On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 22:05:00 -0700, Richard Riley >
wrote:

>I'm looking for an engine that may not exist. If anyone has a notion
>of what it might be, I'd be grateful.
>
>It's for a 103 legal ultralight.
>
>60 lbs or so all up, including re-drive and cooling
>35-40 hp.
>4 stroke.
>More reliable than a 2 stroke Rotax
>
>Any ideas?

Half-VW?

Ron Wanttaja

Richard Riley wrote:
> I'm looking for an engine that may not exist. If anyone has a notion
> of what it might be, I'd be grateful.
>
> It's for a 103 legal ultralight.
>
> 60 lbs or so all up, including re-drive and cooling
> 35-40 hp.
> 4 stroke.
> More reliable than a 2 stroke Rotax
>
> Any ideas?

I don't know if it's an exact match but the Briggs & Stratton V-twin is
close. They're very detuned in stock condition but the cart racers have
pumped them up considerably with little effort.

Tony

Richard Riley wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 05:36:33 GMT, Anthony W >
> wrote:
>
> :Richard Riley wrote:
> :
> :I don't know if it's an exact match but the Briggs & Stratton V-twin is
> :close. They're very detuned in stock condition but the cart racers have
> :pumped them up considerably with little effort.
>
> Seems unlikely it can be pumped up THAT much - the 31 hp B&S I find on
> the web is 125 lbs. The 60 lb engine is only 9 hp. But I'll look at
> them.

Have you considered a motorcycle engine? A modern 600cc liquid cooled
engine puts out around 90 peek BHP and probably a 50 or 60 BHP for
sustained output. I don't remember what they weigh but I had a Honda
600cc engine a couple years ago and I was able to move it around without
much effort.

Tony

Richard Riley wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 07:17:44 GMT, Anthony W >
> wrote:
>
> :Richard Riley wrote:
> :> On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 05:36:33 GMT, Anthony W >
> :> wrote:
> :>
> :> :Richard Riley wrote:
> :> :
> :> :I don't know if it's an exact match but the Briggs & Stratton V-twin is
> :> :close. They're very detuned in stock condition but the cart racers have
> :> :pumped them up considerably with little effort.
> :>
> :> Seems unlikely it can be pumped up THAT much - the 31 hp B&S I find on
> :> the web is 125 lbs. The 60 lb engine is only 9 hp. But I'll look at
> :> them.
> :
> :Have you considered a motorcycle engine? A modern 600cc liquid cooled
> :engine puts out around 90 peek BHP and probably a 50 or 60 BHP for
> :sustained output. I don't remember what they weigh but I had a Honda
> :600cc engine a couple years ago and I was able to move it around without
> :much effort.
>
> I've considered them, they seem like a good possibility. The only
> problem is I can find weights on the web for the bikes overall, but
> not the engines alone. Something smaller than that would be fine - 20
> hp sustained, 50 peak would be a blast.

Be carefull with many of the V twins. Not sure if the unbalenced
firing is good for an aircraft. Most of the inline engines are tilted
and the case is set up for an attached transmission on its side. A
flat twin might be the easiest to convert. Or maybe one of the early
smaller Gold Wing engines.

I think they are getting around 30 HP from basically a bored and
stroked 5 HP lawnmower engine in the Jr. dragraces. Don't know if they
are using gas though.

"Sport Pilot" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>I think they are getting around 30 HP from basically a bored and
> stroked 5 HP lawnmower engine in the Jr. dragraces. Don't know if they
> are using gas though.
>

They use an alcohol blend. I don't think they (the motors) live very long
either.

On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 22:05:00 -0700, Richard Riley
> wrote:

>I'm looking for an engine that may not exist. If anyone has a notion
>of what it might be, I'd be grateful.
>
>It's for a 103 legal ultralight.
>
>60 lbs or so all up, including re-drive and cooling
>35-40 hp.
>4 stroke.
>More reliable than a 2 stroke Rotax
>
>Any ideas?

Colin Chapman of Lotus fame was a pilot and into Ultralights. He had
his engine group design a small four stroke intended for this type of
flying that had an interesting prop drive: They simply beefed up the
camshaft and bolted the prop to it. Since all camshafts spin at 1/2
crankshaft speed, they had themselves a PSRU without all the belts or
gears.

Alas, with the death of Chapman, the engine died with him, or shortly
thereafter.

