Jabiru 5100 - any experiences yet?

[Andreas Maurer]

Hi gentlemen,

subject says it all. Are there already any experiences with the new
Jabiru 5100 engine? So far the only information I have found was the
one on the Jabiru website.


Bye
Andreas

[jls]

"Andreas Maurer" > wrote in message
...
> Hi gentlemen,
>
> subject says it all. Are there already any experiences with the new
> Jabiru 5100 engine? So far the only information I have found was the
> one on the Jabiru website.
>
>
> Bye
> Andreas

If I wanted a REAL 180HP aircraft engine I'd go with an XP360 from Mattituck
or Titan kit from ECI or something like that, particularly since the Jab
costs 22k and has 4 too many cylinders to have to keep up and revs way too
high. Can we say glorified Beetle engine here?:

http://www.usjabiru.com/jabiru_5100.htm

[jls]

"Andreas Maurer" > wrote in message
...
> Hi gentlemen,
>
> subject says it all. Are there already any experiences with the new
> Jabiru 5100 engine? So far the only information I have found was the
> one on the Jabiru website.
>
>
> Bye
> Andreas

If I wanted a REAL 180HP aircraft engine I'd go with an XP360 from Mattituck
or Titan kit from ECI or something like that, particularly since the Jab
costs 22k and has 4 too many cylinders to have to keep up and revs way too
high. Can we say glorified Beetle engine here?:

http://www.usjabiru.com/jabiru_5100.htm

[Mike Borgelt]

On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 17:14:07 +0100, Andreas Maurer
> wrote:

>Hi gentlemen,
>
>subject says it all. Are there already any experiences with the new
>Jabiru 5100 engine? So far the only information I have found was the
>one on the Jabiru website.
>
>
>Bye
>Andreas


A good friend is finishing an RV7A with that engine in it. May be
only a few weeks away from flying.

I know that Jabiru bought an RV6 for testing and they have some
several hundred hours on it. I've seen it flying.

Eight cylinders may have some advantages over 4. The smaller cylinders
likely will have better combustion and if you lose one the engine may
still deliver useful power without running too rough. Guess how they
know.

Mike Borgelt

[CW9371]

>Eight cylinders may have some advantages over 4. The smaller cylinders
>likely will have better combustion and if you lose one the engine may
>still deliver useful power without running too rough. Guess how they
>know.
>
>Mike Borgelt

also gives u a smoother running engine

[Andreas Maurer]

On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 13:05:21 -0500, " jls" >
wrote:


>If I wanted a REAL 180HP aircraft engine I'd go with an XP360 from Mattituck
>or Titan kit from ECI or something like that, particularly since the Jab
>costs 22k and has 4 too many cylinders to have to keep up and revs way too
>high. Can we say glorified Beetle engine here?:

More or less Beettle.. :)
The main cause why I'm interested in the 5100 is its weight - 117 kg
dry weight is a lot better than anything else around that I'm aware
of. It is also pretty narrow, making it possible to use a pointed
cowling whith its better aerodynamics. The O360 is a monster compared
to the 5100.

One more handicap is that I'm in Germany, making it problematic to use
US engine conversions that have not been licensed by the German
authorities.

But thx a lot anyway for the hint... :)



Bye
Andreas

[Richard Lamb]

Andreas Maurer wrote:
>
> On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 13:05:21 -0500, " jls" >
> wrote:
>
> >If I wanted a REAL 180HP aircraft engine I'd go with an XP360 from Mattituck
> >or Titan kit from ECI or something like that, particularly since the Jab
> >costs 22k and has 4 too many cylinders to have to keep up and revs way too
> >high. Can we say glorified Beetle engine here?:
>
> More or less Beettle.. :)
> The main cause why I'm interested in the 5100 is its weight - 117 kg
> dry weight is a lot better than anything else around that I'm aware
> of. It is also pretty narrow, making it possible to use a pointed
> cowling whith its better aerodynamics. The O360 is a monster compared
> to the 5100.
>
> One more handicap is that I'm in Germany, making it problematic to use
> US engine conversions that have not been licensed by the German
> authorities.
>
> But thx a lot anyway for the hint... :)
>
> Bye
> Andreas

260 pounds?

