THill182

I wanted to update this thread and close the loop. Actually, I am still unsure of what is/was going on. Long story short, as I keep flying my plane I realize that I really don't have a good fix on my oil level. Specifically, when I park the plane in my hangar and come back two days later I usually (in the winter) had about 6qrts (a little over) on the dip stick. After I leave it in the hangar for 2 weeks it then shows 8 qrts; or almost that much. In other words, it seems to me that for whatever reason it now appears as if I am burning more oil, because of different intervals at which I fly and check oil (also, I have a new shop do my oil changes; not sure that matters). Best I can tell, my oil consumption is actually reasonable (about 1qrt per 8 hours or so; I now have about 16+ hours on the oil after the last change, and added 2 Qrts; and stand at 8 qrts on the dipstick). What is weird is that I had this plane for 10 years, so have very standard procedures. What is new is that I fly at less regular intervals (sometimes a lot, sometimes not at all for 2 weeks or more), and that I am using Camguard regularly (nobody claims it can hurt; lots of people say it works; so why not; perhaps it makes more oil stick to the cylinder walls for longer periods of time?). Anyway, thanks for all the input and reference points. I am happy for now, and also have an annual come up at Don Maxwell's in a month or so; I will ask him to look at my Cylinder #5 once more if he sees anything unusual.

They have pretty pictures of it, and a not-so-unreasonable price attached to it. If I could get rid of my vacuum system I could also get 6lbs or so back of useful load (maybe more). Anyway, didn't realize that it actually isn't out yet. Thanks!

Does anyone have experience (yet) with the KI 300, as a replacement for the KI 256 on older Mooney's? Can I use it to make myself entirely electric (2000 M20R; the KI 256 is the only thing requiring a vacuum pump). It seems like a reasonable path when the KI 256 needs to be overhauled. Any opinions/experiences?

Here is something I didn't know: The Acclaim has a reported TBO of 2,200 hours; for the Ovation, TBO is undefined/not-reported at the Mooney site. Two questions: Why? Has anyone ever seen 2,200 hours between overhaul on a turbocharged (or any) 550 Continental?. Are they kidding?

OK; so for what it's worth: I typically fly at 2600 RPM LOP; since the simple 14.9 (* FF) approach is a good approximation to HP when running LOP, here are then the power settings at finer granularity: A few notes: 1. The first two columns have numbers from the power/FF table of the POH (or supplement) 2. The last 4 columns are computed; so that 2.1. For numbers from the POH, I subtracted 8% of power from the ROP operation as per the fine print (actually, if I compute them using the 14.9 multiplier, I get the same results) 2.2. For the computed numbers I used the 14.9 x FF formula 3. In the last two columns, I expressed the resulting HP as a percent of 310HP (post-conversion per STC on my Mooney) or 270HP (pre-conversion, i.e., Ovation 2) I usually run at 12.4 to 12.8 GpH, so that keeps me below 70% power given the original 270HP rating. Hopefully, that will give me the longest expected lifetime of happy motoring before an overhaul...

Aha! (Ignoring the fine print has gotten me into more trouble!). That makes sense now. The horsepower and % figures on the 310 chart are for ROP, and I must subtract 8% for LOP operations. I normally run at slightly below 13GpH (so, 12.6 to 12.8 GpH; about 50F LOP) at 8,000 or 9,000 ft. That would give me a fairly low power setting, which in my tests costs me roughly 8kts-9kts or so compared to ROP 75% power. PS: I will also go to the Continental IO550 seminars on line as suggested by JEFF_S; thanks!

For reference, here are the charts; still not sure this compares 242HP for 310HP Ovation, at 78% and 2550RPM is 14.8 Gph; on the 270HP Ovation 14.5 GPH gets you 75% power; so 30HP difference at comparable fuel flows? Must be doing something wrong.PowerFFCharts.pdfPowerFFCharts.pdf

This confuses me: When I fly LOP the horsepower of the engine should be a direct function of the fuel flow; presumably you just multiply the fuel flow (GpH) by 14.9. When I then divide that number by the max horsepower of the engine, then I should get % power. These computations worked well and mapped to the power charts of my 270HP Ovation 2; but when I look at the 310HP Ovation 3 numbers (I have the conversion to 310HP), they don’t. For example, the 310HP power chart shows a fuel flow of 13.4 GpH to yield 217HP and 70% power. But 13.4*.14.9=199.66. Why is that?

PS: One other quick question: When I change oil, usually, after putting in 8Qrts and flying it for an hour or so, the dip stick settles at 7qrts or less. So we have been putting in closer to 9qrts to start. Does anyone know if overfilling (to 9 qrts at oil changes) can do any harm the engine? (Note that I have an air/oil separator installed). Just curious about what can/not do harm to the IO550....

