Bob Lester at one time ran a Subaru engine before changing over to a Corvair. 
Problems with the crankshafts due to the high rpms necessary to produce enough 
power.  Read the Auto Mathbook for some numbers of projected life expectancy 
when engines are subjected to higher and higher rpms.  The Chevy 350 is 3.48 
inches in stroke and will reach a piston speed that at 6500 rpms will stress 
the crank 4 times what it is at 5500 rpms per the author of the book.  Yet by 
de-stroking that same engine as in the Indy cars, it can be revved to 11,500 
and reach the same piston speeds as 6000 rpms, bringing the same stress to the 
crank.  You must do the same things to your chosen engine, OR use an engine 
that develops more HP than you need, so that your rpms can be maintained at a 
reasonable level for longevity.  The chosen engine needs to have a broad power 
band where torque is good where you plan to cruise.  Peak Hp does not matter if 
you cannot stay there for long durations. Remember about takeoffs, climbs while 
in cruise flight. etc...

With the complexity with running a liquid cooled auto engine added to an 
already complex task of setting up an engine and then matching a prop to it, 
the idea of getting reliable information concerning PSRUs and prop matches is 
nothing short of daunting.  The Subarus are reputed to produce X amount of HP 
but I was not impressed with their presentation nor information, or lack there 
of at Sun n Fun, from the Eggenfellner group.  They seemed full of hipe but 
would not talk real world knowledge of their products.  Like REAL hours of use 
instead of projected TBO. Their full rated HP falls WAY off when throttled back 
for economy cruise. For all the added extras in complexity and weight, you are 
better off with a good 2180 VW or Corvair 2.7L.  The three best auto engines I 
have researched that are successful conversions, being used extensively, with 
LOTS of information available are: 1) the VW 2180; 2) the Corvair 2.7L ; 3) the 
4.3V6 GM.  By far these engines have way over the numbers of flying conversions 
that stay in the planes and the owners express satisfaction with their 
performance.  The others have smaller numbers, and have short TBOs like the 2 
cycle Rotax family.  

IMHO I would recommend for our birds, stick with the proven power plants and 
you will fly sooner, be happier, spend less money, and perform better than 
these other fancy boat anchors. (Ok maybe not boat anchor, but definitely tie 
down anchors ).


Colin Rainey
brokerpilot9...@earthlink.net
EarthLink Revolves Around You.

Reply via email to