That's a pretty respectable weight -
unless
external oil tank?
It that with accessories like starter and alternator?
Does it have a vacuum pump pad?

It's air cooled, isn't it? No radiator.

Still,

An IO-360 runs 330 pounds without accessories...

[Bill Daniels]

"Richard Lamb" > wrote in message
...
> Andreas Maurer wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 13:05:21 -0500, " jls" >
> > wrote:
> >
> > >If I wanted a REAL 180HP aircraft engine I'd go with an XP360 from
Mattituck
> > >or Titan kit from ECI or something like that, particularly since the
Jab
> > >costs 22k and has 4 too many cylinders to have to keep up and revs way
too
> > >high. Can we say glorified Beetle engine here?:
> >
> > More or less Beettle.. :)
> > The main cause why I'm interested in the 5100 is its weight - 117 kg
> > dry weight is a lot better than anything else around that I'm aware
> > of. It is also pretty narrow, making it possible to use a pointed
> > cowling whith its better aerodynamics. The O360 is a monster compared
> > to the 5100.
> >
> > One more handicap is that I'm in Germany, making it problematic to use
> > US engine conversions that have not been licensed by the German
> > authorities.
> >
> > But thx a lot anyway for the hint... :)
> >
> > Bye
> > Andreas
>
> 260 pounds?
>
> That's a pretty respectable weight -
> unless
> external oil tank?
> It that with accessories like starter and alternator?
> Does it have a vacuum pump pad?
>
> It's air cooled, isn't it? No radiator.
>
> Still,
>
> An IO-360 runs 330 pounds without accessories...

Ever tried to pick up an O-360 crankshaft? I tried, then I got some help.

The O-360 "Lycoming Paint Shaker" has four massive 5 1/2" diameter pistons
that pound that crank mercilessly - it HAS to be heavy. A crank in a flat
8, by comparison, has the power impulses spread over 4 whacks per revolution
so it can be lighter. On the downside, the flat 8 has higher internal
friction so the SFC will be worse.

Bill Daniels

[Andreas Maurer]

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 01:44:29 GMT, Richard Lamb >
wrote:


>260 pounds?
>
>That's a pretty respectable weight -
> unless
>external oil tank?
>It that with accessories like starter and alternator?
>Does it have a vacuum pump pad?

This is the toy I'm talking about.... ;)
http://www.jabiru.net.au/engines/8cylin.html

I really like the compact size and the low weight, although the fuel
coonsumption could be a lot better...
The 360 (and 320) is a monstrum and I'm not considering it for my
planned aircraft due to sheer size and weight.

Another engine that looks pretty good is the new Thielert Diesel
engine
http://www.centurion-engines.com/c17/c17_start.htm

...., but its weight and extreme comlexity are less than perfect,
although performance and fuel consumption are very good.


Bye
Andreas

[Paul Lee]

Richard Lamb > wrote in message >...
> Andreas Maurer wrote:
>...........
>
> 260 pounds?
>
> That's a pretty respectable weight -
> unless
> external oil tank?
> It that with accessories like starter and alternator?
> Does it have a vacuum pump pad?
>
> It's air cooled, isn't it? No radiator.
>
> Still,
>
> An IO-360 runs 330 pounds without accessories...

You can get those details on their website
http://www.jabiru.net.au/engines/8cylin.html

BTW - the Jab 8 can burn autogas with no problem.
The somewhat higher RPM is also not a problem, just get the
right prop for it.

