You're right Allen, but in fact a plaintiff's lawyer won't even take the case because he only makes money on the win, and pays all costs up front betting on the win. To line up experts and pay himself for all the prep is simply not worth it.
I provided the EAA form to the guy who sold me his Avid, it is a fine form, but you really don't need it. The EAA says that nobody ever won a suit against anybody else when flying an experimental aircraft. Juries simply laugh when the defense attorney reads the definition of Experimental, and when they see the large placard on the dashboard. It is a shame when folks strip the airworthiness cert from their aircraft and de-register it out of fear of being sued.
I did a fairly simple calculation. The springs bottom at about 12 feet per second of landing impact, at about 4 g's. If you land that hard in a Cessna, you make a fireball, part 23 requirements are about 8 feet per second. The springs are simply not the problem.
This is a reminder of the tremendous weight cost of a certified 4 stroke, or a car engine, and why most of us fly happily with a Rotax or its equivilent. For an aircraft with 400-500 lbs of useful load, the extra 125-140 pounds for the luxury of a big block 4 stroke (the Lycoming at 241 lbs is a perfect example) means I would leave my passenger on the ground. I have a 91 HP Rotax 670 that would read 101 lbs on the scale the Lycoming hangs on. The Rotax 912 is only a few pounds more at maybe 120 lbs, and it has 115 HP. Giving up 125 pounds of payload is a decision that should not be made lightly, especially when good engines at 100 ish horsepower can be had at 100 lbs. Barnstormers is full of Subaru Avids that carry their pilot and some gas.
Allen, I found that the high temperature under the cowl was enough to cause an over rich problem because the temperature alone is like an altitude increase. It was so bad before i installed the scoop that I can get excellent run up with cowling off, when I put the cowling on I couldn't get past 3800 RPM!
AKFlyer, I had to work on the leaning of the engine since I fly at 6000 ft runway elevation. I had to back down the main jets to 165 to allow a good takeoff, at 180 the full throttle takeoffs bog down and I can't get over 4000 rpm. With the 165 I get a clean burn and 6550 rpm at 60 mph, at about 8 GPH, which equates to about 75 HP, just right for a 91 HP engine at 8,000 feet.. I reinstalled my Hacman, and the 180 jets, and now I just lean a bunch on takeoff to get a nice power situation. I also noticed that the under cowl temperatures were very high (I used my wife's digital meat thermometer to read the carb inlet temp), and it was a solid 25 degrees F above ambient, which also leans the air like crazy. I cut a hole in the forward right cowl, and used a plastic window scoop to blow fresh air on the rotax air cleaners, and the temp went down to about 5 to 10 degrees above ambient.
I use the Facet pump at Rotax Rick's advice, the regular small air pump is only good for 8 GPH or so, and the 670 can ask for a lot more, up to 13, so the extra electric pump provides that.
About 45 hours total. Great behavior on the engine, lots of power. I pulled off the exhaust Y and looked at the cylinder walls, still shows the original cross hatching and looks great. Starts perfectly. More fuel flow than the 582, I average about 6 gph at 90 mph at 9000 feet. Hacman works well. Very happy with the install.
What did the guy who sold you the engine say was the Horsepower of the new engine? Rotax Rick's 670 puts out 91 horse power, and mine shows that for sure. I think 120 psi is a good compression number, I will check mine and post it when I get home.