 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
admin(at)arachnidrobotics
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 1:15 pm Post subject: Corvair Bashing and other irritating, close-minded individua |
 |
|
Sounds like we have another for the Lycoming side of the fence! No problem, there's room for us all! : ) Just make sure you don't become one of those you're harping on. You're correct, there are a few Corvair nuts that hurt the group by posting before thinking, but they are by far the minority. For the most part, Corvair buffs admit the shortcomings of the engine and knowingly accept the tradeoff of hanging one on the front of their aircraft.
I have noticed there are quite a few 'Traditionalists' with the same bad attitude as the Corvair nuts, especially in recent days. You mentioned the Corvair failing more than the 'certified' engines, and we all know you're right. However, that point does little to end the argument of which engine is better. What is better? Owners of retractable gear airplanes often swear by them. They tend to be faster, consume less fuel, etc., but statistics show they ARE more susceptible to accidents. How do these facts answer the question, "Which aircraft are better: Retractable or Fixed Gear?"
It seems many have taken "Safer" to mean "Better". If that is your standard, please feel free to judge by it. Just accept that others have a different standard. Corvair engines are lighter and cheaper. Hmm, could that be another argument for "Better"? If those are your standards, then yes. Statistics say it's safer to walk to work every day than to fly once a week. I'd still choose flying EVERY day if I were able. Does this mean I'm nuts? No, I simply chose a more dangerous mode of transportation because I LIKE it. Perhaps non-Lycoming engine enthusiats come accross a little defensive because they're tired of having to defend their choices?
Just my two cents...Bet I ticked some people off with it too, which is a sad indication of the irritating minority lurking out there.
Christopher Smith <ch601xl(at)gmail.com> wrote: | Quote: | I know I am new to the list but this corvair stuff is just dumb. It seems no one can say the corvair has it's downsides. It has lots of downsides, that's because it's a car engine. But the reason most who choose it is for the cost savings. The engine does not have the data to prove it's reliability. Too few are flying. But I will wager that if you look at the engine failures per capita against a certified engines, it fails more often. One thing is clear.....Corvair people come off as rude when defending the choice. That is what is hurting the engine the most.
On 7/6/06, Phil Maxson <pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com (pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com)> wrote: | Quote: | --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Phil Maxson" <pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com (pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com)>
Paul,
No offense intended, but you are showing your ignorance about the Corvair
conversion. I'm flying one.
If it is as you say, "not clear to you", why don't you accept the input of
experts and those who have been flying for years?
On second thought, don't answer that. Some people like one engine better
than another. In the future, could you please leave the Corvair discussion
to us who are interested in building and flying Corvair engines?
Phil Maxson
601XL/Corvair
Northwest New Jersey
75 hours
|
--
Christopher W. E. Smith
fly1m1
http://ch-601xl.com |
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ch601xl(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 1:43 pm Post subject: Corvair Bashing and other irritating, close-minded individua |
|
|
As a matter of fact I have been looking into the corvair engine. As a possible buyer, I am put off by those trying to promote the corvair engine. I have seen questions ask, and the ones with the answers get attitudes about the question ask. You tell me, should a possible customer be made to feel that way? "Sounds like we have another for the Lycoming side of the fence!" No you have someone wanting info on the corvair!
On 7/6/06, Tom and Bren Henderson <admin(at)arachnidrobotics.com (admin(at)arachnidrobotics.com)> wrote: | Quote: | Sounds like we have another for the Lycoming side of the fence! No problem, there's room for us all! : ) Just make sure you don't become one of those you're harping on. You're correct, there are a few Corvair nuts that hurt the group by posting before thinking, but they are by far the minority. For the most part, Corvair buffs admit the shortcomings of the engine and knowingly accept the tradeoff of hanging one on the front of their aircraft.
I have noticed there are quite a few 'Traditionalists' with the same bad attitude as the Corvair nuts, especially in recent days. You mentioned the Corvair failing more than the 'certified' engines, and we all know you're right. However, that point does little to end the argument of which engine is better. What is better? Owners of retractable gear airplanes often swear by them. They tend to be faster, consume less fuel, etc., but statistics show they ARE more susceptible to accidents. How do these facts answer the question, "Which aircraft are better: Retractable or Fixed Gear?"
It seems many have taken "Safer" to mean "Better". If that is your standard, please feel free to judge by it. Just accept that others have a different standard. Corvair engines are lighter and cheaper. Hmm, could that be another argument for "Better"? If those are your standards, then yes. Statistics say it's safer to walk to work every day than to fly once a week. I'd still choose flying EVERY day if I were able. Does this mean I'm nuts? No, I simply chose a more dangerous mode of transportation because I LIKE it. Perhaps non-Lycoming engine enthusiats come accross a little defensive because they're tired of having to defend their choices?