I considered the Jab engine for my canard project, and even put a
deposit, but it came out too late for me. And also the original claims
were 200hp but now it is down to 180hp. So I went with a 220hp
6 cyl Franklin - about the same weight as Lyc IO-360 but a lot smoother.
The biggest beef I have with Lyc 360 is the vibration - essentially a
giant VW engine. Cont. IO360 is a 6 but considerably heavier than
Franklin.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Paul Lee, SQ2000 canard project: http://www.abri.com/sq2000

[Info]

Best thing is to ask Mike Sullivan who was the exclusive tester for them
in his 3/4 scale spitfire, when i ran into him at LAX he had rolled up
his third (and last) plane with the engine and was adamant he wouldn't
recommend then to anyone, period.

Do a search and ask him, they nearly cost him his life........ Michael


CW9371 wrote:
>>Eight cylinders may have some advantages over 4. The smaller cylinders
>>likely will have better combustion and if you lose one the engine may
>>still deliver useful power without running too rough. Guess how they
>>know.
>>
>>Mike Borgelt
>
>
> also gives u a smoother running engine

[CW9371]

>
>Best thing is to ask Mike Sullivan who was the exclusive tester for them
>in his 3/4 scale spitfire, when i ran into him at LAX he had rolled up
>his third (and last) plane with the engine and was adamant he wouldn't
>recommend then to anyone, period.
>
>Do a search and ask him, they nearly cost him his life........ Michae

why dont u post something about him saying that, when i looked up the sites i
didnt see anything bad he had said about it. this is the most annoying thing
about the net, people post stuff without giving the reasons, or anything to
colaborate there statements

[Info]

What i am saying to you is email him direct.... he cant put on his site
that the engines are crap or he will end up in court, take the time to
send him a short and personal email and see what comes back, then you
will have the word on the engine from the person who has more hours than
anyone else in the world behind the 8 cylinder. Easy....

CW9371 wrote:
>>Best thing is to ask Mike Sullivan who was the exclusive tester for them
>>in his 3/4 scale spitfire, when i ran into him at LAX he had rolled up
>>his third (and last) plane with the engine and was adamant he wouldn't
>>recommend then to anyone, period.
>>
>>Do a search and ask him, they nearly cost him his life........ Michae
>
>
> why dont u post something about him saying that, when i looked up the sites i
> didnt see anything bad he had said about it. this is the most annoying thing
> about the net, people post stuff without giving the reasons, or anything to
> colaborate there statements

[CW9371]

>
>What i am saying to you is email him direct.... he cant put on his site
>that the engines are crap or he will end up in court, take the time to
>send him a short and personal email and see what comes back, then you
>will have the word on the engine from the person who has more hours than
>anyone else in the world behind the 8 cylinder. Easy....

If the engines are so crappy as u say, he should be able to substatiant his
comments therefore he can say what he wants about them without getting in
trouble

[Ron Wanttaja]

On 10 Feb 2004 21:47:34 GMT, (CW9371) wrote:

>>
>>What i am saying to you is email him direct.... he cant put on his site
>>that the engines are crap or he will end up in court, take the time to
>>send him a short and personal email and see what comes back, then you
>>will have the word on the engine from the person who has more hours than
>>anyone else in the world behind the 8 cylinder. Easy....
>
>If the engines are so crappy as u say, he should be able to substatiant his
>comments therefore he can say what he wants about them without getting in
>trouble

Doesn't stop him from being sued. Just means that, after spending $20,000
or so to defend himself, he might be able to prove what he said was true.
And then have to countersue to try to recover his expenses...and such
recovery would be complicated by the company in question being located in
another country.

Ron Wanttaja

[CW9371]

>Doesn't stop him from being sued. Just means that, after spending $20,000
>or so to defend himself, he might be able to prove what he said was true.
>And then have to countersue to try to recover his expenses...and such
>recovery would be complicated by the company in question being located in
>another country.
>


I thought he was in australia also

[jls]

"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message
...
> On 10 Feb 2004 21:47:34 GMT, (CW9371) wrote:
>
> >>
> >>What i am saying to you is email him direct.... he cant put on his site
> >>that the engines are crap or he will end up in court, take the time to
> >>send him a short and personal email and see what comes back, then you
> >>will have the word on the engine from the person who has more hours than
> >>anyone else in the world behind the 8 cylinder. Easy....
> >
> >If the engines are so crappy as u say, he should be able to substatiant
his
> >comments therefore he can say what he wants about them without getting in
> >trouble
>
> Doesn't stop him from being sued.

