"Stan" wrote:

> Based on the above wouldn't the Corvair seem to be the better
> choice? What is the advantage of the o200 vs the Corvair or the
> Corvair over the o200? What is the time between overhaul on a
> Corvair?

The difference between the two boils down to the O-200 is a real 
airplane engine, designed for the job, with compromises to make it last. 
  This includes lower compression for reduced stressed, and a more 
primitive carb for simplicity.  The biggest thing with the O-200 is that 
it's purpose made for the job, with giant bearing near the prop to 
handle prop loads.

The Corvair was not designed to run wide open all the time, but if you 
put a $2000 crankshaft in it and add a $1000 front bearing, the crank 
becomes pretty reliable and there are few weak links left, one of which 
is the semi-rare cam gear failure (and we know what to watch for on that 
now).  Rebuilds on a Corvair are pretty cheap, compared to the O-200, 
and heads and cylinders survive rather well.  Corvair parts are rather 
plentiful, and simple stuff like gears are still made and cheap, rather 
than rare and expensive.

Having said that, if reliability is your number one goal, the O-200 is 
the way to go.  If efficiency and performance is your goal, the Corvair 
may be the way to go.  Cost is probably about the same either way, as 
far as initial installation, depending on luck and scrounging ability.

It's too early to tell what the TBO is on the Corvair...there just 
aren't enough hours on them yet.  I'd bet serious money that it's longer 
on the Continental than the Corvair though!  I don't think anybody would 
disagree with that.

I have a lot invested in Corvairs, and will stick with them.  They are 
far better than VWs, both in reliability and safety.  And I have two of 
them ready to run already.  No, I'm not trying to sell either of them. 
If I were starting over and an O-200 presented itself for a reasonable 
price, I'd seriously considering buying it.  With a new 4340 crank in my 
Corvair though, I'm good with that option too, especially since they are 
both paid for.


Mark Langford
ML at N56ML.com
http://www.n56ml.com


Reply via email to