Finding a decent, reliable small fourstroke engine has been going on
for a long long time. Motorcycle engines are intriguing, but attain
their high output via extremely high rpms. In addition, nearly all of
them come with the transmission case cast along with the engine
crankcase. You don't need the transmission, unless you want to use it
as the PSRU, and then you don't need all the gears which add to the
weight you have to carry. People have tried to use the transmissions
as PSRU's with mixed success.

For one thing, the transmissions aren't designed to spin a prop so
some kind of beefed up power takeoff has to be added and it just
becomes a bit of an engineering nightmare. It might actually be
easier to have one of the local machine shops machine a case out of a
block of aluminum using their computerized milling machines.

It's the old story of liability issues, plus the relatively limited
market for such an engine. But I watched Jesse James order a couple
of cylinderheads for a custom chopper he was building, and the camera
guys went to the machine shop where this CNC milling machine cut the
cylinders out of a block of aluminum. If they can do that, they can
cut out a crankcase, it should be a more simple job.

Or, go whole hog and recreate an Offenhauser engine in miniature; no
cylinderhead so no cylinderhead gasket to worry about. Valve jobs are
a bitch though...

Corky Scott

Richard Riley wrote:
> I'm looking for an engine that may not exist. If anyone has a notion
> of what it might be, I'd be grateful.
>
> It's for a 103 legal ultralight.
>
> 60 lbs or so all up, including re-drive and cooling
> 35-40 hp.
> 4 stroke.
> More reliable than a 2 stroke Rotax
>
> Any ideas?
>
>
The Mid-West GAE 50 R for Ultra (Micro)Lights, Homebuilt or
Kit-Planes:
72 lbs / 50HP
http://www.tiho-hannover.de/bmt/bmt/institut/personal/geiling/wankel/ggkart.htm
Kumaros
It's all Greek to me

Richard Riley wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 07:17:44 GMT, Anthony W >
> wrote:
>

> :Have you considered a motorcycle engine? A modern 600cc liquid cooled
> :engine puts out around 90 peek BHP and probably a 50 or 60 BHP for
> :sustained output. ...
>
> I've considered them, they seem like a good possibility. The only
> problem is I can find weights on the web for the bikes overall, but
> not the engines alone. ...

The Kawasaki 340 and 440 are in use in Ultralights but I think
they are two-stroke.

--

FF

The requirement stated by the original poster was more reliable than a
Rotax. Are we all that sure that a motorcycle engine or a overstressed
lawnmower engine will be even as reliable? Rotax's are pretty damn reliable
if maintained properly.

Dan wrote:
> The requirement stated by the original poster was more reliable than a
> Rotax. Are we all that sure that a motorcycle engine or a overstressed
> lawnmower engine will be even as reliable? Rotax's are pretty damn reliable
> if maintained properly.

Actually with selective use of parts and limiting the revs, I am sure
you could modify a lawnmower engine to be reliable and more powerfull.
Not sure it would meet his criteria, and not sure it would be worth the
work. As for as motorcycles, that would be a much safer bet. Many
Honda Gold Wings are driven past 100,000 miles with so so maintenance.
The newer Harley Evo engines will also make it past 100,000 miles but I
don't think you would want that vibration. There are a few V twins
used on some Japanise bikes that are smooth, especially the crotch
rockets.

On 7 Jun 2005 12:23:42 -0700, "Sport Pilot" > wrote:

>Many
>Honda Gold Wings are driven past 100,000 miles with so so maintenance.

While this may be true, and I don't doubt it, (I find it ironic to be
taking the cautious side of the debate given that I'm testing a Ford
V6 for my aircraft's engine) but cruising around at 8 to 10 % power is
not what happens with aircraft engines. Ok, maybe some occasional
hard use and call it 12% power, but were are talking about a Goldwing
here, not a pocket rocket.

I'm not saying auto engines cannot take a continuous 50% power for
hours on end, with frequent calls for 100% power, but they aren't
often asked to do that normally and as I've said so often in the past,
even if it's something other than the long block that fails, a dead
engine is a dead engine. One of the two Goldwing conversions I read
about used the transmission to drive the prop. That setup failed
after a while. Don't know about the other one.

It isn't just the engine that has to keep going, it's the psru, the
prop, the fuel system, the induction system, the ignition system and
the charging system that also have to stand up to hard use.

Corky Scott

Check out the various Yamaha Virago engines. One has been flying
successfully in a "Graham Lee Neuport 17 for a number of years.