Well, Ron, I guess anybody could get sued for just about anything; but I
doubt any attorney is interested in busting the wallet of some poor bloke
who has already had his a** busted by a klunky aircraft engine.


Just means that, after spending $20,000
> or so to defend himself, he might be able to prove what he said was true.

Well, yes, but does it really cost that much to defend words that happen to
be true? I think it really sad that the message may need to be gotten out
about the 6-cylinder Jabiru, and everybody will go mum with fear of a
lawsuit.

On the other hand if the engine is reliable, success will follow.

I personally don't care for an engine that has to turn such high rpm's to
obtain its rated horsepower. It causes you to have to shorten the prop,
when you want the tips out there away from the cowl.

> And then have to countersue to try to recover his expenses

If a winning countersuit is available to a slapp victim, then more power to
him, I say.


....and such
> recovery would be complicated by the company in question being located in
> another country.

Well, here I take a little issue with you. If a foreign company is
permitted to sue here in the USA, then it can post security to cover damages
in a judgment against itself on a counterclaim.

The question remains, is Jabiru manufacturing and selling an engine which is
unsafe for use in aircraft? I have heard some mighty strong statements
about those engines, including reading at least one in
rec.aviation.ultralight. Have any of the critics been sued?

>
> Ron Wanttaja

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:06:58 -0500, " jls" > wrote:
>
>Well, Ron, I guess anybody could get sued for just about anything; but I
>doubt any attorney is interested in busting the wallet of some poor bloke
>who has already had his a** busted by a klunky aircraft engine.

No, but an attorney does what his client pays him to do. No lawyer takes a
SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) case for a client on
a contingency basis. The tactic is used by those with either deep enough
pockets, or some access to low-cost legal support, such as a family member
who is a lawyer.

> Just means that, after spending $20,000
>> or so to defend himself, he might be able to prove what he said was true.
>
>Well, yes, but does it really cost that much to defend words that happen to
>be true?

I believe the going rate for legal assistance is about $250/hour. $20,000
is just two forty-hour weeks, for an attorney. That doesn't include other
expenses, such as court costs, travel, etc.

Remember, too, that the purpose of a SLAPP suit is NOT to get to court to
have the issues settled. The purpose of a SLAPP suit is make continued
resistance financially prohibitive...to shut someone up by making it too
expensive to defend themselves. A lawsuit can be stretched out over years.
Heck, the SLAPP suit in which I was a co-defendant is *still* active, with
one remaining defendant, five years after I won dismissal (the RAH-15 case,
of course).

> I think it really sad that the message may need to be gotten out
>about the 6-cylinder Jabiru, and everybody will go mum with fear of a
>lawsuit.

I think it is sad, too, and believe people should speak up if they've got
the truth on their side. But as a former defendant in a SLAPP suit, I can
sympathize with those who keep silent for fear of becoming a target.

>> And then have to countersue to try to recover his expenses
>
>If a winning countersuit is available to a slapp victim, then more power to
>him, I say.

But, again, it costs money to prosecute such a case. Maybe...
eventually... you'll win. But there are plenty of ways an unscrupulous
company or individual can keep from paying any judgement. Buddy of mine
won a personal-injury case (ex-husband of his girlfriend assaulted him with
a baseball bat) and didn't see a dime.

>...and such
>> recovery would be complicated by the company in question being located in
>> another country.
>
>Well, here I take a little issue with you. If a foreign company is
>permitted to sue here in the USA, then it can post security to cover damages
>in a judgment against itself on a counterclaim.

