[Ron Lee]

Frank, your position on fuel systems is well known. It may even be right. I am not going to discuss that since I don't know.

However, I would like to see proof of an RV crash from vapor lock while flying.

I don't mean on the ground on a hot day after refueling. I have been there.

 

[RV7Guy]

Kool aid!!!

Well deej, right off the Alt engines play book. The same inane arguments everyone tries to use to justify and rationalize a Subaru. I won't go point by point. It's been done many times before. I was one of them. Fortunately I was "saved" from the Church of the Alt engine.

As a couple of people have pointed out, Alt engines are only for a few people. I don't think they should be an over the counter type of purchase. Of the 10 people I know personally, all have had numerous issues with alt engines, primarily Eggy's. Three have crashed or had off field landings.

One friend had posters in his hangar with all of the "benefits," of the Eggy listed for everyone to see. Well, just after his 40th hour, the engine quit on take off. The airplane landed off field and flipped. He is lucky to be alive. Another, almost the same story. One of the biggest supporters of the Eggy has pretty much disappeared. He had a couple of off field successful landings that were quietly pushed under the rug.

Two guys are not getting anywhere close to advertised performance and can barely fly in the summer. One has said he will swap out when money allows.

One guy has been through 3 gearboxes and hasn't even flown yet.

Bottomline, the accident stats are far skewed regarding Alt engines for the overall number flying. And, the question I always ask a potential Alt engine user, "Knowing the accident rate for Alt engines as compared to conventional engines, are you will to put a member of your family in your airplane?" Any hesitation answers the question.

I'm all for experimentation. I'm just tired of seeing friends have accidents and not getting to fly as much as they hoped, dreamed and were promised by the "trouble free," FWF packages offered by some.

 

[deej]

Well deej, right off the Alt engines play book.

Actually, I cut and pasted it from my personal web site. Matt asked why some people are attracted, and I answered him from my perspective, and in fact the first three words in my post were "In my opinion". I personally wrote those reasons, and did not copy them from an "Alt engines playbook" (whatever that might be).

I can see not much has changed here. Lots of alternative engine bashing in the alternative engine forum. No one dares to post anymore because all the nay-sayers bash anything posted by the people that actually like something other than a Lycoming. Matt even asked for no flames, yet here we go again... *sigh*

It is interesting to note, that for every "failure" of an alternative engine package, you can find many more "failures" with a Lycoming package, but no one ever seems to want to hear that.

-Dj

 

[C-GRVT]

which group are you in?

As I suggested in my earlier post, the key is informed decision making. "Alternative engine" bashing is meaningless without context - it is not a "bash" of an alternative engine under development to say that something failed, or the thing is unproven, or that it doesn't operate as the designer expected - getting it right and proving it is part of the normal process of development of a new technology. It is however a legitimate bash if that alternative engine is marketed and sold as a safe, reliable firewall forward "plug and play" alternative to a Lycoming.
By marketing an alternative engine as offering power and dependability in a smooth, safe, reliable and complete package, a vendor is marketing his product to that second, non test pilot group of people (myself included) that I described in my earlier post. How many in that second group would buy the alternative engine if the vendor did not promise safety and reliability in a complete plug and play firewall forward package?
Deej, would you have? If so, you've made an informed decision that's right for you.
But I know that if I had bought the package based on vendor representations of a safe, reliable plug and play alternative to a Lycoming, and the reality turned out anything like what RV7Guy and many others have described, I know it would have been the wrong choice for me.
So, alternative engine "bashing" is a futile game, but there is great value in sharing knowledge, experiences and opinions on these engines so that all of us, and we all need an engine, can make an informed decision based on our needs, interests, and abilities.
Bill Brooks
Ottawa, Canada
RV-6A finishing kit

 

[deej]

Deej, would you have? If so, you've made an informed decision that's right for you.

I researched the Subaru option for about 5 years before deciding to go with it. You are absolutely right that you need to make an informed decision. EVERY engine package has its pros and cons, and EVERY engine package, traditional or not, has failures. To say or think otherwise is just silliness.

but there is great value in sharing knowledge, experiences and opinions on these engines so that all of us, and we all need an engine, can make an informed decision based on our needs, interests, and abilities.

I completely agree. I just wish we would see more of this, and less frivolous bashing.

Thanks,

-Dj

 

[David-aviator]

......I just wish we would see more of this, and less frivolous bashing.

Thanks,

-Dj

Dj, you have to cut Darwin a bit of slack.

He was one of the guys who sent a ton of money to an alternate engine vendor and never received so much as a spark plug in return. The water is really poisoned for him.

 

[DGlaeser]

Thanks DJ

For being the voice of sensibility and reason.

Vendors who 'accentuate the positive' about their products - who'd ever guess that would happen Billy Mays is rolling over in his grave!

 

[RV7Guy]

Not Bashing

Deej,

How can you call factual information, bashing? Your defense of Subaru's is completely consistent with most of the others with the tatoo. Then, down the road, reality sets in and they come back to the fold. If, you live through it.