In the hovercraft world, there have been many attempts to make use
of motorcycle engines. The issues are very similar to aircraft. A
persistent problem has been power take off from the sprocket. The
sprockets are always in the wrong place or they are adaptable to belt
drive. (Hovercraft should never have chain drives - impossible to keep
clean and properly guard.). The only examples that are competitive from
a power to weight perspective with the gearbox along for the ride are
the 250-400cc ultrahigh rpm sportbike engines that were never even sold
in the US. They absolutely need the gearbox for speed reduction before
the belt drive.
The 4 inline Yamaha engines appearing in water toys and snowmobiles
might be the trick answer. Some come with builtin gear- PSRU which plus
a belt ought to be reliable. The question is, do you want to spend the
money and do you need 140 hp? If so, that would be a low profile, very
high performance answer.
Actually, I am looking forward to someone exploring this one for
the rest of us.

"Chuck" > wrote in message
...
> Check out the various Yamaha Virago engines. One has been flying
> successfully in a "Graham Lee Neuport 17 for a number of years.

I have had a 1982 Virago for five years. It has 80,000 miles total.

I would no more climb into an airplane with a Virago engine than lay down on
a red ant hill. Either way, you're gonna get bit.

Rich "Found by the side of the road more than once" S.

"Corky Scott" > wrote in message
...

> I'm not saying auto engines cannot take a continuous 50% power for
> hours on end, with frequent calls for 100% power, but they aren't
> often asked to do that normally and as I've said so often in the past,
> even if it's something other than the long block that fails, a dead
> engine is a dead engine. One of the two Goldwing conversions I read
> about used the transmission to drive the prop. That setup failed
> after a while. Don't know about the other one.
>
> It isn't just the engine that has to keep going, it's the psru, the
> prop, the fuel system, the induction system, the ignition system and
> the charging system that also have to stand up to hard use.
>
> Corky Scott
>
>

Of course, Lyc's and Continentals often outlast their accessories too.

Here in Colorado, many folks commute by road from their homes in Summit
County to the Denver Metro area each day. The return trip is a full
throttle climb for an hour or so for a 5000+ foot climb to the Eisenhower
Tunnel. There is no evidence that these engines are failing at a greater
rate than those in more modest duty. Those failures that do occur seem to
be mainly cooling system hoses.

This tells me that given a good engine choice, a good installation and good
maintenance, an auto or motorcycle engine should give good service in an
airplane.

bildan

some of the "Quickie" experimental A/C used the Onan engine from the
rec.vehicle generator set, or semi trailer truck refrigeration unit -
they are 4 cycle horizontally opposed 2 cylinder and air cooled - most
produce around 35 HP and turn slow enough to connect the prop direcly
to the crank. Readily available parts and high quality come with the
deal. besides they look for all the world like and Aeronca C-3 36 HP
engine and that would be cool

wrote:

>
> Richard Rileguarantee
>> On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 07:17:44 GMT, Anthony W >
>> wrote:
>>
>
>> :Have you considered a motorcycle engine? A modern 600cc liquid cooled
>> :engine puts out around 90 peek BHP and probably a 50 or 60 BHP for
>> :sustained output. ...
>>
>> I've considered them, they seem like a good possibility. The only
>> problem is I can find weights on the web for the bikes overall, but
>> not the engines alone. ...
>
> The Kawasaki 340 and 440 are in use in Ultralights but I think
> they are two-stroke.
>


I'm fairly sure the 440 is 4 stroke. But I won't guarantee!
Take a look at the Kawasaki Snow mobile engines. Some of them had CVT
drives, basically a automatic transmission with a Constantly Variable
ratio. It might work.
John

"Bill Daniels" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Corky Scott" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> I'm not saying auto engines cannot take a continuous 50% power for
>> hours on end, with frequent calls for 100% power, but they aren't
>> often asked to do that normally and as I've said so often in the past,
>> even if it's something other than the long block that fails, a dead
>> engine is a dead engine. One of the two Goldwing conversions I read
>> about used the transmission to drive the prop. That setup failed
>> after a while. Don't know about the other one.
>>
>> It isn't just the engine that has to keep going, it's the psru, the
>> prop, the fuel system, the induction system, the ignition system and
>> the charging system that also have to stand up to hard use.
>>
>> Corky Scott
>>
>>
>
> Of course, Lyc's and Continentals often outlast their accessories too.
>
> Here in Colorado, many folks commute by road from their homes in Summit
> County to the Denver Metro area each day. The return trip is a full
> throttle climb for an hour or so for a 5000+ foot climb to the Eisenhower
> Tunnel. There is no evidence that these engines are failing at a greater
> rate than those in more modest duty. Those failures that do occur seem to
> be mainly cooling system hoses.
>
> This tells me that given a good engine choice, a good installation and
> good
> maintenance, an auto or motorcycle engine should give good service in an
> airplane.
>
> bildan

When you say full throttle, do you mean "Tach at the redline, engine working
as hard as it can given the altitude." or "Pedal depressed farther than
usual, turning 3,500 rpm in one of the lower gears."

