peterh337
There is a big difference which is that engine management is hardly rocket science and during 99% of the average flight one never touches the engine controls.
If you had to fiddle with an engine every 5 minutes and/or it needed a PhD, there would be a market for electronic controls. But one doesn't, which is why there isn't.
The Lyco/Conti engines are heat dissipation (CHT) limited at anytime over about 75% of max rated HP, and are heat dissipation limited below that if the airflow is not enough, so a FADEC controller isn't going to be able to do much beyond running them rich during those phases... which is exactly what we do.
There are also so many complete muppets working in GA companies that I would not trust them to design a FADEC which lasts 1/10 as long as my 3 control cables
I concurr with most of your post however, the bit I bolded for you is simply not true. I regularly run engines at higher than 75% power, 85+% even and the CHT's are very good indeed, at times as low as 300-310F and at worst 330F. In fact this is cooler than a full rich takeoff. They are done at high power settings Lean Of Peak.
If you wish to run ROP and waste fuel go for it, but if you have CHT problems in a CONFORMING engine then there is a baffle issue.
Otherwise yes a full fadec system is really like having an automatic beer can opener. Cool gadget but really what does it do for the money?
Cars....another problem altogether and why they have BSFC's that are usually worse than our old Lycosaurus and CMI's.