Hi Ken !
I'm with you ! Based on my limited experience flying &
observing Suburau powered aircraft, I believe they will be more
reliable and less expensive to run. My impression is that the less
you mess with the standard systems, the better off you'll be -
Heck ! -Geert even used standard Subaru fuel pumps submerged in the tanks !
And they worked fine ! There seems to be greatly diminished returns
from changing pistons & cams,etc. - you lose the big advantage of
cheap, readily available parts - and reliability !!
Again, in my limited experience, I've seen a MUCH lower
success rate with North American auto engine conversions - particularly
8 cylinders. They sound great in theory, but the flight line at
Oshkosh is PRETTY SPARSE with successful installations ! There
seem to be many more happy Subaru drivers ...
Dave Bangle has a mounting system that lets you bolt a 4 cyl.
Subaru straight onto standard Lycoming engine mounts - if he has
extended this technology to the 6 cylinders, this would be a
giant step towards easing the conversion !! ( Dave ???? )
The Super Rebel was designed for as low as 180 hp. - if one
had an experimental inclination, perhaps it might be worth trying
one of the 200 hp. + Subaru < 4 cylinder > variants !!?? This would
certainly provide a LOT of useful information !!
Someday, I hope to have the opportunity to fly a Super Rebel
with 180 hp., a fixed pitch metal prop, & tricycle gear ... I really
believe that this could be a viable family aircraft, and more than
a replacement for the C-172 !!
So many things to try ..... so little time !!! ;-)
.....bobp
---------------------------------orig.------------------------------------
At 09:36 PM 1/18/01 -0800, you wrote:
That's because there is no answer of course. I personally believe my
Subaru will be much more reliable than a Lycoming will ever be. Many
auto engines are well suited to the task but most failures are system
failures such as the psru or ignition or a poorly thought out
customization of something. The firewall forward packages have also had
their problems. If you are not prepared to learn a lot and spend the
effort, then a Lycosaur is probably more reliable simply because there
are more of them around and their problems are better known (but
expensive). Any one-off installation will have its risks, so you must do
your homework regardless of engine choice if you want to minimise nasty
surprises.
Ken
AGT wrote:
I started this discussion to answer one simple question. Will the Suburu
engine, or the Northwest-Aero LS-1 engine for that matter, be as reliable as
a Lycoming. Simple question, right? Won't someone just say yes, or no?
*--------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------*
---------*
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
Contributors' page at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/contributors.htm
Visit the book store at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/book_store.htm
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/archives.htm
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at:
https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe:
rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator:
mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------
