Right, because none of the Lycoming and Continental engines built since 1937 have ever had carbs or distribution spiders above the cylinders… and none have been lost to fires caused by overpriming.
Between old wives tales of reliability and the cold facts of repeated failures – who to believe?
Some facts that don’t date back to 1937: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/06/12/lies-coverups-mask-roots-small-aircraft-carnage-unfit-for-flight-part-1/10405323/
My Continental engine actually has no primer, and doesn’t need one. That engine also lacks a lot other things it doesn’t need, for instance a starter or generator or fuel pump. None of that stuff actually holds a plane in the air, in fact it does the opposite. I prefer a plane that has absolutely the minimum amount of stuff that will do the job. If the job on a given day is just getting airborne and having fun (or maybe some cross countries within a few hundred mile radius) very little stuff is needed.
I’ll do my best going forward to avoid fiery carnage or plummeting to my death 
Some facts that don’t date back to 1937: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/06/12/lies-coverups-mask-roots-small-aircraft-carnage-unfit-for-flight-part-1/10405323/
On a quick read, at least 50% of that article is low grade journalistic bullsh1t.
They have some good snippets in there, like the Cessna seats which can unlock and slide off. But
is pure Daily Trash stuff.
Shorrick – Can you please refrain from posting anti-GA pandering sensationalism articles from USA today ?
edit: Looks like Peter beat me to it
The USA Today article, like the newspaper itself, is cartoonish nonsense. That said, neither of my planes have adjustable seats because they don’t need them (there may be a theme in my aeronautical purchases)
Back on topic, more or less, I spoke with a guy who flies his Jabiru powered aircraft around the globe. His engine has the same type of Bing CV carb as the older Rotaxes. However his engine uses just one carb, located below and behind the engine at the bottom of the firewall. The carb is installed with a spigot/hose clamp mount that doesn’t control the installed angular position of the carb. It was interesting to learn that when removing and replacing the carb, unless he marks and reinstalls it in precisely the same angular position, his fuel distribution and individual cylinder EGTs will change substantially. I can imagine that would be a big issue when flying across an ocean!
Silvaire wrote:
crankshaft with needle bearing
The crankshaft is supported by 5 plain bearings as far as I know. I haven’t heard of needle bearings on a 912 (but then I have never opened one).
Here’s a 912 crankshaft, showing three plain main bearings, one piece con-rods and built up crankshaft construction. One piece rods typically would mean needle rod bearings, as per Rotax two stroke practice, but either way the issue is the one piece rods themselves and the associated crankshaft construction: you can’t replace the bearings without pressing the crankshaft apart into pieces. I’ve done that job on motorcycle crankshafts myself, it’s skilled work. I understand Rotax wants you to instead buy a whole new crank/rod assembly as pictured below when you overhaul the engine.
As an aside, in the old days when Japanese four cylinder motorcycle crankshafts were pressed together, it was commonplace for a high performance engine to weld them after pressing them together. That made them really hard to overhaul!
Also in common with motorcycle engines is the lack of camshaft bearings – the 912 apparently runs the cam directly in the case. Obviously if you really wanted to overhaul a 912 you might end up replacing almost the whole thing, and I’m sure Rotax would prefer you to buy a new engine at substantial expense when TBO time comes.
Where is this motor ???
a big failure of rotax
V6- 220 hp or 300 hp……
http://www.aero-news.net/ANNTicker.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=d0917684-17b8-4d47-bb55-c62698d155c8
That might all contribute to the fact, that Rotax only sold 40k engines of the 91x-line, which – as we all know – is rediculous few in the aviation world, especially nowadays.
Enough Rotax bashing for today, I go to bed
