Ryszard. Did you even read my note? Cheers, Jay

I am with Ryzard and Rick on this topic. Experience and observations of others speaks volumes. You want to fly make it as simple and as tested by professionals as you can. Bruce

You guys keep pointing out one success here, one success there. Once again, exceptions don’t change the rule. I agree It IS a personal preference just like smoking cigarettes is personal preference.

Hi Richard, Not to weigh in on the automotive vs. aircraft engine issue, but the main concern you should have will be the installation of any engine you choose. If a particular engine has been

It seems to me that you got the info you asked for? 😊 --

I don't want to get into an argument, but  bashing auto engines is not helpfull. I have four airplanes. One with an airplane engine and three with auto convertions. I feel very comfortable flying

Robert---------  John Finley had a 2.2 Subaru in his Q2. I have a 2.5 Subaru Direct drive turbocharged in my Q200. A few fellows have the 912. I have a Dragonfly with the 1.8 Subaru turbocharged. 

No one’s bashing auto engine. We’re just discussing reality. RZ

Thanks Jay, I'll reach out to Martin. -- Robert "TheFrisco" Schmid (408) 805-5450 www.facebook.com/TheFlyingFriscos www.theflyingfriscos.com Love building planes almost as much as flying. Latest

Why does this question always have to become religious!?!? I made it clear in my initial ask NOT to bash car conversion engines and yet some here can't help themselves. If this would be a FB group I'd

When we say “auto engines” are including things like Great Plaines VW conversions as well? Engines that are already air cooled? Thanks! Fredd Baber

In my years at Velocity I worked with many builders and observed many more. Those who chose auto engines took at least three extra years in the installation and debugging. When they were ¨plowing

Exceptions don’t change the rule. Auto engnes don’t fly… I’ll go one step further…auto engines are dream killers. There’s no telling how many have wasted significant amounts of time

William Wynne can verify there are several Corvair conversions well over 1200 hours in several designs. An entire overhauled engine costs less than the rocker arms for a C-85/O-200. The engines

The 2000 hr. TBO thing seems like a red herring (non sequitur) to me. How many experimentals get to 2000 hrs? The key seems to be knowing when to rebuild/replace and how much cost to rebuild. A 500

What Ryszard said. Also depends on your ambition and appetites for either flying or long term R&D…. Bill Allen --

FYI - Jim Doyle and Larry Weishaur designed and flew an LS-1 canard, without the elusive QAC carbon fiber spars. It started as a taildragger, then they changed toa Tri-Q after a groundloop incident,

The Rotax 100hp is certainly viable and well proven and there's tons of folks that can work on them now, but pricy. If I picked up that Q project I was leaning to the aeromomentum, not because it was

I know, I know. Heck, I first met Joe Horvath in the 70s when I was buying engine parts for my KR-1. It was, I guess, a bad joke. The guy wanted to know about modified car engines for the Q2,

Dragonfly builders.. Charlie Johnson (on You Tube known as One Sky Dog) and I have the Corvair..Charlie is about to get his aircraft operational again after having some issues with an induction