Someone else posted that the critic was Australian as well, which means any
suit would come under Australian law. Not sure what that would mean, in
this case. Australia might have a "loser pays" system, which would make
things easier for the critic.

>The question remains, is Jabiru manufacturing and selling an engine which is
>unsafe for use in aircraft? I have heard some mighty strong statements
>about those engines, including reading at least one in
>rec.aviation.ultralight. Have any of the critics been sued?

Depends on the type of comments. It's tough to base a SLAPP suit on one or
two critical statements. SLAPP suits are generally used against
*persistent* critics, not against one or two people saying "I think their
product is bad." Somebody making specific, repeated claims, especially if
worded "in the heat of the moment," might be more at-risk.

Lawsuits against critics in homebuilt aviation aren't unknown. Dave
Blanton was essentially driven out of business by a libel suit (justified,
by my understanding). There was the RAH-15 case, a classic example of a
SLAPP suit. Other homebuilt companies have garnered somewhat of a history
of suing their customers...for example, see:

http://www.seawind.cc/builders_sued.htm

The trouble is, most of what I've seen about the Jabiru engines have been
"I've heard" or "Another guy said" sort of comments. I'd be most happy to
hear first-person accounts of trouble or success.

Ron Wanttaja

[jls]

"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:06:58 -0500, " jls" >
wrote:

Very interesting. Thanks for the Seawind link.

[jls]

cont'd:

"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message
...
[...]There was the RAH-15 case, a classic example of a
> SLAPP suit.

Which makes me wonder. Could anything have backfired any worse? Could
anyone have committed a more strategic blunder?

Well, I identify with you RAH-15. At least you had company to commiserate
with you. And you had a good Florida lawyer helping you, iirc. Try
getting SLAPPed alone sometime. It ain't fun.


Other homebuilt companies have garnered somewhat of a history
> of suing their customers...for example, see:
>
> http://www.seawind.cc/builders_sued.htm

The guy who put up this page is not afraid of being sued. It sounds to me
like he'd fight a buzz-saw.
>
> The trouble is, most of what I've seen about the Jabiru engines have been
> "I've heard" or "Another guy said" sort of comments. I'd be most happy to
> hear first-person accounts of trouble or success.
>
> Ron Wanttaja

We'll keep asking. Someone will talk sooner or later. Personally I'd
like to see the Jabiru engines a success, and eight-bangers ought to make a
beautiful sound. If they are hurting people, though, the truth ought to be
known.

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 11:13:58 -0500, " jls" > wrote:

>"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message
...
> [...]There was the RAH-15 case, a classic example of a
>> SLAPP suit.
>
>Which makes me wonder. Could anything have backfired any worse? Could
>anyone have committed a more strategic blunder?

I ain't saying it was a *typical* SLAPP suit. :-)

> Other homebuilt companies have garnered somewhat of a history
>> of suing their customers...for example, see:
>>
>> http://www.seawind.cc/builders_sued.htm
>
>The guy who put up this page is not afraid of being sued. It sounds to me
>like he'd fight a buzz-saw.

But he has been forced to shut his web page down several times. About two
years ago, I got email from Seawind asking that I remove the link to his
site on my "Avlinks" web page. I checked it then, and all it consisted of
at that time was a note saying he'd had to remove the site due to legal
problems. I didn't delete the link, but did a comment to the effect that
it was not an official site (the same disclaimer carried on the site
itself). I was actually a bit surprised the other night when I clicked it
and the full web page appeared.

I suspect his legal problems ended when the company went out of business
and the owner moved his operation to Canada.

