2CSI engine vs Rotax

[chuck]

Anybody have any opinions as to the various strengths and weaknesses of
each?

[clare at snyder.on.ca]

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 15:15:09 -0500, "chuck" >
wrote:

>Anybody have any opinions as to the various strengths and weaknesses of
>each?
>
You mean 2si? Formerly Cayuna?

You're joking, I hope. The 2SI is legendary - and not in any sort of
GOOD way!!

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Juan Jimenez[_1_]]

Not only that, 2SI no longer makes or supports their aviation engine product
line.

<clare at snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 15:15:09 -0500, "chuck" >
> wrote:
>
>>Anybody have any opinions as to the various strengths and weaknesses of
>>each?
>>
> You mean 2si? Formerly Cayuna?
>
> You're joking, I hope. The 2SI is legendary - and not in any sort of
> GOOD way!!
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[chuck]

I guess what you're saying is that it is worthless, huh? Too bad.
I was looking to buy a Challenger with the 70 H.P. version.

"Juan Jimenez" > wrote in message
.. .
> Not only that, 2SI no longer makes or supports their aviation engine
> product line.
>
> <clare at snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
> ...
>> On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 15:15:09 -0500, "chuck" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Anybody have any opinions as to the various strengths and weaknesses of
>>>each?
>>>
>> You mean 2si? Formerly Cayuna?
>>
>> You're joking, I hope. The 2SI is legendary - and not in any sort of
>> GOOD way!!
>>
>> --
>> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>

[Juan Jimenez[_1_]]

Whether it is good or not won't make a difference if you can't find parts...

They are now concentrating on their defense contracts making multifuel
utility engines.

"chuck" > wrote in message
...
>I guess what you're saying is that it is worthless, huh? Too bad.
> I was looking to buy a Challenger with the 70 H.P. version.
>
> "Juan Jimenez" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> Not only that, 2SI no longer makes or supports their aviation engine
>> product line.
>>
>> <clare at snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 15:15:09 -0500, "chuck" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Anybody have any opinions as to the various strengths and weaknesses of
>>>>each?
>>>>
>>> You mean 2si? Formerly Cayuna?
>>>
>>> You're joking, I hope. The 2SI is legendary - and not in any sort of
>>> GOOD way!!
>>>
>>> --
>>> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>>
>
>



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[[email protected]]

chuck wrote:
> I guess what you're saying is that it is worthless, huh? Too bad.
> I was looking to buy a Challenger with the 70 H.P. version.

I have had a lot of experience with the 690L70. It made terrific low
and mid range power and was fuel efficient. It drastically out
performed anything rated close to 70 hp. All their water cooled engines
have lots of common parts whether they are labelled aircraft related or
not.
I had a number of issues with the ignition system. It by nature
needs a high cranking speed to start. It cannot be rope cranked.
If that were fixed I would use nothing else. It made about 55-60 hp
at 4500 rpm. I still have mine.

>
> "Juan Jimenez" > wrote in message
> .. .
> > Not only that, 2SI no longer makes or supports their aviation engine
> > product line.
> >
> > <clare at snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
> > ...
> >> On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 15:15:09 -0500, "chuck" >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Anybody have any opinions as to the various strengths and weaknesses of
> >>>each?
> >>>
> >> You mean 2si? Formerly Cayuna?
> >>
> >> You're joking, I hope. The 2SI is legendary - and not in any sort of
> >> GOOD way!!
> >>
> >> --
> >> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
> >

[wesley marceaux]

I noticed you did not say you were still flying behind yours..keeping one
in the closet and on an airplane is different.have lots of useless junk in
my closet too.
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> chuck wrote:
>> I guess what you're saying is that it is worthless, huh? Too bad.
>> I was looking to buy a Challenger with the 70 H.P. version.
>
> I have had a lot of experience with the 690L70. It made terrific low
> and mid range power and was fuel efficient. It drastically out
> performed anything rated close to 70 hp. All their water cooled engines
> have lots of common parts whether they are labelled aircraft related or
> not.
> I had a number of issues with the ignition system. It by nature
> needs a high cranking speed to start. It cannot be rope cranked.
> If that were fixed I would use nothing else. It made about 55-60 hp
> at 4500 rpm. I still have mine.
>
>>
>> "Juan Jimenez" > wrote in message
>> .. .
>> > Not only that, 2SI no longer makes or supports their aviation engine
>> > product line.
>> >
>> > <clare at snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
>> > ...
>> >> On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 15:15:09 -0500, "chuck" >
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>Anybody have any opinions as to the various strengths and weaknesses
>> >>>of
>> >>>each?
>> >>>
>> >> You mean 2si? Formerly Cayuna?
>> >>
>> >> You're joking, I hope. The 2SI is legendary - and not in any sort of
>> >> GOOD way!!
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>> >
>

[[email protected]]

wesley marceaux wrote:
> I noticed you did not say you were still flying behind yours..keeping one
> in the closet and on an airplane is different.have lots of useless junk in
> my closet too.

I used it in a hovercraft. I mainly race them these days and needing
a heavy battery on board is very bad in that context.


> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> > chuck wrote:
> >> I guess what you're saying is that it is worthless, huh? Too bad.
> >> I was looking to buy a Challenger with the 70 H.P. version.
> >
> > I have had a lot of experience with the 690L70. It made terrific low
> > and mid range power and was fuel efficient. It drastically out
> > performed anything rated close to 70 hp. All their water cooled engines
> > have lots of common parts whether they are labelled aircraft related or
> > not.
> > I had a number of issues with the ignition system. It by nature
> > needs a high cranking speed to start. It cannot be rope cranked.
> > If that were fixed I would use nothing else. It made about 55-60 hp
> > at 4500 rpm. I still have mine.
> >
> >>
> >> "Juan Jimenez" > wrote in message
> >> .. .
> >> > Not only that, 2SI no longer makes or supports their aviation engine
> >> > product line.
> >> >
> >> > <clare at snyder.on.ca> wrote in message
> >> > ...
> >> >> On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 15:15:09 -0500, "chuck" >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>>Anybody have any opinions as to the various strengths and weaknesses
> >> >>>of
> >> >>>each?
> >> >>>
> >> >> You mean 2si? Formerly Cayuna?
> >> >>
> >> >> You're joking, I hope. The 2SI is legendary - and not in any sort of
> >> >> GOOD way!!
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
> >> >
> >