Please answer this question honestly. If you are married, have you told your wife that you have bought an engine that has been fraught with problems and has been through many redesigns of the prop drive. Or, have you just told her the "benefits," side of the chart?

Yes there are issues with Lycoming and clones. But, per capita, there is absolutely no comparison. As I said, 10 for 10 of the people I know with Eggys have had problems. Fortunately, all are alive to talk about it.

David, I actually got the engine from the crooked Canadian company. I was able to sell it after 100% full disclosure to the buyer as to my relationship with the company and my many concerns. This was the only way I could sell it in good conscience.

Deej, again, don't confuse bashing with facts. Its the facts that are bothering you. There is still time to change and minimize your risk.

I'm done with this. Same argument every few months.

 

[deej]

Your defense of Subaru's is completely consistent with most of the others with the tatoo. Then, down the road, reality sets in and they come back to the fold. If, you live through it.

No tattoos anywhere on my body as that is something I've never been interested in. Comments like your last sentence above "if you live through it" are indeed, in my opinion, bashing. There are far more airplanes flying with Subarus that are not having problems than those that are. Why don't the nay-sayers ever mention any of those?

Yes there are issues with Lycoming and clones. But, per capita, there is absolutely no comparison. As I said, 10 for 10 of the people I know with Eggys have had problems. Fortunately, all are alive to talk about it.

Okay, and I know of far more flying with Subarus than I do of those that have had problems. The problem we have on this forum is that so many nay-sayers gang up on anyone not flying with a Lycoming, that no one flying an alternative engine wants to post here anymore. If you REALLY want to know the success stories, you have to go to the individual engine-type forums. Yes, there are problems, as there are with ANY engine package, but you make it sound like 100 percent have issues, and I'm sorry, but that is far from the truth.

Same argument every few months.

Yeah, that is what I said in my first post. Not much has changed on this forum, same old bashing for anything non-Lycoming. The truth is out there for anyone that wants to find out more, but you unfortunately won't find it here.

One of our brethren flying an RV-10 installed a brand new Lycoming in his airplane. After a couple of hundred hours, he had to have cylinder work done on the engine. He was excited that it was so easy to get to and repair. My response is that I was aghast that he had to have piston/cylinder work done on a brand new engine after only 200 hours. It amazes me that this type of work on a Lycoming is perfectly acceptable to people, yet whenever work has to be done on an alternative engine installation, people point fingers and make a huge deal out of it. Interesting, yes?

-Dj

 

[nucleus]

Bad Practices Abound

I changed my mind away from using an alternative engine; mostly to save time. I have not regretted that choice. I think alternative engines can be great.

But I have been particularly disturbed by the main Subaru supplier's attitude. He doesn't seem to do much but buy used engines (low mileage japanese engines are plentiful and cheap) and slap on whatever, make sure it's anodized to look nice, and then sell it a an serious markup. No dyno testing, no running of the engine and reduction box in a cell, and apparently no torsional resonance testing. I also think that his attitude of adopting the latest engines available from Subaru is a bad idea as well, no continuity.

He has chutzpa coming out his ears. In the FAQ on his website he states that he doesn't want his customers to even monitor other forums beside his own.

Hans

 

[N395V]

A discussion is fine but the tone is turning a bit nasty in some of the posts. This thread is close to being deleted.

 

[David-aviator]

Actually, I cut and pasted it from my personal web site. Matt asked why some people are attracted, and I answered him from my perspective, and in fact the first three words in my post were "In my opinion". I personally wrote those reasons, and did not copy them from an "Alt engines playbook" (whatever that might be).

I can see not much has changed here. Lots of alternative engine bashing in the alternative engine forum. No one dares to post anymore because all the nay-sayers bash anything posted by the people that actually like something other than a Lycoming. Matt even asked for no flames, yet here we go again... *sigh*

It is interesting to note, that for every "failure" of an alternative engine package, you can find many more "failures" with a Lycoming package, but no one ever seems to want to hear that.

-Dj

Dj,

Jan needs defenders of the faith and you're doing your part. But from my perspective this is difficult. The product simply did not work out price wise or performance wise. If you fly with no more than $24000 invested, great.

Wait until your airplane is flying to beat the drum so loudly. At this point, all you're doing is defending a decision to go with it. Hopefully, you will report success in the air sooner than later.

Beyond all that, what is the latest deal with ECU's? Is Jan building his own? I know he stopped using Subaru units and I do believe Ross is out of the picture.

 

[L.Adamson]

Dj,

Jan needs defenders of the faith and you're doing your part. But from my perspective this is difficult. The product simply did not work out price wise or performance wise. If you fly with no more than $24000 invested, great.

Wait until your airplane is flying to beat the drum so loudly. At this point, all you're doing is defending a decision to go with it. Hopefully, you will report success in the air sooner than later.

Beyond all that, what is the latest deal with ECU's? Is Jan building his own? I know he stopped using Subaru units and I do believe Ross is out of the picture.