KB

"Kyle Boatright" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Bill Daniels" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Corky Scott" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >> I'm not saying auto engines cannot take a continuous 50% power for
> >> hours on end, with frequent calls for 100% power, but they aren't
> >> often asked to do that normally and as I've said so often in the past,
> >> even if it's something other than the long block that fails, a dead
> >> engine is a dead engine. One of the two Goldwing conversions I read
> >> about used the transmission to drive the prop. That setup failed
> >> after a while. Don't know about the other one.
> >>
> >> It isn't just the engine that has to keep going, it's the psru, the
> >> prop, the fuel system, the induction system, the ignition system and
> >> the charging system that also have to stand up to hard use.
> >>
> >> Corky Scott
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Of course, Lyc's and Continentals often outlast their accessories too.
> >
> > Here in Colorado, many folks commute by road from their homes in Summit
> > County to the Denver Metro area each day. The return trip is a full
> > throttle climb for an hour or so for a 5000+ foot climb to the
Eisenhower
> > Tunnel. There is no evidence that these engines are failing at a
greater
> > rate than those in more modest duty. Those failures that do occur seem
to
> > be mainly cooling system hoses.
> >
> > This tells me that given a good engine choice, a good installation and
> > good
> > maintenance, an auto or motorcycle engine should give good service in an
> > airplane.
> >
> > bildan
>
> When you say full throttle, do you mean "Tach at the redline, engine
working
> as hard as it can given the altitude." or "Pedal depressed farther than
> usual, turning 3,500 rpm in one of the lower gears."
>
> KB
>
I mean full throttle in whatever gear will give the most speed - RPM at the
HP peak. Even my V8 Grand Cherokee, if loaded, will require full throttle
on the uphill grades and still be below the speed limit.

The cops are usually smart enough to set speed traps on the downhill grades.

bildan

I'm amazed that no one has mentioned this yet.

The military 4a032 is a 32 cubic inch horizontally opposed "inini Lycoming"
4 cylinder engine.
With a larger carb, and shaved heads, it will put out over 30 HP, but it's
more comfortable at 16 to 20 HP. Stripped of all the junk, I believe it's
weight is within range of your specs too.

They are cheap via surplus
http://saturnsurplus.com/engine/engine.htm

And have been used in many aircraft.
http://www.harpritsan.com/EngineRecord1.html
http://home.cfl.rr.com/aircraft/4A032.html/
as examples. There are many others Google 4a032.


Also look at the 2a043. 2 cylinder, but a bit larger displacement. More
power, less weight, but not as smooth.

I use these things to turn a skiff into an airboat. They're a lot of fun!

Ron Webb







"Richard Riley" > wrote in message
...
> I'm looking for an engine that may not exist. If anyone has a notion
> of what it might be, I'd be grateful.
>
> It's for a 103 legal ultralight.
>
> 60 lbs or so all up, including re-drive and cooling
> 35-40 hp.
> 4 stroke.
> More reliable than a 2 stroke Rotax
>
> Any ideas?
>
>

I've been looking for the same engine for years. There is no such animal.
Finding a 4 stroke with the same power and weight of the Rotax 447 would be
the answer to reviving legal 103 airplanes.
--
Mitchell Wing
http://www.mitchellwing.com

--
Have a good day and stay out of the trees!
See ya on Sport Aircraft group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/




"Richard Riley" wrote ...
> I'm looking for an engine that may not exist. If anyone has a notion
> of what it might be, I'd be grateful.
>
> It's for a 103 legal ultralight.
>
> 60 lbs or so all up, including re-drive and cooling
> 35-40 hp.
> 4 stroke.
> More reliable than a 2 stroke Rotax
>
> Any ideas?
>
>

I have no specs, but a year or so ago I visited a guy who was building
a plane with a
BMW opposed twin motorcycle engine. He had found a new or nearly new
one somewhere. I have moved and lost track of him, but this was his
third plane (second
of his own design), and he had previously used Rotaxs.