Ron Wanttaja

[ChuckSlusarczyk]

In article >, Ron Wanttaja says...
>>I suspect his legal problems ended when the company went out of business
>and the owner moved his operation to Canada.
>
>Ron Wanttaja

....and the savior of aviation didn't report it??? :-)

See ya

Chuck S

[Paul Lee]

Can anyone give us a specific hint as to what the problem is with
the Jab 5100 instead of these inuendos whose intent is to leave
a lot to the imagination?
"Mike"'s web flight report had no problem indications at
all on his Jab 5100 testflights. The least you would expect is for
him to say some true technical results - engine "missfired only once",
"a slight lack of power at takeoff", "slight starting problems"...
whatever... But there was no such comments. How can you get sued for
stating what happened in a test flight.
In fact, even his current web comments describe the test flights
for engine performance with same paragraphs used for the original
Jab 5100 write ups. There are yet no reports for the "newer"
autoconversion GM V6 engine with electronic fuel injection
which will yield more horsepower (240).

An obvious conclusion is that he wants more power (note that
Jabiru 5100 is down to 180 hp from original 200HP peak) and with
fuel injection aerobatics is more possible but less likely
with the carbureted Jab 5100. His plane specs indicate +6/-3 G
limited aerobatics. Inverted flights with carb engines
could be life threatening.

Facts please - not emotional bashing.

-------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Lee, SQ2000 canard project: http://www.abri.com/sq2000

Info > wrote in message >...
> Best thing is to ask Mike Sullivan who was the exclusive tester for them
> in his 3/4 scale spitfire, when i ran into him at LAX he had rolled up
> his third (and last) plane with the engine and was adamant he wouldn't
> recommend then to anyone, period.
>
> Do a search and ask him, they nearly cost him his life........ Michael
>
>

[jls]

"Paul Lee" > wrote in message
om...
> Can anyone give us a specific hint as to what the problem is with
> the Jab 5100 instead of these inuendos whose intent is to leave
> a lot to the imagination?

Innuendo, hell. Assuming the conversation at LAX to be truthful and
accurate, you should have no trouble concluding there were 3 catastrophic
engine failures.

[CW9371]

>
>Innuendo, hell. Assuming the conversation at LAX to be truthful and
>accurate, you should have no trouble concluding there were 3 catastrophic
>engine failures.

Well there is nothing documented to this fact, just u saying that he told u
this at LAX

[CW9371]

>Innuendo, hell. Assuming the conversation at LAX to be truthful and
>accurate, you should have no trouble concluding there were 3 catastrophic
>engine failures.

Also remember that if he did have these catastrophic engine failures and he
didnt document them or anything else he could be liabel for any thing that
comes of it, casue the sites all day its a great engine, including quotes from
him

[Captain Avgas]

There's one important point that everyone has overlooked regarding the
new Jabiru 8 cylinder engine. Just tell me how many of the new whiz
bang engine management systems provide for CHT and EGT data on 8
cylinders.

[jls]

"CW9371" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >Innuendo, hell. Assuming the conversation at LAX to be truthful and
> >accurate, you should have no trouble concluding there were 3 catastrophic
> >engine failures.
>
> Well there is nothing documented to this fact, just u saying that he told
u
> this at LAX

Learn to read. I was not a party to the conversation. Learn to write
too.

Also learn to do a little research. Do you expect all your questions to be
answered here in rec.anarchy.homebuilt?

[jls]

"CW9371" > wrote in message
...
> >Innuendo, hell. Assuming the conversation at LAX to be truthful and
> >accurate, you should have no trouble concluding there were 3 catastrophic
> >engine failures.
>
> Also remember that if he did have these catastrophic engine failures and
he
> didnt document them or anything else he could be liabel for any thing that
> comes of it, casue the sites all day its a great engine, including quotes
from
> him

Get his phone number and call him. Quit your whining.

[jls]

"Captain Avgas" > wrote in message
om...
> There's one important point that everyone has overlooked regarding the
> new Jabiru 8 cylinder engine. Just tell me how many of the new whiz
> bang engine management systems provide for CHT and EGT data on 8
> cylinders.

Hey, Bob. Just buy and install two four-cylinder sets.

[Paul Lee]

(Captain Avgas) wrote in message >...
> There's one important point that everyone has overlooked regarding the
> new Jabiru 8 cylinder engine. Just tell me how many of the new whiz
> bang engine management systems provide for CHT and EGT data on 8
> cylinders.