A bit over a year ago, my 6A (Lyc) and a friends 8 (Egg/Sub 6) were signed off by the DAR within days of each other. When my plane hit 100 hrs, his was at 19 (mostly on the ground). It was due to severe over heating problems, as well as the upgrade to the generation III gear box. He's had to modify the cowl & radiator piping over and over to improve these cooling problems. Within the last few weeks, the hours have moved through 40. We'll see what future hours bring. In the end, it's said that he could have nearly bought two Lyc's for what has gone into this. That could be an over statement.............but perhaps reality.

Never the less, it's been far from plug & play, and perhaps these Subi units really DO need P-51 or Spitfire type cooling.

Until witnessing the events of the last year, I didn't feel any real bias against these alternative engine setups. I just didn't believe the hype on the EGG web site. These day's, I never recommend one.

L.Adamson --- RV6A

 

[N941WR]

Can I dip a toe in the water?

Back when I was first building I thought about putting a Subbie in my -9. On paper it almost looked good and I liked the idea of a modern engine.

Then I looked at the price and almost fell over. WTF! For the price of the FwF package you can have find a good deal on a Lycoming. So I did look around and found a good deal on a Lycoming.

Then there was that weight thing. Almost every non-rotary alt engine RV would come in a LOT heavier than its Lycoming counterpart.

Some day, there will be a good alt engine for our planes and I hope the forum members support the effort and reporting of said engine. Who knows, that engine may even come from Florida.

I'm still keeping my fingers crossed for a good quiet rotary package or maybe a turban, or maybe a warp drive...

Keep experimenting guys!

 

[roadrunner20]

My price for the Subaru FWF when I bought it, not including any shipping or crating:
Eggenfellner 3.0 E6 $21,300
This includes electronic ignition, engine mount, cabin heater (an optional add-on), 75Amp alternator (an optional upgrade), exhaust system, fuel pumps, starter, cable brackets, oil cooler, and an Andair fuel filter (an add-on).
I'll be using an IVOProp 3 blade variable pitch prop at a cost of $3,120.
My total cost is $24,420 not including any crating or shipping.

From the Glasair Aviation website at the time:
Lycoming Y0-360-A1F6 180hp with Lasar ignition Part No: 501-04000-05X $27,800.00
Lycoming Type I Dynafocal Mount Installation $1,295.00
Shock Bushing For Lycoming Engines $389.00
Engine Baffling Kit $495.00
Lycoming Oil Cooler Installation $908.00
Sportsman IO-360 & IO-390 Injected Induction Installation $199.00
Sportsman and Glastar Muffled Exhaust Systems $1,295.00
Fuel Pump Cooling Shroud $115.00
Cabin Heat System $279.00
Eng. Control Bracket Installation $175.00
Hartzell 74" Constant Speed Propeller $6,183.00
Prop Governor $1,300.00
Total for the Lycoming installation is $40,433, not including any shipping or crating.

You're numbers are a bit off.
You could knock off at least 10-15k from your calculations.
My fwd induction XIO-360, 22k
Catto 3-blade, 1500.
This setup will out perform any sube.

On the sube, you'll need to add-in additional 8k for the genII & gen III or maybe another 5k for the genIV.

Great business model when you can make a mandatory recall and charge your customers thousands of dollars.

Although today there's an even bigger savings from people attempting to sell off their sube setup.

 

[N713R]

Lots of good information here guys.

If I may chime in. Many of the alt engine guy here feel slighted buy discussion of alt engine failures. I am an alt engine guy (Mazda Rotary in a 7), and I can tell you, hearing of these failures is EXACTLY what people need to hear. I have spent more time (much more actually) trying to talk people out of an alternative engine than into it. I enjoy tinkering, I enjoy challenges, and I enjoy diving deep into subjects to find viable solutions. I try to spend twice as much time listening, and half as much talking. (came equipped with two ears and one mouth). Alternative engines are not for the masses. I don't feel the least bit slighted when people speak of accidents involving alt engines, provided the facts are presented, and not gross misstatements or lies. There are some of those too. You have to learn to separate the wheat from the chaff in what you hear and read, but there is much good information out there.
Learn from those that have been there, and don't think that a failure they had won't happen to you. Learn from information and prevent it from happening to you.
Typically the supporting systems are what cause an alt engine to fail, pay very close attention to cooling, fuel, and PSRU. Among all the others.

 

[TSwezey]

I rarely hear of a Rotary failure. Tracy Crook has been very successful in his rotary powered planes. I believe there is a rotary powered RV-10 out there somewhere also. It can be done. There has been one fatal RV-10 crash that had a sube in it but the engine was not the cause of the crash. The biggest problem I see is that the "mass" producers of alt engines think they know everything and they will not listen to anybody's advice.

 

[deej]

You're numbers are a bit off.
You could knock off at least 10-15k from your calculations.
On the sube, you'll need to add-in additional 8k for the genII & gen III or maybe another 5k for the genIV.

Hi Dan,
The numbers were 100% correct when posted to my web site back when I did the pricing research. I verified them multiple times before I put the information up on my site. The price quoted includes the Gen 3 v4 PSRU. I'm sure that today the prices are not exactly the same as they were back then, but the relative difference between the two is still roughly the same, I believe.

