View Single Post
  #35  
Old October 22nd 03, 06:58 PM
Robert Schieck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi Rob. Thanks for forwarding the E-mail. I was unable to find the website
you mentioned. Would you please post my response.

I appologize for not keeping my site totally current. As of 21 Oct 2003, we
have logged 874 trouble free hour on our LS-1 powered Seabee. A second LS-1
powered Bee has loged over 70 hours, and an LS-6 powered Bee has over 180
hours on it. They are using my conversion. The first LS-6 conversion has
been delivered to a Murphy Super Rebel customer.

If you check my website, you will see the LS-1 is rated a@ 345 H.P. by G.M.
We derate it to 320 H.P. for our use. The LS-6 is rated by G.M. at 405 H.P.
We derate it to 350 H.P. for our use. If you do a literature search, you
will discover G.M. ran two LS-1's at 100% power for 520 hours. The engines
were torn down & and all parts were within new parts tolerences. We do not
recommend running any engine at 100% continuous power. We run at full power
untill it is safe to throttle back. We cruse climb at 25" & 3500 rpm untill
we are at desired altitude. I have only climed to 11.000' for test purposes.
The engine ran great.I enjoy the scenery & normally cruse in the 2500 to
7000' range.

In terms of fuel efficiency, I normally burn 8.5 Imperial Gallons Per hour
at 22' & 3200 RPM. This increases to 10 IGPH at 25 " & 3500RPM. This is the
maximum popwer setting I have used for extended periods of time. Both of the
other Seabee owners claim they burn less fuel per hour than I do! I time my
flights with my GPS unit & dip the tanks every flight. I normally use the
lower power setting - I pay for all my gas myself & the extra speed is not
worth it.

If these gentlemen check the website, they will discover I do not use Oxygen
sensors on my aircraft. G.M. provides three calibration codes for the
computer, including the one which uses no Oxygen sensors. We did use oxygen
sensors on the LS-6 installation initially (the first 100 hours). They do
last fine if you use leaded fuel occasionally, but provided no operating
advantage. All my current installations do not use Oxygen sensors.

In terms of fuel, I run 100LL when I am at an airport, & premimum unleaded
when I am at home. The unleaded is better for the engine & the environment &
is cheaper.

In terms of the rebuild costs, I have quoted the average cost paid by
several Franklin owners recently. For the LS-1 overhaul costs I have
included the cost of replacing the engine with a factory new short block, &
dismantling the reduction unit & replacing key components.

In terms of reliability, I never passed the 100 hour mark on my Franklin
without incuring some major work. The Lycoming on my Supercub was better,
but not great. They recently replaced the Factory new lycoming on a
commercially operated, well maintained local aircraft at the 800 hour mark
because it plugged the oil cooler with metal. They also replaced 2 cylinders
in the first 800 hours. I believe the V-8 will prove to be a reliable
powerplant, & is certainly more cost effective. The modern heating & air
conditioning systems are a bonus. I remove my reduction unit & dismantle it
for inspection regularly (roughly every 200 hours), & so far it is like new
inside. Last winter I removed the oil pan from the engine & visually
inspected the engine. It too looked like new.

I had also considered the Northstar engin when I was in the design phase. I
rejected it as unnecessarily complicated. I believe the LS series is a much
better choice for aircraft use. I strongly believe in the KISS principle
(Keep It Simple Stupid)

Thanks for the opportunity to comment on these items. If anyone wishes to
discuss the mater further, please contact me.

Regards

Brian Robinson

705-374-4347