The whole lean of peak (LOP) versus rich of peak (ROP) discussion seems to be broken down into teams for a carbureted engine. Strong believers on each side. I was heavily in the LOP club for several years and enjoyed the reduction in fuel-guzzling and happily accepted the slightly reduced cruising speed. With 882 hours on my O-470 in four years, I was a maniac with the JPI in adjusting the LOP setting just so. But I've now been through two cylinders. Lately, I've been asking every higher time GA piot I meet and the engine shops what setting they recommend. Interestingly the feedback has been ROP is much better for your engine. One Baron pilot just told me he had 700 hours on both engines, sold the plane, and in a year the new pilot flying LOP had to pull three cylinders. The well-respected machine shop said only to fly the O-470 at least 50 ROP. I've had other similar stories as well. The fuel burn difference in my 182 is three gallons per hour at 100 ROP versus 50 LOP. It goes faster ROP. I'm sure this thread will have vigorous fans on each side of the argument. It always does. It's almost like talking politics but with pilots. So I'm curious what other frequent flyers have experienced LOP versus ROP and if others have now abandoned the LOP route as well based on actual experience.