Please feel free to use the exact list that I gave to get current prices if you wish, and post the information here if you would like to share the current pricing differences with us. You can find the Sportsman engine accessory pricing information (mount, baffles, oil cooler, etc) at www.glasairaviation.com.

-Dj

 

[roadrunner20]

Hi Dan,
The numbers were 100% correct when posted to my web site back when I did the pricing research. I verified them multiple times before I put the information up on my site. The price quoted includes the Gen 3 v4 PSRU. I'm sure that today the prices are not exactly the same as they were back then, but the relative difference between the two is still roughly the same, I believe.

Please feel free to use the exact list that I gave to get current prices if you wish, and post the information here if you would like to share the current pricing differences with us. You can find the Sportsman engine accessory pricing information (mount, baffles, oil cooler, etc) at www.glasairaviation.com.

-Dj

Hey Dj,
My take is that anyone can manipulate the numbers to favor their argument. Using the lyc with lasar option & CS bumps up that price.

My engine/prop combo knocks off about 10k from your numbers. You could also compare against a carb with standard intake for 2-3k less.

If you add the MT prop into the sube and all the additional work to enable proper venting to provide additional cooling, there is no real savings.

When I entertained using the sube option and ran my numbers, it was more expensive & more experimental. I was not willing to go that route.

I had hoped the autoconversion option would work as this would drive down prices for all of us. This is what Superior had done in their heyday. They made Lycoming wake up and view the experimental market as viable and began to compete for that market with their own enhancements and more competitive pricing.

 

[frankh]

I believe

Frank, your position on fuel systems is well known. It may even be right. I am not going to discuss that since I don't know.

However, I would like to see proof of an RV crash from vapor lock while flying.

I don't mean on the ground on a hot day after refueling. I have been there.

Note how I said that..

Jan had a design where the fuel pumps were high on the engine side of the firewall..Naturally I urged him to make a change.

Then there was a crash and (Vapour lock being VERY hard to prove after the event) Jan put it down to VL.

he then changed the dsign of the fuel system to move one pump to the cabin floor and energised it on fuel pressure failure.


It was about then I got turned off..

That was the sequence of events as I remember them....It was from my design suggestions I came up with the FI version of my wing root pump setup.

Frank

 

[deej]

Hey Dj,
My take is that anyone can manipulate the numbers to favor their argument. Using the lyc with lasar option & CS bumps up that price.
My engine/prop combo knocks off about 10k from your numbers. You could also compare against a carb with standard intake for 2-3k less.

Among other things, I wanted electronic ignition, fuel injection, and a variable pitch prop in my engine. I configured both the Subaru and the Lycoming with those options and compared the prices, which is what I posted earlier.

However, let's take the numbers you gave and compare FWF for kicks:

XIO-360 $22,000
Catto 3-blade prop $1500
Lycoming Type I Dynafocal Mount Installation $1,295.00
Shock Bushing For Lycoming Engines $389.00
Engine Baffling Kit $495.00
Lycoming Oil Cooler Installation $908.00
Sportsman IO-360 & IO-390 Injected Induction Installation $199.00
Sportsman and Glastar Muffled Exhaust Systems $1,295.00
Fuel Pump Cooling Shroud $115.00
Cabin Heat System $279.00
Eng. Control Bracket Installation $175.00

Total for the Lyc installation with your engine and prop choice is $28,650.

Back when I did the price comparisons the total Subaru FWF came to $24,420. Using today's pricing, the price of the Subaru FWF comes to $21,420.

-Dj

 

[L.Adamson]

Back when I did the price comparisons the total Subaru FWF came to $24,420. Using today's pricing, the price of the Subaru FWF comes to $21,420.

I can see your enthusiasm.... just as my friend had. But in the end, his Subbie equipped RV is now worth much less, than a comparable Lycoming equipped plane would be. That in it's self, rips the heart out of FWF pricing comparisons.

And seriously, I wouldn't be so down on the Subbie, if I hadn't seen first hand what this guy has gone through, over the last year. To me, they are worthless, and I wouldn't install one.... if given to me. IMO, this is not bashing, but the reality and consequences of owning one. It's not like fixed pitch versus constant speed, or nose gear versus taildragger. Those are just preferences. This is about dependability "without" the worry of constant attention.

L.Adamson --- RV6A

 

[deej]

This is about dependability "without" the worry of constant attention.

I can respect that. I had multiple problems with Lycoming engines in previous aircraft that I've owned, which is one of the reasons why I decided to consider something else in the plane I am building. Anything mechanical is going to have problems eventually, including the Subaru, and the simple reality is that there is no such thing as a "bulletproof" engine.

Everyone has to make their own decisions. I just wish we could have an actual discussion on this forum about alternative engine choices without all the nay-sayers constantly throwing tomatoes. If you want to only support the Lycoming and clones, there is a separate thread for that. No need to keep posting that stuff here.

-Dj

 

[Flyfalcons]

I love my Subaru WRX! I'm still not putting one of those engines in my plane though. The glide ratio of an RV does not inspire me to run anything but a proven aircraft engine.

