REFLECTOR: Alternative engines

[doug.holub at tx.rr.com]

Eight years ago, I swore I wouldn't put a Lycosaurus in my 21st century airplane and sold the mid-time Lycoming that came with my second-hand kit. But the new kit engines from Superior and ECI look like a huge improvement. Better airflow, dynamically balanced VAR crankshafts, cold air induction, improved lubrication on the camshaft, nickel-carbide cylinders. Add fuel injection, electronic ignition, and engine monitoring that allows you to run lean of peak, and you've got an easy-to-start, smooth running, fuel efficient power plant that is 10 times faster and easier to install than an auto conversion. 

But it's all about "education and recreation", and you've got to admire the engineering and craftsmanship that are going into these auto conversions. That's just not for me. I'm not a motor head, and I'm very thankful that the factory provides a firewall forward kit for my engine.

Doug Holub
Irving, Texas

---- Tom <tomcat05 at comcast.net> wrote: 
> Velocity owners/builders tend to be an outside the box group. 
> Proportionately speaking, I see a lot of Velo builders opting for 
> engines other than Lycoming/Continental/Franklin. Has anyone tried to 
> figure out what the success rate is on the outside the box engines? Do 
> you have to reinvent the wheel on the installs? Are there reliability 
> issues? How hard to work out the bugs (cooling, fit, gear reduction, 
> etc)? Are any cost or efficiency savings promised actually realized and 
> worth it? Tom
> _______________________________________________
> To change your email address, visit http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
> 
> Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> Check old archives: http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html