Thanks for all the feedback! Regarding the spark plug, it wasn't "wet" per se, just dark with carbon deposits, so looked like it burned oil (the other spark plugs where gray). We did the borescope without anything remarkable turning up; oil change (oil filter) also normal; mailed in the oil sample. If that is normal then I just keep flying it and check the oil more regularly. As I said, all indications on the EGT/CHT, oil pressure, and performance have been normal. The mechanic on my field specializes on engine work and rebuilds, so this is in his "wheelhouse" ; he agrees that repair is always preferable and something likely indicated here if the oil usage doesn't stabilize or return to normal. When I first got the plane over 12 years ago, it was used with about 800 hours. At that point the engine was in bad shape, burned oil at a qrt every 5 hours or so, and CHT's would not stay below 400 in climbout no matter what I did. Eventually, all cyclinder heads cracked likely because I transitioned in from a C182RG with a bullet proof carbureted Lycoming -- so flew the plane by the book which always gave me very high CHT's. Anyway, after the top-overhaul about 1000 hours ago the cylinders have not given me any problems. Hope they won't start now.

I put that hole in a long time ago, and before the top overhaul which now has 1000 hours on it. It did solve my high CHT problem on #5 quite nicely. I should have a report back on the borescope inspection and oil analysis very soon. I hope you'all are right that it is a stuck ring. What surprised me was how suddenly this came about. For the last oil change at 30 hours, I used 1 qrt. For the fist 10 hours after the current oil change I didn't put any oil in it, and then suddenly no matter how much oil I put in I am stuck below 6qrt on the dipstick (even after sitting in the same hanger, and for a few days to let the oil settle; also I have an air-oil separator, so usually, when I am filled up at 8Qrts I stay there for a long time).

Thanks for replies! I have been flying regularly, with occasional breaks for up to 3 weeks. I am using Camguard to hopefully prevent rust. There is no oil on the floor, or any signs of oil leaking. I have had small oil leaks, and usually, they leave tiny droplets of oil on the windshield after flights, as the oil works its way out of the engine -- anyway that is what it looked like before. The engine compartment is dry. I have the #5 vent hole, and it did fix the temperature problem. After the overhaul and for the last 900 hours, I rarely see CHT's above 380F, and only on very hot summer days climbing out. In cruise everything settles at LOP with CHT's below 340F, and on cooler days 320F. (Although, for about a year after the 310 conversion, a shop set up my fuel flow too low, and consistent with the 280HP version, resulting in relatively hot climb-outs). The engine runs great, and I have detected nothing unusual for the past 20 hours of X-country flying. #5 does not run any hotter than the other cylinders, and performance and LOP power settings are identical and as good as it has always been. The ONLY thing different is that starting last month on 3 flights, I had to put in a quart of oil (3-5 hour flights). Also, I "feel" as if as if this started only after the first 12 hours or so on the new oil. So perhaps this has to do with the older oil (but never noticed that before). Anyway, I will analyze the oil, change the oil, and then fly it for 10 hours and watch if the oil consumption stabilizes or returns to normal. The mechanic at my airport specializes on engine overhauls so I believe has all the equipment including borescope to look into the cylinder; i'll ask him to do that next also...

I know this must have been discussed before, but I cannot find it using the search facilities: My M20R (2000, 310hp upgrade) has about 1000 hours on the engine (actually the top; the bottom was overhauled separately about 500 hours ago; long story...). I started noticing increased oil use, and we did a hot compression check. All came out at >70 except #5 (the "hot one"), which clocked in at 62. Further, the spark plugs showed some signs of burned oil. The other spark plugs where clean. I am doing an oil analysis this week. If that comes back clean (the last one 3 months ago had very little metal, below average), would you recommend I pull the cylinder and replace it? If so, how much should that cost, approximately? Note that the engine is running great otherwise, and as I said, the bottom part is overhauled and has less than 600 hours. My plan was to fly for another 800 hours or so, and then put a new engine in it. What also worries me a bit is that the oil usage came up suddenly. After the last oil change, I used about 1QRT for every 10 to 15 hours. Now it is more like a Qrt for 4 to 5 hours or less. Does anyone else have experience with these types of symptoms? As always, words of wisdom and from the "been-there-done-that" fellow pilots are greatly appreciated!

Thanks rgpilot; that is what occurred to me when I realized that while flying the bug, enabling the A/P outputs won't disconnect the autopilot; so it is the autopilot Approach Mode that is "incompatible" with the enabling of A/P outputs, and hence disconnects the autopilot. That actually makes sense given what I understand how this works logically. Thanks, I will try that and adjust my procedure accordingly!

I have a question for those of you flying the original KFC225 with a WAAS Garmin 4/530, as it was installed on the original pre-glass Ovations etc.: I have never figured out how best to transition smoothly from the Approach mode on the autopilot to the coupled-glideslope Approach mode operation on RNAVS. So here is how it works, let's say on a T-layout RNAV with Glideslope guidance: When I am cleared to the approach, and get close to the initial approach fix, I punch the APProach button on the KFC225. I then use the autopilot to descend to the respective altitudes along the approach. Sometime closing in on the final approach leg of the approach, the Garmins warn me that Glideslope outputs are available. To enable them, I need to push the PROC button, and select Enable A/P Outputs. All that is described in the manuals I have. BUT: when I do that, the autopilot disconnects and starts blinking. Usually, I can turn off and then on the autopilot and that fixes it (couples the approach). But I never figured out how to do that reliably. (For example, the last two approaches I flew, I ended up doing the final approach by hand because I didn't want to get distracted punching buttons). How do others do this? What is the correct sequence to reliably couple the approach without disconnecting the autopilot ever (not that I don't practice by-hand approaches; but in the real soup to minimums I prefer to be the backup and let the autopilot fly, while I scan the altitude and look out the window for signs of seeing the runway…). PS: The last approach, I flew with the Nav BUG, and then when I enabled the A/P glideslope outputs, the autopilot didn’t disconnect. Maybe that is the technique? Fly the bug, until you get glideslope output?