 

[DanH]

Couple notes:

(1) Ya'll listen to Hans. New guy here on VAF, but an old hand in the alt engine world. Bright, well-educated, and very realistic. You'll find his "opinions" have roots in fundamental physics and engineering.

(2) I've noticed a trend. EFI, EI, computer control, electric variable pitch, etc, seem to be hot stuff with many of the plug-n-play alt-engine buyers. However, the Prime Directive for an aircraft engine, before all other things, is to be reliable. Everyone seems to forget the best way to add reliability is to simplify. Have we all forgotten you can build a bulletproof dual ignition with no external power or computer required? And why have we spent 15 years fooling with ECU's for fuel delivery? Excellent carbs are available, or why not install an Airflow Performance mechanical FI?

Yeah, I know, "it starts instantly". Trouble is, the fancy stuff tends to quit instantly too.

(3) Vendors talk a lot about the wonderfulness of high-tech, yet few apply real engineering to the truly fundamental issues of cooling and propeller speed reduction. They are ignorant (in the dictionary sense, "lacking knowledge") of sciences fully understood since the late 1930's.....and buyers let them get away with it because they are equally ignorant.

There's no shame in ignorance. We're all born that way, and the trick is to learn all you can before you run out of luck. There is great shame in remaining ignorant, and great sin in taking money and risking lives while ignoring the fact.

(4) Please excuse me for this, but you can count the number of auto-engine Lindy winners in single digits. I'm one of them, so the next time somebody accuses me of being anti-alt-engine, well..............

LATER EDIT: #4 is a dumb statement. It was aimed at the few readers who will again claim I'm down on conversions, or critical of a specific conversion because I'm fronting for some competitive vendor. Ain't so.

 

[John Clark]

Ignorance...

Beautifully stated Dan!

John Clark
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

 

[rvbuilder2002]

If I may chime in. Many of the alt engine guy here feel slighted buy discussion of alt engine failures. I am an alt engine guy (Mazda Rotary in a 7), and I can tell you, hearing of these failures is EXACTLY what people need to hear. I have spent more time (much more actually) trying to talk people out of an alternative engine than into it. Alternative engines are not for the masses. I don't feel the least bit slighted when people speak of accidents involving alt engines, provided the facts are presented, and not gross misstatements or lies.

Everyone has to make their own decisions. I just wish we could have an actual discussion on this forum about alternative engine choices without all the nay-sayers constantly throwing tomatoes. If you want to only support the Lycoming and clones, there is a separate thread for that. No need to keep posting that stuff here.

-Dj

D.J.

I typically avoid these discussions but thought I would throw something out regarding your comment, by quoting back from Ben's post (which I think is right on the mark as far as the frame of mind that anyone considering or flying an auto engine conversion should have).

I believe that most of the negative vibe that wells up within the forum is caused when people start to defend a conversion as a proven, viable, direct replacement for a Lycoming. The facts show that to not be the case.

The concern many people have (and that I have always had) is that the unsuspecting consumer/RV builder will get the idea that an auto engine conversion is the new technology for airplanes and because of that it is the best choice economically, for performance, and reliability. The facts show that this is not true.
I think it is great that we have very sharp talented people that are willing to take a chance (both financially and physically) and push the boundaries for aircraft power plants. This is the very thing that has advanced general and sport aviation in the last 25 years. Much of the new airplane designs and equipment (including new engine technology) has originated within amateur built kit manufacturers.

The problems start to happen when someone shows up at OSH with a new engine design mounted to an airframe that is not yet finished and flown, but they have a full color brochure with a price list and they are taking orders. I have personally seen this going on for years with multiple companies. Some are no longer in business, but some are.

Hundreds of unsuspecting buyers have layed down there money thinking they were buying a fully tested and proven plug and play replacement for a Lycoming. They weren't, and they still can't. I am not aware of a single person that has purchased an engine kit in which they simply installed it per the supplied plans and instructions and flew off into the sunset for the next 5 years without needing to do a single thing to the engine other normal maint. I know of hundreds and hundreds of Lyc powered RV's in which that has been done.

It is a simple fact that anyone buying an alternate engine kit from a company selling them is at the very least doing reliability test for them but usually is still developing a viable installation for them. My hat is off to guys that go it alone and do it without an installation kit. They are operating at the extreme as far as doing reliability testing and development of the installation.

The bottom line as far as I am concerned...
We should all applaud the guys that are are pushing to develop new power plant options. General aviation as a whole will benefit from the introduction of new technology.
But...I believe it is also our responsibility with forums such as this one, to make sure people know that these are not highly developed and proven installations and that they should not consider it a viable direct replacement for a Lyc.

If they are a person that is interested in a challenge and is willing to accept an additional level of risk, and can approach it in the frame of mind as presented by Ben in his post, then go for it.
If instead they are someone who is just looking to finish an airplane and then enjoy just flying it instead of constantly tinkering and modifying, then go with the powerplant that has already proven itself in thousands of RV's.

 

[deej]

Hi Scott,
You make some very good points, and most definitely someone interested in alternative engine choices need to do their research and ensure they know what they are getting.