Thats a no brainer.. For my 6 cyl Franklin I use a rotary switch
going into the Rocky Mountain MicroMonitor. You can do that even
with a standard gauge.

[Paul Lee]

" jls" > wrote in message >...
> "Paul Lee" > wrote in message
> om...
> > Can anyone give us a specific hint as to what the problem is with
> > the Jab 5100 instead of these inuendos whose intent is to leave
> > a lot to the imagination?
>
> Innuendo, hell. Assuming the conversation at LAX to be truthful and
> accurate, you should have no trouble concluding there were 3 catastrophic
> engine failures.

"Innuendo, hell. ... catastrophic failures...." again deliberately
leaves
much to imagination. Hardly specific or objective. You also snipped
out
my attempt at objectivity - with no comments.

Since you seem to know so much about the problems and have the
"courage", why not give us the technical specifics? A lot of people
are holding their
breath for some detailed facts. There is nothing libelious about
reporting the actual specifics.

What is a "catastrophic" engine failure? It exploded in mid air? And
then
Jabiru replaced the engine twice?

[Frank Stutzman]

Captain Avgas > wrote:
> There's one important point that everyone has overlooked regarding the
> new Jabiru 8 cylinder engine. Just tell me how many of the new whiz
> bang engine management systems provide for CHT and EGT data on 8
> cylinders.

IIRC, JPI makes a model for nine cylinder radials. One cut with a pair of
dykes and you've got one for a 8 cylinder.

--
Frank Stutzman
Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
Hood River, OR

[CW9371]

>Learn to read. I was not a party to the conversation. Learn to write
>too.
>
>Also learn to do a little research. Do you expect all your questions to be
>answered here in rec.anarchy.homebuilt?
>

I think I can read, cant help it if you dont like a quote thats cut out of
your comments. I think I can write, however my typing skills leave something
to be desired. But I don't claim to be a typest.
In regards to the research if you knew how to read, you would have read all the
posts in regards to this subject and you would have seen i have looked all over
the web and I cant find anything about these engine failures.
Well if your going to jump in on this conversation, you should be able to
answer it whats be asked or be able to add something to the conversation.
Which I don't see you doing.
Chris

[CW9371]

>
>Get his phone number and call him. Quit your whining.
>

Whos whining, your the one that seems to be the cry baby. Get his phone
number, umm far as I know he lives in Australia, thats a little large of an
area to search for a number. Do you have his number, can you post it for me.
Help me out here why dont u, since i am such a pathetic whiner. I mean I cant
even write to your standards. Can I have your pitty now.
Thanks I needed that. LOL

Chris

[jls]

"CW9371" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >Get his phone number and call him. Quit your whining.
> >
>
> Whos whining, your the one that seems to be the cry baby. Get his phone
> number, umm far as I know he lives in Australia, thats a little large of
an
> area to search for a number. Do you have his number, can you post it for
me.
> Help me out here why dont u, since i am such a pathetic whiner. I mean I
cant
> even write to your standards. Can I have your pitty now.
> Thanks I needed that. LOL
>
> Chris

Attaboy, Chris. Now we're friends an if I find out something I'll pass it
on to u. Right now I have no interest in flying behind any Jabiru engine.

[John Duncan]

Try www.whitepages.com.au.( there's only 20 million of us - easier than
searching LA!)

Then either put up or shut up.


JD

CW9371 wrote:
>>Get his phone number and call him. Quit your whining.
>>
>
>
> Whos whining, your the one that seems to be the cry baby. Get his phone
> number, umm far as I know he lives in Australia, thats a little large of an
> area to search for a number. Do you have his number, can you post it for me.
> Help me out here why dont u, since i am such a pathetic whiner. I mean I cant
> even write to your standards. Can I have your pitty now.
> Thanks I needed that. LOL
>
> Chris