irishpilot

Thanks for the great post. The engine shop had a set of used cylinders that are in great shape. They overhauled them at good price and they stand by their work. I've got 850 til TBO so they should get me there. Buying new ones now didn't seem like the best option. I'll be putting them back on tomorrow and hopefully ready to be back in the air by Thursday Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

The shop came back and said that the putting on the cylinder walls is too much. They do not recommend a rebuild. The rings on the Pistons haven't been made in 30 years. They can sell refurbished cylinders for $1100 each, or new for $2200. They recommend refurbished unless I'm doing a full rebuild. Ya'll have any insight? Is it true an engine overhaul adds 25% to an aircraft value? Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

So the "ring debris" mentioned earlier was just carbon? What's odd is that oil consumption jumped all at once after running it for several months. With cylinder corrosion, I would expect it "$#!t the bed" the first time it was run after being idle or gradually decline over the next 20hrs. Running fine for 30-50hrs and then having a spike in consumption surprises me. Afirm, the ring debris turned out to be a lot of carbon. Yesterday I rechecked the debris and it was just a lot of carbon. The filter had a few small aluminum slivers. With the amount of scratches on the top of piston #4, we are pretty sure it was the source. The oil consumption was a qt/3-4 hrs and within the last 7 hrs went to 1qt/1-2 hrs and the breather tube was pushing oil onto the belly. Plus it fouled plugs on the last flight. Definitely a noticeable change for me within the last 7 hrs. Any theories on the sudden jump? Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

FWIW, I never suggested just throwing new rings in. IRAN (inspect and repair as necessary) can be as much or as little as you dictate. Check and possibly replace valves and valve guides? Absolutely. Hone the cylinders? Absolutely. Repaint? Most shops will do that, too. You pay extra to get the word "overhaul" on the 8130 airworthiness tags, even if they do the exact same work. Since there is technically no such thing as a "Top Overhaul", I'm not sure what the point would be, especially if you plan to keep the airplane to TBO. Thanks for the clarification. I do appreciate all the time everyone is taking to help me with this issue. Plane ownership is not for the faint of heart. Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

I'm curious how your old engine looked inside. We opened ours in 99 at 1850 and 32 years and it looked fine. A broken exhaust valve had deminished confidence and in the engine. On initial inspection, the internals looked good. No issues on the inner case, crank, or cam. There is some slight wear on the cam lobes, but no pitting or corrosion. We are going to continue inspecting while we wait on the engine shop's cylinder assessment. Sent from my SM-T817V using Tapatalk

No missing or broken rings. The #4 piston was the worst but all four have blow by. With the amount of work it takes to pull the top end apart, I don't feel that comfortable just throwing new rings in. It may get to TBO, it may not. Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

I pulled the jugs off and found evidence of blowby on the pistons as well as evidence of where rust formed on the cylinder walls. Pistons were pretty wet with oil and carbon buildup. Initial inspection of crankcase and cam looks good. No excessive wear. Here's a few shots. I'm dropping off the cylinders tomorrow. I'll be interested to see the engine shop's assessment. What do ya'll think?

The engine is a wide deck and 1/2" valves. Took a while to get all the aluminum housing off as well as the lower cowling. Mooney aircraft do not have a lot of free space! Going to pull the jugs off tomorrow. Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

I found those notes as well. So, just to make sure I understand, if the engine has 7/16 valves TBO is 1200 and 1/2 TBO is 2000? Also, any way to tell if it is a wide deck or narrow? I've read conflicting info.