But here is the problem. Someone comes on to this forum, and posts a query in the ALTERNATIVE ENGINE thread, attempting to do the research and get the information about ALTERNATIVE ENGINES. Pretty much every time that happens, you get a bunch of Lycoming supporters that post about how much better the Lycoming is, and don't put in an alternative engine because you'll fall out of the sky. A lot of replies back and forth arguing one point against another, and guess what? The poor guy that came to the forum to get information doesn't get the help he was seeking.

If someone wants to post how great Lycoming engines are, please post in the TRADITIONAL ENGINE thread. People looking for information about Lycomings will go there. Those of us that happen to like other choices would love to help and answer questions about ALTERNATIVE ENGINES, but can never do so on this forum because we are always dodging tomatoes.

All I'm asking is, Lycoming supporters please post in the TRADITIONAL ENGINE thread, and the alternative engine supporters please post in the ALTERNATIVE ENGINE thread. Is that too much to ask?

Thanks,

-Dj

 

[rvbuilder2002]

All I'm asking is, Lycoming supporters please post in the TRADITIONAL ENGINE thread, and the alternative engine supporters please post in the ALTERNATIVE ENGINE thread. Is that too much to ask?

-Dj

Probably.

I think it is important to make comparisons between choices that can be made. Otherwise we should have a category for Dynon EFIS, and one for AFS EFIS, etc, so that pro Dynon guys aren't talking down about hom much better they think it is comapaired to AFS.
When it comes to helping someone make an engine choice, I see it very rare (It was nice to see Ben's post, being very candid about it) for an alt. engine enthusiast to present the negative side. If you or any one of them are being truly honest with them self and with others, they have to admit that the auto conversion is much much less proven than the lycoming.

Example...We often hear from pro alt engine enthusiasts..."there are a lot more power loss related crashes in RV's that are powered by Lycomings than alternative engines" Well it doesn't take a research professional to see that the ratio of RV's powered with Lycomings is probably well over 100 : 1 compared to those powered with alt. engines. That means for every accident caused by a power failure in an alt. engine powered RV there should be at least 100 similar accidents in RV's powered by a Lyc. (discounting those caused by the pilot mismanaging fuel). This ratio is far from reality.

Bottom line...you will probably get a far better reception (on this forum anyway) if you present it as a choice to experiment. Not a proven viable choice as an alternative to a Lycoming.

 

[John Clark]

Comparisons

All I'm asking is, Lycoming supporters please post in the TRADITIONAL ENGINE thread, and the alternative engine supporters please post in the ALTERNATIVE ENGINE thread. Is that too much to ask?

Thanks,

-Dj

Sorry DJ, but it is a little too much to ask. This forum is where ideas and knowledge are exchanged. If you exclude the negative on any subject no real learning will take place. The Lycoming comparison will always come up because it is the baseline, the standard, that we have for comparison. Cheerleading won't further the Alternate Engine cause, development and open minded discussion will.

John Clark
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA

 

[Ted Johns]

There is great shame in remaining ignorant, and great sin in taking money and risking lives while ignoring the fact.

Right on the mark, Dan.
Using customers as beta (or alpha!) testers, without explicit disclosure of that fact? As you said, great sin. I'd question whether I could do business with a company developing product that way, even if they finally got the product right.

... is that the unsuspecting consumer/RV builder will get the idea that an auto engine conversion is the new technology ...

Scott, what has always amazed me is that there is such an animal as the "unsuspecting consumer/RV builder". Perhaps I've just been an engineer for way too long, but it seems the dollar amounts involved would kick the credulity right out of a person.

 

[N713R]

Need to ask.

deej and others,

Your post regarding people asking questions about alternative engines is somewhat misled. The long and short of it is this, If you have to ask if an alternative engine, no matter what type, is right for you, THEN IT IS NOT! The Lyc guys are trying to get that message out there to those that are not in the know, through no fault of their own. As an alt guy, I can tell you, I appreciate that. The more alt's that crash, makes it that much harder for those of us that truly know what we are getting into. (though we do generally gain some knowledge from them)
Some of the FWF package sellers are irresponsible in advertising these things in an attempt to sell product. That is wrong. However, I am sure these people believe they have a good product to sell, no matter what the short falls may be. The reliability is not there, the R&D is not there, and the proven hours in ALL flight regiments and conditions is not there. In addition to that, the buyers of these FWF packages are lulled into them by being told how reliable they are, and smooth, and cost effective, and on and on and on. Fault of the builder? Hard to say. Fault of the seller, definately suspicious. I guess what is needed is more discussion on it, and more publicly available discussion. Hence what happens here on the forums. Don't feel like you are being cut if you have an alternative engine and someone else thinks they are not the way to go. Most generally they are right, just don't ask them to fly with you. Further, if you are selling an FWF, take a good hard look at what you are offering, and look at the statistics. Numbers don't lie. They just don't. Millions of hours are flown behind Lycomings every year with out incident. Compare that to alternatives, and no matter how you want to slice it, alternative engines lose.
That does not mean I think alt's should be banned, then I'd have to start over, but by and large, they are not the answer. At least not now, and not in the near future.

All meant with the best of intentions, and with my most gracious tone of voice.