Just my two cents...Bet I ticked some people off with it too, which is a sad indication of the irritating minority lurking out there.
Christopher Smith < ch601xl(at)gmail.com (ch601xl(at)gmail.com)> wrote: | Quote: | I know I am new to the list but this corvair stuff is just dumb. It seems no one can say the corvair has it's downsides. It has lots of downsides, that's because it's a car engine. But the reason most who choose it is for the cost savings. The engine does not have the data to prove it's reliability. Too few are flying. But I will wager that if you look at the engine failures per capita against a certified engines, it fails more often. One thing is clear.....Corvair people come off as rude when defending the choice. That is what is hurting the engine the most.
On 7/6/06, Phil Maxson <pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com (pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com)> wrote: | Quote: | --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Phil Maxson" < pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com (pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com)>
Paul,
No offense intended, but you are showing your ignorance about the Corvair
conversion. I'm flying one.
If it is as you say, "not clear to you", why don't you accept the input of
experts and those who have been flying for years?
On second thought, don't answer that. Some people like one engine better
than another. In the future, could you please leave the Corvair discussion
to us who are interested in building and flying Corvair engines?
Phil Maxson
601XL/Corvair
Northwest New Jersey
75 hours
|
--
Christopher W. E. Smith
fly1m1
http://ch-601xl.com |
|
--
Christopher W. E. Smith
fly1m1
http://ch-601xl.com
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
admin(at)arachnidrobotics
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 2:19 pm Post subject: Corvair Bashing and other irritating, close-minded individua |
|
|
Then you've come to the right spot! Your first post most certainly had a different 'feel' to it. : ) Thanks for the clarification. I would recommend posting the questions the 'other guys' seem to be avoiding to the list. I guarrantee you'll get answers. As with all things internet related, filter them with a healthy dose of common sense.
Hope you find what you're looking for...
Christopher Smith <ch601xl(at)gmail.com> wrote: | Quote: | As a matter of fact I have been looking into the corvair engine. As a possible buyer, I am put off by those trying to promote the corvair engine. I have seen questions ask, and the ones with the answers get attitudes about the question ask. You tell me, should a possible customer be made to feel that way? "Sounds like we have another for the Lycoming side of the fence!" No you have someone wanting info on the corvair!
On 7/6/06, Tom and Bren Henderson <admin(at)arachnidrobotics.com (admin(at)arachnidrobotics.com)> wrote: | Quote: | Sounds like we have another for the Lycoming side of the fence! No problem, there's room for us all! : ) Just make sure you don't become one of those you're harping on. You're correct, there are a few Corvair nuts that hurt the group by posting before thinking, but they are by far the minority. For the most part, Corvair buffs admit the shortcomings of the engine and knowingly accept the tradeoff of hanging one on the front of their aircraft.
I have noticed there are quite a few 'Traditionalists' with the same bad attitude as the Corvair nuts, especially in recent days. You mentioned the Corvair failing more than the 'certified' engines, and we all know you're right. However, that point does little to end the argument of which engine is better. What is better? Owners of retractable gear airplanes often swear by them. They tend to be faster, consume less fuel, etc., but statistics show they ARE more susceptible to accidents. How do these facts answer the question, "Which aircraft are better: Retractable or Fixed Gear?"
It seems many have taken "Safer" to mean "Better". If that is your standard, please feel free to judge by it. Just accept that others have a different standard. Corvair engines are lighter and cheaper. Hmm, could that be another argument for "Better"? If those are your standards, then yes. Statistics say it's safer to walk to work every day than to fly once a week. I'd still choose flying EVERY day if I were able. Does this mean I'm nuts? No, I simply chose a more dangerous mode of transportation because I LIKE it. Perhaps non-Lycoming engine enthusiats come accross a little defensive because they're tired of having to defend their choices?
Just my two cents...Bet I ticked some people off with it too, which is a sad indication of the irritating minority lurking out there.
Christopher Smith < ch601xl(at)gmail.com (ch601xl(at)gmail.com)> wrote: | Quote: | I know I am new to the list but this corvair stuff is just dumb. It seems no one can say the corvair has it's downsides. It has lots of downsides, that's because it's a car engine. But the reason most who choose it is for the cost savings. The engine does not have the data to prove it's reliability. Too few are flying. But I will wager that if you look at the engine failures per capita against a certified engines, it fails more often. One thing is clear.....Corvair people come off as rude when defending the choice. That is what is hurting the engine the most.
On 7/6/06, Phil Maxson <pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com (pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com)> wrote: | Quote: | --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Phil Maxson" < pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com (pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com)>
Paul,
No offense intended, but you are showing your ignorance about the Corvair
conversion. I'm flying one.
