V-8 powered Seabee

On 07 Nov 2003 04:56 AM, Ben Haas posted the following:
Really. the top of this page says GOOGLE I think. Lets get BOb's
opinion..

Dude, you need to get some remedial usenet lessons. Google is just an
outfit which provides a free means (one of many) of accessing these
groups, and they keep an archive of old posts, but the newsgroups ain't
run by Google.

----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins-
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/

Earlier, (Ben Haas) wrote:

Really. the top of this page says GOOGLE I think.

That's because you are using the free Google Usenet interface to read
the rec.aviation.homebuilt newsgroup. I use Google too, most of the
time. But Google sure as heck isn't the only way to read Usenet
newsgroups.

Also, Google has no control over the moderation or content of Usenet
newsgroups. That would be like trying to hold your TV manufacturer
responsible for the fact that your set is capable of displaying
pornographic material.

I suggest the following document for a brief introduction to Usenet,
and some handy pointers as to what it is and what it is not:

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1/

My favorite part of that FAQ is:

3. Usenet is not fair.

After all, who shall decide what's
fair? For that matter, if someone
is behaving unfairly, who's going
to stop him? Neither you nor I,
that's certain.

If you don't like what Bob Urban writes, your best bets are to either
ignore it or to refute it with logic and reason. But remember that the
plural of anecdote is not data.

Thanks, and best regards to all

Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com

Thanks, I learned something today. Life is good in Paradise ...
(Bob Kuykendall) wrote in message . com...
Earlier, (Ben Haas) wrote:

Really. the top of this page says GOOGLE I think.

That's because you are using the free Google Usenet interface to read
the rec.aviation.homebuilt newsgroup. I use Google too, most of the
time. But Google sure as heck isn't the only way to read Usenet
newsgroups.

Also, Google has no control over the moderation or content of Usenet
newsgroups. That would be like trying to hold your TV manufacturer
responsible for the fact that your set is capable of displaying
pornographic material.

I suggest the following document for a brief introduction to Usenet,
and some handy pointers as to what it is and what it is not:

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/what-is/part1/

My favorite part of that FAQ is:

3. Usenet is not fair.

After all, who shall decide what's
fair? For that matter, if someone
is behaving unfairly, who's going
to stop him? Neither you nor I,
that's certain.

If you don't like what Bob Urban writes, your best bets are to either
ignore it or to refute it with logic and reason. But remember that the
plural of anecdote is not data.

Thanks, and best regards to all

Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com

Hey, Thanks BOb for the plug. You forgot to tell them all about my
private Airport, 2WY3. I am sure BOb will look that one up too and
post it for all you readers. Now it's time for an adult beverage, a
dip in the hot tub and Dinner. Life is GOOD in Paradise.
Unless I'm confused as badly as Ben....
Ben is the guy that some time ago told us how he had developed an
auto conversion that would develop more horsepower at less RPM
than any other auto engine on earth. One secret ingredient was a
new fangled cam, IIRC. When I asked him to start walking his talk...
all that has been forthcoming is more heat and vitriol concerning me -
NOTHING on his fabulous world class engine. To date, his agenda
remains the same..... shoot the messenger. Discredit the messenger.
Deflect attention from his engine project's failures and... successes?

Although Ben remains CLUELESS about where he is at...
even when informed, he does keep harping on how this group
is about 'EXPERIMENTING'. I wonder when Ben is going to get off
my case and on to posting something topical and of substance.
When will Ben bare his soul and come clean on how what I and
others have been saying for some time? Never, is my guess.

However, since Hass appears to be bashful, one might write....

Ben Haas N801BH.

FAA public record.....

Registered Owner

Name HAAS POWER AIR INC
Street 700 PONDEROSA DR
City JACKSON
State WYOMING
Zip Code 83001-9379


N801BH is Assigned

Assigned/Registered Aircraft
Aircraft Description
Serial Number 8-4419
Type Registration Corporation
Manufacturer Name HAAS POWER AIR INC
Certificate Issue Date 05/19/2003
Model HAAS 801
Status Valid
Type Aircraft Fixed Wing Single-Engine
Type Engine Reciprocating

Me again wrote in message . ..
On 4 Nov 2003 23:45:59 -0800, (Ben Haas) wrote:

Yeah,But... That CERTIFIED 300 horsepower Lycoming would have broke a
crank and killed him. There have been several CERTIFIED ones that did
the same thing. They said it was a quality control issue that slipped
by themselves and the Feds. If I remember correctly Lycoming had a
rash of CERTIFIED cranks break. So they recalled a bunch and using 50
YEARS of experience produced an even deadlier version to fix the first
ones. I am really surprised they didn't hire BOb to run their spin /
PR dept. Hey BOb, did ya sent the next of kin any flowers??? Nothing
like a CERTIFIED death !!!!!!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Ben,
You need flowers...
Stuck up your assinine arse.
You continue to be a CERTIFIABLE fool.