 

[rv8ch]

good advice

There is a lot of good advice on these forums. The problem is that there are some people that are "too smart" to listen. Even when Van himself tells people that they should "wait and see" if a particular alternative engine turns out to be as reliable as promised, some people are just "too clever" to listen. I speak from experience - I was way smarter and much more clever than the dozens of people that strongly recommended I build my RV8 as the designer intended. I was even smarter than the designer himself when he personally tried to convince me to install the engine he designed the airplane to fly with!

I am sure that there will be some good alternative engines coming along in the future, and they may very well be based on the Subaru engine - an excellent engine in my opinion. The key issues with these packages is they have to be complete, they have to be tested, and they have to be supported. Unfortunately, the one that I spent a lot of hard-earned cash on was none of the three.

People that are recommending that potential alternative engine buyers go into the purchase cautiously, with their eyes open, are giving good advice. Life is too short to make all your mistakes yourself - learn from the mistakes of others, like me and Darwin for example. In addition, there are dozens of others that bought the exact same package I did, and none are happy. Zero. There is a 100% rate of customer DISsatisfaction from the people that bought a supposedly complete, tested, and supported engine package from this particular supplier. Also, all of these engine packages that have flown, to the best of my knowledge only 4 of the 25+ "delivered", have had forced landings. That's a 100% failure rate.

So, now I am trying to give the simple advice that I had ignored - anyone considering going with an alternative engine needs to do a lot more due diligence than someone who is taking the advice of the designer and the thousands of others that are flying their RVs behind the engine that the designer specified.

BTW, if anyone wants to buy my engine package - cheap - it's still for sale.

 

[Geico266]

So, now I am trying to give the simple advice that I had ignored - anyone considering going with an alternative engine needs to do a lot more due diligence than someone who is taking the advice of the designer and the thousands of others that are flying their RVs behind the engine that the designer specified.

I agree. I hear of too many builders saying; "They are offering a compete fiewall forward package that has all the connections made! Just hang the engine connect the wires & I'm done." Seems to me if you are not mechanically inclinded you need to go with the proven engine package that is more reliable and needs less tinkering. Learning how to service a Lycoming is made much easier due to everyone else having them. Having an engine package where the only guy that has one is 250 miles away and it is not working does not seem like a good thing to me. There are many "hands" that can show a guy new to engine maintenance how to get -r- done on a Lyclone.

 

[Ron Lee]

DJ, bottom line is that people here are trying to help you not kill yourself. Listen to what people are saying. LISTEN!

Just because you have the latitude to do new things on an experimental aircraft does not make it safe.

Too many RV folks die. Way too many. Sometimes it is pilot error. And sometimes it is because of what they put in their aircraft.

 

[RV7Guy]

Great words Mickey

Mickey, Dan, David, you've all spoke words of wisdom on this subject. Unfortunately, the post originator has made up his mind and there is nothing that is going to change it.

When these words are spoken by those have already walked that mile, it is perceived as bashing. I haven't quite figured out where that mentality comes from. If you don't want an honest answer, don't ask the question!!!!

When I went through my alt engine debacle, it took a while to admit that I was wrong. Once that occured, life was good. I come to this forum to learn and assist where I think I can help. I've learned so much here from great people. Many who I have never met.

It is truly sad when facts are provided and "they" still have what they believe is rational answer. "Never let facts get in the way of a good theory."

As I progress on my second 7, I can't believe how much easier it is. Not only because it is the second one, but because I've been able to learn from the widsom of those on the forums with far more experience that me. The "work smarter, not harder," mindset is prevailing.

 

[deej]

Okay, I give, you guys win. You've convinced me that this aviation thing is just way too dangerous, and I need to take up another addiction. I bought a 2003 Yamaha RX-1 snowmobile this summer which should keep me entertained during the winter months, and my 1986 Honda Rebel motorcycle could use some TLC, so maybe I'll refurbish it this winter to give me a project to work on.

One of these might be fun, and a lot cheaper than an airplane:
http://www.hovercraft.com/content/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=53
<http://www.hovercraft.com/content/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=53>

-Dj

 

[TSwezey]

Okay, I give, you guys win. You've convinced me that this aviation thing is just way too dangerous, and I need to take up another addiction. I bought a 2003 Yamaha RX-1 snowmobile this summer which should keep me entertained during the winter months, and my 1986 Honda Rebel motorcycle could use some TLC, so maybe I'll refurbish it this winter to give me a project to work on.

One of these might be fun, and a lot cheaper than an airplane:
http://www.hovercraft.com/content/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=53
<http://www.hovercraft.com/content/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=53>

-Dj

I have thought about something stupid like this for a long time. And now you have to go and corrupt my little pea brain alt. engine head. You just don't know how much trouble you caused!

 

[N62XS]

WAIT!!!!!

Mickey, Dan, David, you've all spoke words of wisdom on this subject. Unfortunately, the post originator has made up his mind and there is nothing that is going to change it....