David Johnson

UltraJohn wrote:
>>The Kawasaki 340 and 440 are in use in Ultralights but I think
>>they are two-stroke.
>
> I'm fairly sure the 440 is 4 stroke. But I won't guarantee!

Nope -- 340 and 440 are two-strokes.

> Take a look at the Kawasaki Snow mobile engines.

I thought that was what the Kaw340 and 440 were. But I won't guarantee!

Frank

Richard Riley wrote:
>
> On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 19:08:52 GMT, "Dan" >
> wrote:
>
> :The requirement stated by the original poster was more reliable than a
> :Rotax. Are we all that sure that a motorcycle engine or a overstressed
> :lawnmower engine will be even as reliable? Rotax's are pretty damn reliable
> :if maintained properly.
>
> My UL instructor out at Perris (California) says he's had 22 engine
> outs. That's in several thousand hours of Ultralight flying, and many
> of them were other than Rotax. But I want something reasonably close
> to 4 stroke reliability numbers.


I had near 12 in one day trying to find a problem with a 277 powered MX
clone

found the trouble to be the fuel pump rebuilt by the owner,

seems he stacked the new parts in and forced the screws in,

flappers and holes allowed some drainage thjrough but not enough to keep
the carb full at throttle levels above idele,

stay with the lighter and cheaper two strokes,

and learn enough to not do stuff like the above,,,,,,,,,,

i found the problem by swapping a pump that was laying on the floor,
discarded from another project,

worked well,,,,,,,,,,,,
--
Mark Smith
Tri-State Kite Sales
1121 N Locust St
Mt Vernon, IN 47620
1-812-838-6351
http://www.trikite.com

Richard Riley >
:

> I'm looking for an engine that may not exist. If anyone has a notion
> of what it might be, I'd be grateful.
>
> It's for a 103 legal ultralight.
>
> 60 lbs or so all up, including re-drive and cooling
> 35-40 hp.
> 4 stroke.
> More reliable than a 2 stroke Rotax
>
> Any ideas?
>
>

Well, a bit heavier than what you want but...

http://www.hexatronengineering.com/prod02.htm

> some of the "Quickie" experimental A/C used the Onan engine

The Onan engine used in the Quickie was 18 hp.

Frank van der Hulst wrote:

> UltraJohn wrote:
>>>The Kawasaki 340 and 440 are in use in Ultralights but I think
>>>they are two-stroke.
>>
>> I'm fairly sure the 440 is 4 stroke. But I won't guarantee!
>
> Nope -- 340 and 440 are two-strokes.
>
>> Take a look at the Kawasaki Snow mobile engines.
>
> I thought that was what the Kaw340 and 440 were. But I won't guarantee!
>
> Frank
Possibly we're both right!
I think the snowmobile 440 is 2 stroke I know at least one version of the
440 motorcycle is 4 stroke.
John

UltraJohn wrote:

> Frank van der Hulst wrote:
>
>> UltraJohn wrote:
>>>>The Kawasaki 340 and 440 are in use in Ultralights but I think
>>>>they are two-stroke.
>>>
>>> I'm fairly sure the 440 is 4 stroke. But I won't guarantee!
>>
>> Nope -- 340 and 440 are two-strokes.
>>
>>> Take a look at the Kawasaki Snow mobile engines.
>>
>> I thought that was what the Kaw340 and 440 were. But I won't guarantee!
>>
>> Frank
> Possibly we're both right!
> I think the snowmobile 440 is 2 stroke I know at least one version of the
> 440 motorcycle is 4 stroke.
> John



http://www.bikez.com/bike/index.php?bike=19432
27HP @ 7000 not exzctly going to blow your doors away. It is a 4 stroke.

Richard

e-mail my son in law, Robert, at > and ask him your
question. He may be able to help you with some good advice.

