Hello again everyone, Some very interesting points being made on this discussion. Ask ten folks about engines and you will get fifteen different responses! I fully admit my negativity towards "certified" engines and my appreciation of "alternative engines". However, since I was a general aviation A&P until June of this last year I do feel I am entitled. Now back to engines. The point was made earlier that you shouldn't discount a design just because it is old. This is absolutely true. Automotive power plants are perfect examples of this. If I go out and buy the most inexpensive car today I will get a modern, computer controlled (ignition, timing, fuel ratio), fuel injected, liquid cooled power plant. If I buy the latest "certified" powered aircraft I get two magnetos for an ignition source, no timing control, two manual handles to control fuel/air mixture and if I am lucky enough to be able to afford the fuel injection I will have to go to another manufacturer (GAMI) to get optimum performance. Fortunately, FADEC is coming and it will eventually get here, but until then look to the automotive world for advanced or modern features and if possible, consider incorporating them in your design.
Stephen ste...@compositecooling.com ---Original Message----- From: krnet-boun...@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-boun...@mylist.net] On Behalf Of Scott William Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 9:48 AM To: KRnet Subject: RE: KR> Engine Ads --- Stephen Teate <ste...@compositecooling.com> wrote: >> > Hello all! As this is my first post please excuse > any procedural > failings on my part. Let's talk engines. Several > models of Subaru > engines are interference engines. For those who > don't know what that > means, it is where the valve travel and piston > travel overlap. Obviously > a bad thing. Like I said, some models of Subaru > engines are design this > way. Mine is not. It is a 4 cylinder > turbocharged/intercooled > fuel-injected EA-82. Here is a list of the newest powerplants by Subaru.... 1.8 used in Impreza - not interference 3.3 used in SVX - interference 3.0 6cyl in newer OB - interference 2.0 turbo in WRX - interference all 2.5 DOHC and SOHC (96-present) - interference all 2.2 - not interference > As for other engines, if you want to use an air > cooled engine designed > in the 30's and who's parts will require a second > mortgage, or one that > was designed in the late 50's and hasn't been in > production for 35 to 40 > years, That's a really interesting way to introduce yourself....by printing negative propaganda (read: your opinion) about widely used and reliable aircraft engines. The small block chevy came out of the 50's....does this mean that GM shouldn't be using it in cars built now? Reliable design, history of good data.....stop building them? > or use a modern liquid cooled engine with > it's added weight and > perceived complexity, then do it. Bwahahahahahaha!!!! So tell me Stephen, what is "modern" about an EA-82? It was produced in the early eighties (20 years ago) and was a derivative of an engine produced in the early 70's that can trace it's design back to the 60's. The EA-82 was a notorious rod-thrower. Ask anyone who used to own a Subaru Brat with the EA81. > The point is there > are issues with > whatever engine you choose. You are correct, but you did not have to make negative comments about all air-cooled aircraft engines to make your point. As experimental aircraft builders, we will all choose a powerplant that tickles our fancy, some even blazing new trails with powerplants never tried before. But to use the old argument that certified engines are dinosaurs......People will have a hard time taking you seriously. Scott __________________________________ Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. Try it free. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/ _______________________________________ Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html