Any reasonable person knows...
Flying behind certified engines do have calculated risks.
They also know that **** happens under the best of
conditions and controls even where the most qualified
folks and systems are in play. All that can be said is
risks are made as low as possible in this manner....
not by psychotically hammering on some car engine
from the junk yard and substituting the unknown for
the highly known - all the while, stupidly foaming
at the mouth here in RAH.

Wow. 50 years of flight. You must have a ton of money saved up
after all those IFR charters mortal men would have been killed doing.
Ya know,the high risk missions get the high risk dollars. Why don't ya
share with all of us the location of your few hundred acres where your
private airport is located. Surely a man of your means has one of
those??. Oh yeah, I forgot. You didn't even build the RV you are
flying, you just bought one to be cool and honor us with your imput. I
live to see ya rant and rave about others when you are the bottom
feeder in this group....

Ben Haas. 50 years at laughing at OLD fools.....

My record of 50 years and nearly 9000 hours speaks
well of certified engines. I've learn in that time to respect
and trust the engines that I have flown behind over vast
open waters, western deserts, the Rocky Mountains,
crop dusting and IFR charters that would have you ****ting
in your britches.

What have you got to offer to date in your OWN behalf?
N-O-T-H-I-N-G... but derogatory crap and very cheap talk.

Each and every home brewed conversion carries UNKNOWN risks...
and only a flying fool would think he has better odds gambling on
**** that the average shade tree dood has cobbled together.
I'm not against you or your conversion endeavors, but I am
against any horse**** posted here laying claim that auto
conversions in general remotely measure up to the finest
and most reliable piston aircraft engines ever produced by man.

Anyone with an IQ over two digits should realize this...
but guys like you have to learn it the hard way.
So be it.


Barnyard BOb -- over 50 years of flight

Bob Kuykendall wrote:

But remember that the plural of anecdote is not data.

Just goes to show you, if you're willing to wade
through the muck, you'll usually find something
worthwhile g

Thanks, Bob.

Dave 'Henny Youngman' Hyde

Bob Kuykendall wrote:

But remember that the plural of anecdote is not data.

Just goes to show you, if you're willing to wade
through the muck, you'll usually find something
worthwhile g

Thanks, Bob.

Dave 'Henny Youngman' Hyde
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

When your right, your right, Henny.


Barnyard BOb -- take my wife, please

Bob Kuykendall wrote:

But remember that the plural of anecdote is not data.

Just goes to show you, if you're willing to wade
through the muck, you'll usually find something
worthwhile g

Thanks, Bob.

Dave 'Henny Youngman' Hyde
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

When your right, your right, Henny.

Barnyard BOb -- take my wife, please



When you're right, you're right , Henny.

Barnyard BOb - awaiting the Spelling/Grammar Police

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 17:33:02 GMT,
(Corky Scott) wrote:

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:30:49 -0500, Barnyard BOb --
wrote:


What, it's not ok to question that certified aircraft engines have
seen the zenith of their development and are anachronistic, overpriced
and tempermental? BIG grin here

Corky Scott
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Does the BIG grin imply that you do not believe this?
Matters not. We've been at our impasse far too long.
I no longer care what you think or do.

Plonk.


Barnyard BOb -- 50 years of flight

BOb Urban, I_am_hurt! You mean after years of gratuitous insults and
nearly automatic acerbic comments to me, you leave the field?

And here I thought your lack of personal attacks against me lately
were a sign that at last I was gaining your respect because so many
auto coversions had been successful lately.

I guess not.

Corky (who wants my tattered battle flag) Scott

PS, you mean you think that certified aircraft engines AREN'T
anachronistic, overpriced and tempermental? Lordy, I thought that was
something everyone could agree on.


I talked with the man behind the V8 SeaBee last saterday.
Over 1000 trouble free hours on the LT1 in his own plane.
Several hundred on the doc's LT6.

The LT1 has had the drive apart several times checking for wear - none
found. Engine has not changed compression, oil pressure, oil temp, or
oil consumption since first 20 hour of break-in.

And that "trouble free" IS trouble free. No changes required.
The LT6 has needed some changes in code for theO2 sensors from what I
remember. (2 sensor vs 4 sensor vs no sensor)

Snip other stuff
I talked with the man behind the V8 SeaBee last saterday.
Over 1000 trouble free hours on the LT1 in his own plane.
Several hundred on the doc's LT6.

The LT1 has had the drive apart several times checking for wear - none
found. Engine has not changed compression, oil pressure, oil temp, or
oil consumption since first 20 hour of break-in.

And that "trouble free" IS trouble free. No changes required.
The LT6 has needed some changes in code for theO2 sensors from what I
remember. (2 sensor vs 4 sensor vs no sensor)

The problem with the doc's engine was as soon as he went over 2/3
throttle the computer went to full rich. The problem was solved by
changing to an overseas computer or program for an engine that didn't
have a catalytic converter. Since the change the engine has been
trouble free. before the change the only problem was high fuel
consumption and less power. If I remember all from my visit with the
doc this spring. There's another Sea-Bee getting converted in
centralia this winter.