Big John
`````````````````````````````````````````````````` `````````````````````````````````````````````````` `````````````````````````````````````````

On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 22:05:00 -0700, Richard Riley
> wrote:

>I'm looking for an engine that may not exist. If anyone has a notion
>of what it might be, I'd be grateful.
>
>It's for a 103 legal ultralight.
>
>60 lbs or so all up, including re-drive and cooling
>35-40 hp.
>4 stroke.
>More reliable than a 2 stroke Rotax
>
>Any ideas?
>

This is a close match, Richard:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=4553780674&category=26437&sspagename=WDVW

Try http://www.wankel-rotary.com/
"kumaros" > wrote in message
news:1118157997.450933@athnrd02...
> Richard Riley wrote:
>> I'm looking for an engine that may not exist. If anyone has a notion
>> of what it might be, I'd be grateful.
>>
>> It's for a 103 legal ultralight.
>>
>> 60 lbs or so all up, including re-drive and cooling
>> 35-40 hp.
>> 4 stroke.
>> More reliable than a 2 stroke Rotax
>>
>> Any ideas?
>>
>>
> The Mid-West GAE 50 R for Ultra (Micro)Lights, Homebuilt or Kit-Planes:
> 72 lbs / 50HP
> http://www.tiho-hannover.de/bmt/bmt/institut/personal/geiling/wankel/ggkart.htm
> Kumaros
> It's all Greek to me

Stan Premo wrote:
> Try http://www.wankel-rotary.com/
>

The don't appear to have any sales representatives.

Hard to get a price that way.

--

FF

There was an email address either on their site or out of Ultralight Flying
Magazine that responded in a couple of days with a
price list and some mounting info. I'm not sure this will format in the
spreadsheet form I received it but I'll try to paste it in...here goes...
Engine Power Description Retail US$
LCR 407 SGti 37.5 HP @ 6,000 rpm single rotor aircraft and marine
engines $5,691.95
LCR 407 SG/w 41 HP @ 6,900 rpm single rotor Kart engines $5,174.50
LCR 407 SG/k 41 HP @ 6,900 rpm single rotor Kart and industrial
engines $4,822.50
LCR 814 SGti 75 HP @ 6,000 rpm Twin rotor aircraft and marine engines
$7,968.95
LCR Twinpack 150 HP @ 6,000 rpm Four rotor aircraft and marine engines
$16,735.00

*LCR - Liquid Cooled Engine, Charge Cooled Rotor
SG = Single rotor, Gasoline
*ti =Tric-Ignition system
*w version includes carburetor, clutch, electric starter & generator
*k version includes carburetor, electric starter or shaft

Accessories
For Engine Part number Description Retail US$
LCR 407 153 110 Exhaust pipe kit $442.75
LCR 814 152 610 Exhaust pipe kit $638.25
LCR 407 152 121 Stainless steel muffler $977.50
LCR 814 153 621 Stainless steel muffler $1,425.00
LCR 407 156 121 Radiator - steel $615.00
LCR 814 156 122 Radiator - steel $615.00
LCR 407 156 123 Radiator - aluminum $845.00
LCR 814 156 124 Radiator - aluminum $845.00
LCR 407 & 814 154 100 *HDT Reduction Drive $910.00
LCR 407 153 110 Exhaust Pipe & Assembly Kit $442.75
LCR 814 152 610 Exhaust Pipe & Assembly Kit $638.25
LCR 407 & 814 154 100 Reduction Drive (3:1 or 2:1) $910.00

LCR 407 & 814 155 541 spark plug
LCR 407 & 814 151 041 air filter (tapered)
LCR 407 & 814 155 333 V-belt 10x530 Z21
LCR 407 & 814 155 310 generator c/w regulator
LCR 407 & 814 155 611 electric starter
LCR 407 Kart 153 182 engine cover
LCR 407 Kart 155 522 ignition coil PVL
LCR 407 Kart 155 531 high tension lead

LCR 407 & 814 155 203 Electronic Tachometer
LCR 407 & 814 155 202 Coolant Temperature Gauge
LCR 407 & 814 155 205 Ambient Temperature Gauge
LCR 407 & 814 155 204 Voltmeter
LCR 407 & 814 155 206 Hour-meter
Terms - 10% with purchase order
- 40% 30 days prior to delivery date
- balance payable on delivery
- Dealer & OEM terms as arranged
- FOB Oshawa, Ontario, Canada

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
>
> Stan Premo wrote:
>> Try http://www.wankel-rotary.com/
>>
>
> The don't appear to have any sales representatives.
>
> Hard to get a price that way.
>
> --
>
> FF
>

Not sure if this was mentioned earlier in this rather old thread, but
these guys have a pretty interesting solution.
http://www.ecofly.de/english.htm

karel wrote:
> on the negative side: this thing wants unleaded fuel only
> so no 100LL, might be problematic even in Europe
> and I think worse across the pond

You can always run 100LL and use a lead
scavanger, like http://www.decalinchemicals.com/

> for myself I should be more interested
> to see a similar aircraft conversion
> of the smart diesel engine

Last time I spoke to them, early 2003, they were
working on it. Not sure if they still are, or
what the status is.

--
Mickey