Kwixdraw

Don't go gorilla on those case bolts, and do it with a torque wrench. 50 in./lbs. if my memory is correct. It's not all that much but there is only a thread and non hardening sealer in there for a gasket.

As Scott said. The Medco locks are secure from someone just having a matching key. Thing is that someone who really wants in will hammer a screwdriver through the door skin next to the lock to pry it out and then you have more real damage to deal with.

Fine job of aviating.

All of the problems Jetdriven mentions can come from a variety of reasons, this is why you get service letters, recalls and ADs on parts from time to time. If you want to read a lot about this subject get a copy of John Schwaners "Sacramento Sky Ranch Engineering Manual" Its not light reading but you will understand a lot more about fatigue failures and crack propagation and other engineering problems of Lycoming and TCM. He mentions a series of cylinders that were prone to crack because a dull cutter was used in machining the fins and this caused a stress riser to start the failure at that location. These things happen.

Quote: FlyingAggie Yep, that will do the job. I like the bigger knob on that one, it allows you to get some weight behind it when you need to. Some have little cylinder shaped knobs and depend on your grip for all the push on them.

A thing to think about in all of this is how it fits with the FAA and certification. All manufacturers these days are spending huge sums to try to be ahead of the product liability situation. Back in '82 Harley-Davidson claimed it was about 60% of their R&D budget. I'm sure it's no different for Lycoming and probably a large part of why TCM sold to the Chinese. GAMI can do their thing and not be as big a target for suit as Lycoming because Lycoming is the deeper pocket. Lycoming will always be more cautious than an aftermarket supplier because of this situation. I'm as interested in better performance as anyone but it does amaze me that we have so many test pilots out here. Over on the experimental side of things Vans has some great articles on why you shouldn't cram a bigger or turboed engine into your aircraft without looking at the bigger engineering picture. He explains TAS related to flutter speeds and safety margins. Not saying any of you are right or wrong but there is a lot to know about all this before we do much modification to our aircraft. Personally I think aviation would be in a way better situation if the certification process granted some level of protection from product liability suits, otherwise why should anyone bother with the process. No new product coming along except LSAs so I guess thats the answer. LSAs are so pitiful they can only barely kill you.

I notice that Superior and ECI Never have any recalls or ADs on their stuff. I guess they really know how to build a Lycoming huh? Seriously folks. There is something to making life as easy as you can on your engine. With all the scanners and monitors we have now, individual operators probably have more data at hand than the engineers did when they designed the engine and the OWTs came about back in those dark ages. Was chatting with Gerry at Lycon the other day, about some work I want done and how best to proceed with an overhaul. I mentioned that I was thinking about a cylinder and head rebuild using a brand X cylinder because I thought it would give me certain advantages, using my heads and new cylinders with the latest greatest coating in them. Well I got a detailed explanation of how he would do it and a lot of reasons to just go with the Lycoming cylinders. Especially on the IO-360 in a 201. They build their Reno race engines with them and he had darned good reasons for doing it. They get upwards of 245 HP out of the 0-360 in mild tune and converted to injection. That's on a prop dyno not just a figure out of the air. Of course that's not a certificated engine either. Standard Georgia warranty; "If it breaks in half , both halves belong to you." That's racing.

Sounds great Alan. Next time you get ready to do all those panels, get yourself a 1/4 in drive speed handle, it will be much less strenuous on your wrists. They work pretty well at getting the stubborn screws out as well without having the driver jump out of the screw head and dance all over your painted surfaces with the power tool. Get a pack of drywall screw bits too. Get the kind with the ribs on the driving flats and that will also give them some extra grip in the screw head.

You may want to have the upper deck seals checked. If it's leaking at the injector it may not be atomizing the fuel properly and that will cause the cylinder to act like it is rich, though it is getting the correct amount of fuel. If the fuel is not atomized then vaporized it can't burn properly. Usually these seals will be replaced as part of a normal service. You don't want to re use them.

Quote: N601RX We are currently overhauling our engine. I have been going back and fourth between the centri lub cam and the Ney Nozzles that spray extra oil onto the cam. The Centri lub is $500 to modify your cam, the Ney Nozzles are $245 to add to your case. Do you know if the 10:1 option is available for the IO 360 A1A or just the A3B6D?

I had a good long talk with Garry Fischer from LyCon today. Very informative fellow, just a wealth of information. He sent me a complete copy of the FWF STC and we discussed it a good bit. Just not as good a thing as it sounds at first glance. Requires hard to find pistons and new heavier rods too. Also requires specific props and is limited to 200HP continuous by limiting MAP. Seems the angle valve Lycoming is not the preferred engine to hot rod due to piston configuration and weight. LyCon has engines running as high as 14:1 in certain applications (experimental only) but not in the angle valves because the domed pistons cause more risk of detonation as the ratios go up. Garry had a number of really good suggestions for building a good running IO-360-A3B6D and I think we will have to do some business. I would really recommend you talk with him before deciding how to spend your overhaul dollar.

Reskinning would probably take longer but ,depending on who did the work, shouldn't make any difference in the end. If it was a Bonanza with magnesium skins it might be another story. I'd be pushing for the new assemblies depending on what the down time looked like. How long to get that rocker switch from Mooney now?

I got an email back from Chuck Ney this morning. He is a very direct individual and said he had no experience with the conversion to 10:1 compression but the IO-360 already has a tendency to crack cases, so do whatever you think is a good idea. Message received. So lower end will have Ney prepared cases with Ney Nozzles at least. Thinking maybe a Superior cam. Superior claims to ramp their cams differently to cut down some of the impact on the lifter. Sounds like a good thing. I'm thinking maybe just a good clean 200hp configuration would be just fine.