I think your math work is correct. Does the 1660TT calculation match the total airframe time? If you can determine with reasonable confidence that the cylinders have 1660TT on them, then OH is certainly a viable option. Yes, it does match. Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Shadrach, the log showed 480 hrs when it was overhauled. It makes no mention of specifics accomplished. I will assume that the cylinders were overhauled and not replaced. The engine currently has 1180. So the cylinders have 1180 SMOH and 1660 TT. Am I doing the math right? Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Thanks for the insight. There is a lot to think about. As far as resale goes, I may have to bite the bullet and do an engine overhaul. It it tough since the engine has 850 "hours" left. I will post more once we get access to the internals next week. Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

The log entry states nothing specific. We will know more when we pull the jugs on Monday. We will run them up to the engine shop and see if they can be overhauled. I do fly IFR and the family, so just doing one cylinder is out. It's either new cylinders or overhauled. That's if we don't find anything wrong with the bottom end. Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Sent from my SM-T817V using Tapatalk

Sorry, here is the full story. I fly 5 hrs per week and the engine started running rough. Oil consumption jumped to 1 qt per hr and if ended up fouling two plugs. We pulled the lower plugs and found lots of oil pooled. We cut the oil filter and found lots of ring debris. Compression went from 72 three months ago to 58. The logs show an overhaul in 1973 but nothing since. We can't find anything newer other than the standard annuals. I have to assume they haven't seen any work since. Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

The engine was last overhauled in 1973, and it has 1170 hrs. Not much flying which is what caused the the higher iron reading. I won't buy used. I hope they can be overhauled. The Lycoming ones are $2300 a piece. Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

It's all about speed and geometry for intercepts. Although a helicopter can fly slow, it can't intercept as well when not high aspect. Any modern fighter can fly Cessna speeds with flaps down while their wingman keeps a tactical airspeed. As long as folks check the status of TFRs, they won't have to worry about getting intercepted.

Well, my M20e needs a top end rebuild and I've done some searching and it looks like I can refurbish my cylinders (if they are in good enough condition) or I can buy new. From what I read, if I go new I only have the choice of Lycoming. Is this true? It is for an IO-360A1A. If so, where are the best prices and any lesson learned? Thanks for the help.

I fly both military (in MOA/Restricted Airpsace) and civilian so I understand the issue from both sides. I agree with previous posts about flying through MOAs VFR without talking to anyone. Are you legal to do so, yes. Is it smart, no. The best way to deal with active MOAs is to either skirt the outside of the airspace or go above/below it. If you absolutely cannot go around an active MOA, my recommendation is find the MOA frequency and make your intentions known. Some MOAs will be monitored by a ground controller on VHF and they can help you out. If not, still announce your intentions, but realize most military aircraft are on the UHF freq. I know it sucks when some of the MOAs out West are so large (especially when you are paying for the gas), but always try to talk to someone if the MOA is hot, that way controllers can give a pointout to the military aircraft and advise them to keep clear of you. You did the conservative thing by staying IFR. Sent from my SM-T817V using Tapatalk

I am curious as to what you find. I am going through the same thing. I am also waiting for my oil analysis. Sent from my SM-T817V using Tapatalk

It's better, I think. I like that we can file directly with Flight Service vs DUATS. I fly IFR weekly and have had issues with the CSC interface. The scratch pad is better and the interface is easier to split screen. I am okay with new interface as long as we get more options, which I think we do with this update. I am biased as I use the app every few days. Sent from my SM-T817V using Tapatalk

Hey guys, my question wasn't in a quest to create a "generator vs alternator" debate. For those who provided what you learned during your install, thank you. My install is complete and I'm going to go flying. Sent from my Galaxy S5 via Tapatalk

I didn't keep the generator due to my personal preference to have newer technology. To buy a newer regulator with a refurbished generator was only saving me a few hundred in parts. I'm turning wrenches with my A&P so it was worth the extra effort. Almost finished! Sent from my Galaxy S5 via Tapatalk

Thanks for the input. Carusoam, I already ordered the alternator kit and am just looking at getting lessons learned on the install and how well it performs with modern avionics. My current system is 12V 50A generator and the conversion is the 12V 70A. Sent from my Galaxy S5 via Tapatalk

I have SN 669...that's pretty cool. I'm interested to see what the answer to your question is. Sent from my Galaxy S5 via Tapatalk