Darwin:

I originated this thread and it was to compliment my friend Todd Sweezy on an excellent post concerning this subject that may have been missed due to a moderator closing the other thread that I did not start! This thread was appended by someone with a thread discussing a Egg engine for sale, started by one of my best friends, Pierre Smith. You can make all of the assumptions about "the post originator" you want, but you do not know me very well and while I cannot speak to how well you know Pierre, I can tell you that from my experience with Pierre, he has never been a closed minded person that "made up his mind and there is nothing that is going to change it".

Not upset, just want to clarify your post and supply the facts so that other erroneous assumptions are not based on your statement.

FWIW

 

[rv7charlie]

focus?

I hope this will be constructive.

Reading through all the negative posts about engines in this discussion, it kinda feels like the posters' day jobs are lobbyists for gun control. Just a joke, but there's a point to it.

As most of us would agree, it isn't the gun; it's the person wielding it that's the (potential) problem. In my mind, it isn't the engine either; it's the guy building and/or installing it, whether it's me in my garage or a 'developer'/vendor with a bigger budget for his ad campaign than his R&D department.

If there are hundreds of Ford Model A engines flying successfully on Piets, then they obviously work as a/c engines. If there are Sube's, Ford/Chevy V-8's, Buick V-6's, Mazda rotaries, etc flying successfully (and there are), then it isn't the engine that's the problem.

There are good reasons to warn newbe's of ad hype that far exceeds the laws of physics and to warn of the difficulties in developing your own engine installation, but I think that it would be better to offer technical/scientific reasoning, instead of the equivalent of "You can't have a BB gun; you'll put your eye out with it."

Charlie
(a couple of rotaries on the shelf, a Lyc waiting to be hung, and I'm struggling to regain my enthusiasm to build.)

 

[RV7Guy]

My Apologies

Robby, You are absolutely correct. I apparently opened a page and the person I'm referring to was the first post on that page. I think you know who I meant. That's where it got interesting And, you are correct, that Todd has put this topic in a solid perspective.

Too many fun posts right now

Darwin:

I originated this thread and it was to compliment my friend Todd Sweezy on an excellent post concerning this subject that may have been missed due to a moderator closing the other thread that I did not start! This thread was appended by someone with a thread discussing a Egg engine for sale, started by one of my best friends, Pierre Smith. You can make all of the assumptions about "the post originator" you want, but you do not know me very well and while I cannot speak to how well you know Pierre, I can tell you that from my experience with Pierre, he has never been a closed minded person that "made up his mind and there is nothing that is going to change it".

Not upset, just want to clarify your post and supply the facts so that other erroneous assumptions are not based on your statement.

FWIW

 

[CraigC]

I hope this will be constructive.

Reading through all the negative posts about engines in this discussion, it kinda feels like the posters' day jobs are lobbyists for gun control. Just a joke, but there's a point to it.

As most of us would agree, it isn't the gun; it's the person wielding it that's the (potential) problem. In my mind, it isn't the engine either; it's the guy building and/or installing it, whether it's me in my garage or a 'developer'/vendor with a bigger budget for his ad campaign than his R&D department.

If there are hundreds of Ford Model A engines flying successfully on Piets, then they obviously work as a/c engines. If there are Sube's, Ford/Chevy V-8's, Buick V-6's, Mazda rotaries, etc flying successfully (and there are), then it isn't the engine that's the problem.

There are good reasons to warn newbe's of ad hype that far exceeds the laws of physics and to warn of the difficulties in developing your own engine installation, but I think that it would be better to offer technical/scientific reasoning, instead of the equivalent of "You can't have a BB gun; you'll put your eye out with it."

Charlie
(a couple of rotaries on the shelf, a Lyc waiting to be hung, and I'm struggling to regain my enthusiasm to build.)

Maybe. Because if the weapon is not built very well but sold as an out of the box 10 ring shooter with no gunsmithing needed, then clearly it is not the gun owner, but the manufacturer. When the gun blows the receiver out the back end due to faulty manufacturing that I did not know about, it is me that gets hurt and not the mfr.

but I think that it would be better to offer technical/scientific reasoning, instead of the equivalent of "You can't have a BB gun; you'll put your eye out with it."

There are many accident stats to choose from when considering engine choice.

 

[N62XS]

Robby, You are absolutely correct. I apparently opened a page and the person I'm referring to was the first post on that page. I think you know who I meant. That's where it got interesting And, you are correct, that Todd has put this topic in a solid perspective.

Too many fun posts right now

NP Darwin. After all of the "discussions" concerning safety and reliability with Todd, it is absolutely a 300 game that he is the one to define the objective, definitive point of view concerning this subject.

As has always been my point, when testing anything experimental, remember the people below you, if someone must go with you, make sure they are qualified to contribute during the test flight(no non-pilot family or friends) and remember that all of the alternative engine vendors are just that vendors, that will never violate the #1 rule of advertising their products(only accentuate the positive).

I hot rod my Corvair, Corvette, Viper and Porsche engines, always keeping my cell phone charged and handy, knowing I can pull over, in any neighborhood with my survival package($10 in thug money, Glock .40 Crimson Trace-fully loaded and my cell fully charged) and play like I am ET. It just ain't that easy in our birds!