I had the 310hp conversion done to my 2000 M20R with the 2-bladed toothpick prop. As far as upgrades go -- it's a no brainer. Would do it again in a second. Final cruise speeds are not much different (unless to go pedal-to-the-metal -- not something I do...) but the takeoff and climb performance are well worth it. Essentially, I can fly now in and out of any airport -- even in the mountains -- any time with reasonable fuel and useful load. Landings are also simpler, as the 2-bladed Ovation tended to float forever unless you observed very closely the proper touch-down speeds. In fact, if you read the Ovation accidents the bounced-landing-with-bent-prop accident is perhaps the most common accident for that type. This is now much harder to do with the three-bladed prop which provides a great speed break on landing. Drawback is slightly worse glide distance if prop ever stops spinning. Anyway, no question that I'd do it again.

Thanks for this feedback! So as a practical matter, I am using aluminum tape which works great, and gives me the flexibility to control/tune the oil temps quite nicely (I have a lot of experience). Usually I "adjust" twice or thrice a year (summer, fall/early winter, deep winter); my target is to keep temps between 175F to 210F in cruise. On climb-out try to stay below 225F; normally, I never see temps greater than 210F even on climb-out in the middle of the summer in the Mid-West.

No, I don't have the winterization kit. That is another thing I will look into. By the way, I know that the oil temps are correctly measured (had that checked), so I just have to find another way to keep the engine warm.

Just to follow up; did all that and replaced the vernatherm valve just in case -- no effect. Still running too cool (at 10,000 ft and 6C ambient, running 65% LOP, I got 167F -- below the 170F yellow arc). I think the engine just runs cold. Anyway, I will "winterize" as I have done before to manage.

Well; I used to have a Cessna 182RG with a Lycoming O540; which was bullet proof. Nothing ever went wrong with that engine no matter how I ran it, and if you look on ASO or Controller, you will find many 182RG's with 2400 hours on the engine (TBO is 2000).. Then I transitioned to an Ovation. I flew it according to the handbook, and quickly burned up the engine. At about 600 (200 of which I put on; the previous owner also used the POH settings and 75% power), all cylinders needed to be replaced (two had been replaced before then), because of cracks running from the injectors to the spark plugs. Also, before that, oil consumption started to increase. Since then I have learned to fly at 65% power, and LOP, watching CHT's. I haven't had any engine problems related to cylinders for a few years now, and compression looks great. I would echo the other comments: It is tempting to run these engines at full (75%) power as "advertised".. But it is better to look at long-body Mooneys as efficient travel machines, where you get good speeds (not the advertised 200kts etc.) with miserly fuel consumption LOP. I routinely see 165 to 175 kts between 8000 ft to12,000 ft, LOP burning 12 to 13 gph -- not shabby (plane has air conditioning and TKS -- both slow it down significantly; I would expect others to get 5 to 10 kts more..). I have no experience with turbocharged planes. But the lesson I have learned is that the IO550 needs to be babied. That is very different from the Lycoming O540 that I used to fly.

That is interesting, and very different from what I see. My temps are almost directly correlated with ambient temps. So that means I have a problem with said valve. I run 100 Aeroshell all year (preheat in winter). There is a longer story around the engine overhaul, but either way I think it is all resolved now (engine running well). Except this problem, of course, which I now will investigate... Thanks! TOM

Thanks for the advice; really appreciate it. It was my understanding that this valve was properly set when the engine was overhauled and a new oil cooler was installed. I recall that the oil temperature gage was calibrated and also, I know that it reads the ambient temperature when the engine is cold. However, I have had a lot of engine issues for a while (oil leaks, eventually traced to a missing seal), and it is possible that something broke or wasn't properly reinstalled. So I will have that checked next. Thanks! TOM

I have a 2000 Ovation, with the O3 upgrade (310hp). After my last engine overhaul, my engine runs very cool. Typically, in the winter I now put aluminum tape over the oil cooler to maintain >170F oil temps in cruise (LOP operations). But here is my question: Last week I flew all the way from the Canadian border down to Oklahoma. Starting in Montana, the temps were near-freezing at 9k ft with oil temps as low as 165F in cruise. When I got to Oklahoma, the temps at 11k ft were 18C, with oil temps at 198F. So which is worse, cold oil or warn/hot oil? If I were to "winterize" my oil cooler I would run at 210-230F on climb-out when it is hot (to get 185F when it is cold). Does anyone else have this problem with Ovations? Thanks! TOM