD Aircraft, Dreamwings, Moller and their ilk need not apply. They wouldn't have to put lyc/cont out of business, just support themselves on the sales of their own product. It is a tall order under the current market conditions, but eventually somebody will succeed. ---------------------------------------------------- Del Rawlins- Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email. Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website: http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/ |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Got any evidence to supporting your 'pie in the sky' Lycoming sour grapes conjecture and assertions? Nope, it's pure speculation and no less valid than your assertion that new manufacturers will never amount to anything. Last I heard that was still allowed here. Sure, pure speculation certainly is allowed. However, it appeared that you knew something. My mistake. How do you define... "commercially successful"? I would define it as you can call them up and order one and expect to have it delivered within a reasonable time, and some undefined degree of longevity for the company. Dynacam, BD Aircraft, Dreamwings, Moller and their ilk need not apply. They wouldn't have to put lyc/cont out of business, just support themselves on the sales of their own product. It is a tall order under the current market conditions, but eventually somebody will succeed. Del Rawlins- Yes, someday somebody will succeed Lycoming. Someday the United States will be succeeded by another nation. Someday the world will end... and this kind of pondering is silly and a waste of time and energy. Barnyard Bob -- |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Barnyard BOb wrote in message Someday the world will end...
and this kind of pondering is silly and a waste of time and energy. So is sitting in front of our computers reading rah, but we continue to do it every day. Now then, back to my milling machine. I'm building my own turbo-diesel. For my VTOL. D. (The grass is always greener... until the fall when it dies!) |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
On 19 Sep 2003 06:35 PM, Capt. Doug posted the following:
D. (The grass is always greener... until the fall when it dies!) Fine by me, then it doesn't need to be mowed anymore. 8^) ---------------------------------------------------- Del Rawlins- Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email. Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website: http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/ |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
On 19 Sep 2003 05:31 PM, Barnyard BOb -- posted the following:
Sure, pure speculation certainly is allowed. However, it appeared that you knew something. My mistake. The point is that your crystal ball is no more clear than mine. For all I know you may be right, and we could be stuck with the same damn thing for the NEXT 50 years. That is a depressing thought and I prefer to hope for some improvement by the time I have to buy an engine. At my current rate of building, the diesel folks have plenty of time. Yes, someday somebody will succeed Lycoming. Someday the United States will be succeeded by another nation. Someday the world will end... and this kind of pondering is silly and a waste of time and energy. True, but at least I am in good company. ---------------------------------------------------- Del Rawlins- Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email. Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website: http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/ |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Corky,
I am not sure it is worth it to try to make any point with BOb about any auto conversion, but I can supply some information that others might find interesting. Six years ago I could count over 400 homebuilts flying with a Ford V-6. I could find more than 400 more under construction. I don't know what the totals are now. I know of 300 professionally built engines sold for installation in aircraft which have gone to builders whom I don't know. I can now report on 4 that have reached 1400+ hours and one that has gone 2000 with no catastrophic failure. I can also report on several who had problems that they could not figure out and who eventually pulled the Ford to install a Lycoming. I can report one death related to engine stoppage caused by a failed coil. I can report another death due to an improperly supported accessory belt jumping the pulleys and yanking the coil wires off. I can report on four that have been used exclusively for glider towing each reaching 500+ hours with no failure. I can report one engine failure due to a broken stock piston.