Thanks Jim. I was aware that there was a good bit of negative experience with FWF some time back. From the older threads, Doesn't it seem strange they would use .010 over rings in a standard bore? I can see being careful about the break in and temps but I can't believe they would use oversize rings in a standard bore. For one thing, even if you set the end gaps correctly, my understanding is that they could not be perfectly true circles once they are crammed into an undersized bore. I'll check with LyCon to see what they have to say on the subject.

Regarding the fuel being harder to burn at higher alt., It's a combination of things. It gets harder for the magneto to distribute the spark at high altitudes due to the low air density. You probably have pressurized mags on the Bravo but that can be a problem too as you have a constant flow of air+ whatever is in it through your mag. Everything can get pretty cruddy in those conditions. As you lean your mixture below stoichiometric balance you end up with more air space between the fuel molecules and it gets harder for the flame to burn from one molecule to the next. This slows the flame front and causes the rise in egt because the FA charge is still activly burning when the exhaust valve is opening for the exhaust stroke. This is when the exhaust valve gets good and hot and starts cooking the oil back to carbon on the stem and decides to stick when it cools down. The Bravo heads are supposed to cool the valve guide by having oil passages around the guide to help channel the heat away from the valve and guide. Clean oil is your engines Best Friend since a plugged oil passage is going to cause you a big repair bill. The lycoming I worked on at school had been run hot enough that the holes through the center of the rocker shafts on the exhaust side were completely filled with coked up oil. That was just an O-320.

I don't know about the A1A engine but I would think it would be included. FWF talks like it is done all the time on experimentals and they have just done the leg work to make it possible on certificated aircraft too. Who does the Ney Nozzles?I saw that in AOPA Pilot some time back but couldn't find the company that does the mod.

I had 110 in Cherokees and a little Arrow time. Found the 201 to be more confidence inspiring than the Arrow and a whole bunch more practical for me.

Has anyone out here got feedback on FWF's STC to put 10:1 piston in the IO-360 A3B6D. Seems like a reasonable way to get the 210HP of the IO-390 without the crazy cost. Anyone running there centrilube cam? I'm staying with the standard lifters and thinking any extra lube you can get on them might be a good thing.

I read the BS where Mooney said they were failing because they were trying to over produce a hand made Rolls Royce quality airplane and sell it to the masses. Shoot if no one flys the damned thing how is anyone going to get interested in buying one? It all boils down to percieved value. Back in the 201 days the J was the most bang for the buck and the 231 was for the high flying guys. If they can't produce enough to enjoy an economy of scale and drop the price to regain that cost-benefit profile they had back then, they had better be designing something to get them there or selling to the highest bidder because they are done.

I found an excellent write up on electrical noise on the Plane Power website in the troubleshooting section. If your Ovation has a music player in it it sounds like a strong candidate for the problem.

You know I read the letters in MAPA Log about Mooney being shut down because they tried to over produce them and they are made like Rolls Royce or Ferrari and should be marketed like them and to the same clientel. Pure Bovine Scatology. Mooney makes those damned seat frames for well under $200 dollars and if they priced them at $750 they'd still sell probably 50 of them to those of us who just want to upgrade our airplane a bit. I might buy two so mine would match but not at 6k for a pair. It's not like they pay the employees a fortune. Last time I saw they were hiring they were looking for welders and A&Ps at something like $17.50 an hour. Simply astounding. I say we should band together and buy the company. Make Jolie the marketing director and bring back the 201.

Does your radio noise follow the engine rpm? That could possibly be an ignition harness though there are other causes too. Bad grounds. All sorts of stuff.

You've got a lot of aircraft there, a vac pump is no big deal. Be sure to change the filter elements and have the vacuum adjusted when the job is done. Don't let trash from the old one destroy the new one.

Deleted my reply so here goes again. The C-182 is a great family airplane. Big inside and able to carry a good load at reasonable speed. Lots of people think that a door on both sides is safer and easier to live with. Fixed gear equals less expense at annual and in insurance. It's a popular airplane and though you may have to pay a healthy price to purchase it should come back to you if you decide to move to something else. (Your turboed Mooney) As far as going to Tahoe vs over the Sierras. The route to Tahoe has been pointed out and it is lower. To really clear the Sierras at their highest points you need to be up around 17000-18000 ft. Lots of non turboed light aircraft don't have a service ceiling that high. You want as many 1000s of clearance over those mountains as you can get to stay out of turbulence.

Not too much power( re the v-tail) it's the behavior of the aircraft in flight. The V-tail is very light on the controls and with the distractions of single pilot instrument flight in turbulent conditions it can get away from you then exceed redline speed. The V-tail will tend to pull itself out of an overspeed dive faster than the structure will tolerate and when a pilot has lost control his natural instinct is to pull back the yoke and break the airplane quicker. Not that it's too much airplane to handle, it's just that when things start going wrong they will get bad enough to kill you before you get a chance to correct the problem. Same kind of a deal if you don't keep your wits about you in a Mooney. If you get a Mooney into a spin it will loose 1000 ft or more per turn. The Mooney test pilot that signed the airworthiness cert for my plane was killed in an accident where they botched an approach to landing and got it into an uncoordinated configuration at low altitude and spun in. Mr. Smith was not flying but he had something like 20k hours and the actual pilot was high in Mooney time, still neither of them saw the problem in time to keep from crashing. It's kind of like the old saying about the piper Cub being such a safe airplane that it can only barely kill you. All airplanes will do you in if you get your thinking out of order, some just give you more of a chance to fix the mistake before they bite you. They still stick potential fighter jocks into simple trainers to teach the basics. There is a reason.