If it is as you say, "not clear to you", why don't you accept the input of
experts and those who have been flying for years?
On second thought, don't answer that. Some people like one engine better
than another. In the future, could you please leave the Corvair discussion
to us who are interested in building and flying Corvair engines?
Phil Maxson
601XL/Corvair
Northwest New Jersey
75 hours
|
--
Christopher W. E. Smith
fly1m1
http://ch-601xl.com |
|
--
Christopher W. E. Smith
fly1m1
http://ch-601xl.com |
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ch601xl(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 2:35 pm Post subject: Corvair Bashing and other irritating, close-minded individua |
|
|
Thank you Tom, But Mr. Maxson post was insulting to someone who just wanted info. Now I know Mr.Maxson's post was not pointed my way but we all just wanted to understand.
On 7/6/06, Tom and Bren Henderson <admin(at)arachnidrobotics.com (admin(at)arachnidrobotics.com)> wrote: | Quote: | Then you've come to the right spot! Your first post most certainly had a different 'feel' to it. : ) Thanks for the clarification. I would recommend posting the questions the 'other guys' seem to be avoiding to the list. I guarrantee you'll get answers. As with all things internet related, filter them with a healthy dose of common sense.
Hope you find what you're looking for...
Christopher Smith < ch601xl(at)gmail.com (ch601xl(at)gmail.com)> wrote: | Quote: | As a matter of fact I have been looking into the corvair engine. As a possible buyer, I am put off by those trying to promote the corvair engine. I have seen questions ask, and the ones with the answers get attitudes about the question ask. You tell me, should a possible customer be made to feel that way? "Sounds like we have another for the Lycoming side of the fence!" No you have someone wanting info on the corvair!
On 7/6/06, Tom and Bren Henderson < admin(at)arachnidrobotics.com (admin(at)arachnidrobotics.com)> wrote: | Quote: | Sounds like we have another for the Lycoming side of the fence! No problem, there's room for us all! : ) Just make sure you don't become one of those you're harping on. You're correct, there are a few Corvair nuts that hurt the group by posting before thinking, but they are by far the minority. For the most part, Corvair buffs admit the shortcomings of the engine and knowingly accept the tradeoff of hanging one on the front of their aircraft.
I have noticed there are quite a few 'Traditionalists' with the same bad attitude as the Corvair nuts, especially in recent days. You mentioned the Corvair failing more than the 'certified' engines, and we all know you're right. However, that point does little to end the argument of which engine is better. What is better? Owners of retractable gear airplanes often swear by them. They tend to be faster, consume less fuel, etc., but statistics show they ARE more susceptible to accidents. How do these facts answer the question, "Which aircraft are better: Retractable or Fixed Gear?"
It seems many have taken "Safer" to mean "Better". If that is your standard, please feel free to judge by it. Just accept that others have a different standard. Corvair engines are lighter and cheaper. Hmm, could that be another argument for "Better"? If those are your standards, then yes. Statistics say it's safer to walk to work every day than to fly once a week. I'd still choose flying EVERY day if I were able. Does this mean I'm nuts? No, I simply chose a more dangerous mode of transportation because I LIKE it. Perhaps non-Lycoming engine enthusiats come accross a little defensive because they're tired of having to defend their choices?
Just my two cents...Bet I ticked some people off with it too, which is a sad indication of the irritating minority lurking out there.
Christopher Smith < ch601xl(at)gmail.com (ch601xl(at)gmail.com)> wrote: | Quote: | I know I am new to the list but this corvair stuff is just dumb. It seems no one can say the corvair has it's downsides. It has lots of downsides, that's because it's a car engine. But the reason most who choose it is for the cost savings. The engine does not have the data to prove it's reliability. Too few are flying. But I will wager that if you look at the engine failures per capita against a certified engines, it fails more often. One thing is clear.....Corvair people come off as rude when defending the choice. That is what is hurting the engine the most.
On 7/6/06, Phil Maxson <pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com (pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com)> wrote: | Quote: | --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Phil Maxson" < pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com (pmaxpmax(at)hotmail.com)>
Paul,
No offense intended, but you are showing your ignorance about the Corvair
conversion. I'm flying one.
If it is as you say, "not clear to you", why don't you accept the input of
experts and those who have been flying for years?
On second thought, don't answer that. Some people like one engine better
than another. In the future, could you please leave the Corvair discussion
to us who are interested in building and flying Corvair engines?
Phil Maxson
601XL/Corvair
Northwest New Jersey
75 hours
|
--
Christopher W. E. Smith
fly1m1
http://ch-601xl.com |
|
--
Christopher W. E. Smith
fly1m1
http://ch-601xl.com |
|
--
Christopher W. E. Smith
fly1m1
http://ch-601xl.com
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
