Perhaps this is a philolosphy more than anything else.
In the human development of things we always have to do it a bit bigger and
more powerful for each step.
Every year a car model comes out, it is a couple of inches bigger, more
powerful than the year before, and at the end of the model line, the original
concept of the first model is almost always lost, and the car have now grown
into a bigger class of cars.
Your fishing boat, a small aluminum boat, did just fine with a 10 hp outboard
engine, but by some reason or the other, it's sitting a 65 HP engine there now.
A normal car takes about 20 to 30 HP to maintain freeway speed, any more hp is
used for acceleration or hills, and man, do we have hills nowadays, we
absolutely neeeed 300HP.
Dont get me wrong, I like power as well as the other guy, but powerful
vehicles are designed to be powerful vehicles.
I have two vehicles one is a Mercedes 560 SEC, and the other is a VW Rabbit
Diesel.
Those vehicles are two completely different concepts, the only similarities
are that they both have four wheels on the ground.
I am happy with both, because they fullfill their task, each one of them
respectively.
It would be so far fetched to try to make a hotrod out of the VW Rabbit
Diesel, getting bigger engines and make it go faster, make it climb the hills
faster, and make it a red light screamer.
The whole concept of what a VW Rabbit Diesel can do, would be completely lost
with that effort, besides, if I wanted to do a hotrod, I wouldnt choose a Rabbit
Diesel in the first place.
Why go with all these mega heavy engines in a Q1? Just because it has been
done, does not make it the norm. it's still a mutation.
Dont put a blown Hemi in a VW Diesel Rabbit, find a Dodge Charger and it will
bolt right in.
Ryan <
rryan@...
> wrote:
Dave,
The Vari-eze started with a VW engine then the 0-200 Continental or
later an 0-235 Lycoming.
The LongEZ started with an 0-200 Continental then a Lycoming 0-235
and now an 0-320 Lycoming as the best choice.
The Q1 started with 18hp then 22+hp then 503cc Rotax 52hp. Several
flying with 4 cylinder VW engines (I am one). Except for the 3.6gph
fuel burn it is a reliable way to get in the air with plenty of
engine history.
I do not understand the negative responses to an excellent
alternative to the Onan or Rotax engines. Yes it is heavier than the
Onan.
Ryan
--- In
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
, 'davedrosen' <d2r@...> wrote:
>
> All,
> I'm searching for engines, at this point, to replace the non-
> exsistant hexadyne engine. I have some vw questions. Isn't it a
bit
> heavy for the hp. Why just use the 1600 if the next size up or two
> weighs the same. What about PRSU's. How does the GPlains engines
> compare to AeroVee etc. How fast did a Q cruse with a VW, with and
> without a prsu? How are they mounted? does one use rubber mounts
on the
> firewall? Is there any good reference for installation advice for
a Q1?
> Thanks,
> Dave R.
> N4YQ
>
> Hexatron NOT--Gotta sue them for my deposit back.
>
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]