Reliability----This brings up some really good questions and considerations about re-drives. Your basically have 3 types,---- belt, planetary gear, and spur gear.
I saw a video of some of the testing Subaru did on their EJ series engine in the car on the test track, they were down right murderous and--- no failures. Most of the failure of our converted engines is not engine failure, it is CONVERSION FAILURE !!!!!!!!!!!!
Tony
BINGO.
In situ (in the car) the EJ-22's are amazing. That is where and how they were designed to be used.
Take the engine out of the car, attach a redrive and non soob components, run it in a high vibration environment at aircraft RPM and load factors and we have a whole new game.
EJ-25's have problems even in the cars. The early years esp. had head gasket issues.
Issue.........................................................Soob.......Aircraft Engine
Purpose design............................................n............y
Manufacturer support...................................n............y
Designed to turn prop...................................n...........y
Manufactuer service flaw tracking (aircraft).....n............y
Mechanic feedback to mfgr on flaws...............n............y
AD or Service Builitin system........................n.............y
Mfg designed and built redive (if needed)........n............y
Designed for high RPM use............................n ............y
Mfg standardized mounting and hardware........n............y
Mfg cooling system used................................n............y
Mfg electrical and charging system used...........?............y
Able to function after charging or elect fail.......n(few).....y
Fully redundant ignition system......................n(vfew)...y
Large numbers of standardized installations......n...........y
Designed for high power:weight......................n...........y
"over engineered" for application.....................n...........y
Known documented usage and mech history.....n(if new).. common
Adapted from FI to carb..................................common..n
Stock manafold not used................................common...n
Failures likey to be catastrophic ("out")............common...n
Cooling problems common..............................y.............n
Crank failures common...................................y (induced) n
Redive application raises thrust line..................common....n (not sig)
High investment return on resale value..............n............y
Again I am not trying to throw a wet blanket on all of the soob lovers.
I love soobs myself and it is indeed a testment to their design that they can perform as well as they do when adapted to aircraft use.
A dangerous issue as I see it is when anecdotal evidence (like seen here in this thread) is used to try to convice the unexperienced new comers that an auto-conversion is as reliable as a purpose built aircraft engine. That is simply not true.
I LOVE my soob gyros but I don't have the confidence in them that I do in an aircraft engine.
All aircraft engines can fail but how often and how catastrophic the failure is dramaticly changes between engines and applications.
I personally know several people that bought used gyros or kits that could have afforded aircraft engine powered machines if they had exercised patience. They then became frustrated by the recurrent problems and tinkering and left our sport for good.
We don't have much choice for affordable engines to power 2 place gyros, but single place machines we can get affordable 2-stroke used Rotax engines for.
Please read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence
If you have the money or can get an aircraft engine if you get a loan or wait another year to two, go for the aircraft engine.
If the only possible way you can afford to fly is to use an auto-conversion then welcome to the club. However, don't convince yourself, your passingers or others new to the sport that the engine has the same qualities as a purpose built aircraft engine. You really do get what you pay for.
.