Re: REFLECTOR: engines

[aegerter@dataway.ch (Simon Aegerter)]

>Forgive me for asking a stupid question, but why would anyone consider other
>engines/propellers than lycoming/mt combo's?

CBrock:

here's my stupid answer to your stupid question: <g>

I have a Franklin for two reasons:
- six cylinders
- cost: a new Lyc is 20 ... 45k. a new Franklin is 12k (naked). OK, nobody
buys a NEW Lyc, you look for a runout and rebuilt one. That's what I wanted
to avoid. Who knows how it was run out and how is was rebuilt? Some guys
are lucky, some less so. My hangar neighbour just discovered that the O-320
on his Long EZ had been "rebuilt" rather than rebuilt. Junked two
cylinders after less than 100 hrs.
With a Franklin, you get a NEW engine. (Right, that doesn't mean you're out
of trouble as I had to find out the hard way. But that was before we had
New Aviation and the engines were fitted with accessories by a slob in VA).

Why not a MT? The dumb and dirty answer: $$$$$$$$!
The more subtle answer: Weight! on a Long Wing Velocity you can accomodate
it, but on a standard, it is probably only possible with lots of ballast in
the nose. Remember Dan Maher in the old video: "watch my lips: no constant
speed prop! too heavy". Well - I do have an MT and a LW. Still, when flying
alone I enjoy the company of 40 lb. of lead.

Best
Simon

Simon Aegerter, Winterthur, Switzerland