ORIGINAL: jimmyjames213
ORIGINAL: MJD
But jj.. your one positive experience doesn't change anything about the fact that a bunch of people got stuck with .32's that starve for fuel due to messed up fuel inlets on the carb. A lot of people have GMS .32's that run great - so what? A bunch of others have troubles. There's no excuse for that and unless someone has the patience and wherewithall to fix it themselves, IMHO there are far better engine gambles out there. Caveat emptor.
MJD
im stating my expierence like he asked for, if you have a different expierence then post it (like you did) and the op can make his decision.
i think a lot of the problems with the .32 were trying to use them on the c-130 (a 4 engine plane), at least thats where i heard many many complaints about the engine
That's all good, I understand, but it far more common than that. Sorry not to jump on you, but I thought the reports were more well known. With the frequency of issues I found in just a little research, and having encountered it first hand on the one and only example I handled, I think it is a bad gamble. I would ignore one report same as you might, sure, and chock it up to a random flaw. It's a batch or QC problem, not just one guy with a C-130 having troubles. Sorry if I sounded pissy, I wasn't meaning to be, but I was trying to stress that when a bunch of people have trouble with one product, add the number of people who you haven't heard from for a variety of reasons [which is always the case with consumer feedback], and you have what I define as an unacceptable quality control issue and a bunch of bad engines out there. I know a bunch of folks have not had problems - but that does not make it a good product. It's a great deal if you can buy it cheap and don't care about having to repair the carb if it bad - the engine runs like a top otherwise and lots of power.
MJD