Real stats on engine failures?

I guess I don't agree. My experience is that maitenance creates many
problems. I agree that the engine will last longer if you change the oil
more frequently but changing the oil doesn't prevent failures. Routine
maitenance doesn't detect impending connecting rod failures, turbo bearing
about the sieze ect. I have seen and heard of too many oil leaks, fuel
leaks, rubbing tubes and various parts coming loose or falling off...all
caused by "maitenance".

Mike
MU-2

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
hlink.net...
You are probably more likely to have an engine failure from maitenance
than
from lack of maitenance.

Cute. But not really all that true, IMHO.

It depends on over how long a period of time you're talking about. If you
mean the instant after some maintenance is done, well sure...it's true
(but
obviously so, and not interestingly so). But if you look at the same
question over 2000 hours of operation or one or two decades, I suspect
that
lack of maintenance will show up as much more of an issue. The lack of
oil
changes alone are likely to be a major problem, never mind the myriad of
fixable problems that would normally be detected during routine
maintenance.

Pete