>  Or Ron Gowan's Long EZ? These are relatively high-time and
> proven conversions. These installations do far more to showcase the
> potential of alternate engines than low-time conversions do.
>
>
> Brett Campbell.
>
> It is also a bad idea for a magazine to lump the rotary in with
> automotive
> piston engines. The two are worlds apart as far as continuous high
> power duty is concerned.
>
> Paul Lamar


I think I've passed Ron Gowan for high time hours in a Long-Ez. Ron had
2-hundred-something, I'm over 500 now. Ron had so much trouble with his
Ross gearbox, he thinks planetaries are no good. I think he has obtained
a non-planetary gearbox from the Canadian company whose name escapes me
at the moment. I also think his original installation was plugs-up,
which is not necessary in a Long-EZ and is probably not a good thing to
do. Kitplanes says they will report on other autoconversions if you let
them know about them, I haven't contacted them yet.

Perry

You would think they would be smart enough to do an Internet search using
google. :)

Paul Lamar

Oops, my bad. For some reason I thought Ron Gowan had at least 1000 hrs on
his conversion. But the fact remains that rotaries have proven capable of
putting up the numbers.

This, combined with the availability of website information and guides, as
well as proven off-the-shelf conversion items such as engine mounts,
redrives and fuel/ ignition control systems that are now available means
that the auto conversion option is available to just about anybody capable
of building an airplane from a kit
Brett & Tiana