[Silly Little Cars] cushmans on craigs

[Alec Bennett]

Having owned both an air cooled ('83) and a water cooled ('90) I have
to hugely disagree that the air cooleds are near as tasty as the water
cooled ones. I'd estimate the air cooleds at 1/2 the power, much more
prone to breakdown, and no heat.

Of course much of this could have been b/c a) my watercooled is almost
10 years younger, b) I'm a lazy bastard who doesn't do a tuneup until
I have a roadside breakdown, and c) I bought my water cooled from a
lazy bastard who didn't do tuneups until he had a roadside breakdown.

But I'm sticking by my theory.

As far as Cushman info, there's a couple of interesting links in the
Silly Little Wiki here:

http://www.sillylittlecars.com/wiki/index.php?title=Company







On 12/7/07, Dan Das Mann <dandasmann at gmail.com> wrote:
> is there a written history of the cushman engines and changes over the
> years. i am interested in three wheeled vehicles from 1970 on. i think that
> if we had a better understanding about these cars, we could make better
> choices and begin to save more of the older models from the dump.
> -dannn
>
> On Dec 7, 2007 2:08 PM, <Directpart at aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > The air cooled is arguably the better engine. Plenty of parts available
> and much less expensive.
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> Check out AOL Money & Finance's list of the hottest products and top money
> wasters of 2007.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Silly Little Cars Email List
> > sillylittlecars at sillylittlecars.com
> >
> http://lists.sillylittlecars.com/listinfo.cgi/silly_little_cars-sillylittlecars.com
> > Use the wiki at http://sillylittlecars.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Silly Little Cars Email List
> sillylittlecars at sillylittlecars.com
> http://lists.sillylittlecars.com/listinfo.cgi/silly_little_cars-sillylittlecars.com
> Use the wiki at http://sillylittlecars.com
>
>
>
>