(we all now use aftermarket pistons) No injury. The only short comings found with the engine was initial problems with head gaskets. Solutions were found and now gasket failures are rare to nonexistent. Early intake manifolds didn't flow well. Later ones work OK. Speed parts are now becoming available with fancy intakes and improved ratio roller rockers. The engine has been found to weigh in at 400 lb to 450 lb FWF and consistently produce 195 to 210 hp at 4800 RPM. Cog belt PSRUs produced by Blanton, Brantly and Northwest Aero have shown dependability and durability with belt life of 2000+ hours. THe engine can be built and flown for $5000 to $7000. And you can buy a new crank when it's time to rebuild for $450. If you don't understand mechanical devises and have never overhauled an engine, choose another engine project. If you like experimentation and enjoy the fruits of your own physical labor, go with an auto conversion. Corky Scott wrote: On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 09:23:15 -0500, Barnyard BOb -- wrote: No one is accusing anyone of having their head in the sand, but given the millions of hours Lycoming and Continental have been flown and tracked over the years, any backyard data base by a couple of conversion enthusiasts is insignificant and quite suspect in the scheme of things. The FAA and the AD system far exceeds anything you or Bruce can begin to track regarding auto conversion world faux pas. My sincere apologies if I implied that you accused anyone of having their heads in the sand. That was intended as my reference to myself and anyone else who would rather charge ahead with a project without first ascertaining what, if anything, has gone before and where the failure modes are. That just seemed logical to me. Further... The Ford engine is but one conversion and not a popular one. Whatever its record is, or can be... it ain't good enough for the majority of folks interested in converting auto engines today. As far as I'm concerned, you Ford guys are riding a dead horse and the Chevy boyz fall out of the sky with alarming alacrity. It isn't dead to me. The parts are still available and the only reason I'm using it is because so many are flying. The concept that we're "riding a dead horse" is interesting. If that's the case then what does that say about the Lycoming/Continentals? I'd rather be using a Chevy, only because there are more aftermarket parts available for it, but it's heavier than the Ford, unless you buy an aluminum block. And then the cost is prohibitive and it may still be heavier. Feel all warm and fuzzy with your minuscule knowledge/data base, if you must. Your Ford defense is a hoot.... and moot. Barnyard BOb -- 51 years of flight. The Database is small compared to Lycosaurs, no question about that. But the database for them (Lycosaurs) was exceedingly small at one time too, back when they were first introduced. There isn't anything inherently wrong with the concept of using an auto conversion. An engine is an engine as long is it's run within it's design parameters. But you can't just bolt a prop to Mom's salvaged grocery shuttle V-6 and expect it to work like an IO-360-L2A. The devil is in the details. That's why the subject keeps being discussed, that's why Bruce and others persist in printing newsletters, a thankless task by the way. People need to know the latest information. Corky Scott -- Bruce A. Frank, Editor "Ford 3.8/4.2L Engine and V-6 STOL Homebuilt Aircraft Newsletter" | Publishing interesting material| | on all aspects of alternative | | engines and homebuilt aircraft.| |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Sure, pure speculation certainly is allowed. However, it appeared that you knew something. My mistake. The point is that your crystal ball is no more clear than mine. For all I know you may be right, and we could be stuck with the same damn thing for the NEXT 50 years. Your point was and still is patently obvious... at least to me. Yes, someday somebody will succeed Lycoming. Someday the United States will be succeeded by another nation. Someday the world will end... and this kind of pondering is silly and a waste of time and energy. True, but at least I am in good company. Del Rawlins How can you be sure? g Barnyard BOb -- |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
"Bruce A. Frank" wrote: I am not sure it is worth it to try to make any point with BOb about any auto conversion, but... ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ You have it all wrong, Bruce. Your_points_ have ALWAYS been well understood. The point is... I simply disagree with the points as you and Corky present them. Let it be known now and forever more that this is the way it is. Barnyard BOb -- over 50 years of flight. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What's the best auto gas for a/c use in California? | [email protected] | Home Built | 12 | September 17th 03 08:47 PM |
Fuel pressure Problems | smf | Home Built | 3 | September 7th 03 08:25 PM |
Christen Fuel Pump troubleshooting | ShawnD2112 | Aerobatics | 4 | August 17th 03 12:08 PM |
Barnyard--- Auto engines | Jerry Springer | Home Built | 10 | August 8th 03 06:38 PM |
Question ~ Does fuel injection add weight? | Barnyard BOb -- | Home Built | 0 | July 6th 03 09:47 PM |