jetdriven

well, filiform corrosion forms under unprimed paint.

How about alodine, or primer? Just paint the bare aluminum with a single stage spray enamel? Quote: Hank I took a paint sample to an automotive paint supply company and had a perfect match put in a can for about $15. Works great for small touch ups like stone chips on the leading edges or landing gear.

Sure! Call up the overhaul shop when your 25K engine eats a camshaft befroe TBO. Im sure the 6-8$ a quart boys are looking out for you. Tel me again, why are we seeing so many Lycoming cam problems in the past decade? LOP?

And do you believe someone who sells 3 million $worth of oil (so did Mobil, with their AV1), or do you follow the guidance of a defected petroleum engineer who made his own additive package and a 60 year old IA with an CFII and a 3,000 SMOH TURBO 310R who happens to run the stuff we are all talking about? The additive Aviation Consumer said has clearly proven to extend the time before rust appears on their sample coupons on their corrosion test. The stuff that seems to help infrequently flown private aircraft make more hours before they go kaput?

Nope. I read right here! LOP, flying past TBO, and climbing at redline RPM voids your insurance. I read it right here! Quote: Hank

You, sir are illegal! Your insurance will deny you. Also your cam is below the crank. Oil doesn't matter on those. Quote: Mitch Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that my Aeroshell mulit-grade fire breahting IO-500G is beyond TBO now!! Fire 'em up and get out there folks!!!

The thing with 15w50 isn't it's lubrication qualities. The problem is after sitting a few days, corrosion pits form on the cam and lifters. Secondary is it is 50% PAO synthetic. Google that. Fly every day. Don't worry. Most of us do not. I do know Lycomings did not have so many cam problems before synthetic blends. Full throttle 2700 rpm climb too.

You can mix 4 bottles of different oil. Plus marvel mystery and STP. Just fly it every day !

Just how many aircraft engines did Mobil buy back with their stunning failure of Mobil AV1 full synthetic aviation oil? Go read about that for a while, its absolutely shocking. Maybe you can still find some, go ahead and put that in your airplane. It was approved too. Quote: allsmiles There are two actions that will protect our engines. Both are completely within our control. 1. Fly, fly, fly the aircraft often, and 2. Change oil regularly and frequently. I change mine q 25-30 hours max. I'm not an oil expert y any stretch of the imagination but this is my form of "cheap insurance." If you read between the lines both Mr. Kollins and Mr. Busch do say this. But I have one suggestion for these gentlemen. Why don't they R&D and bring to market their own aviation oil. After all they seem to think they know more than Shell, or anybody else! Then we could compare their oil on an even field with the rest. To sit on the sidelines and critique is generally considered cheap. Shell and the others R&D these oils very carefully in the laboratory. They have teams of chemists constantly perfecting these formulas. They don't want us to alter it with additives. If they did they would tell us. What I haven't seen from Mr. Kollin is exactly how his additive alters the original oil formula. I wouldn't add anything in my oil for this very crucially important reason alone. I don't want to take a known quantity and alter it to an unknown! As I have said before some things are best left to professionals. I think I'm going to make this my motto.

I am going to chill out now. But one more article, where Ed Kollin, the developer of Camguard, posts several times explaining what is in the oil we buy and what can work better. Note, if you fly your aircraft every day it doesnt matter what oil you use. http://www.piperowner.org/forums/topic.html?id=82256

I changed FROM A/S 15W50 because there is enough evidence to suggest semi-synthetic oils are not as good as mineral oils in infrequently flown aircraft. Engines made TBO for decades before synthetic blends. The Camguard additive is a bet. Given Lycoming problems with camshaft failure I think its 29$ per oil change insurance. There is evidence fron Aviation Consumer that shows it works to extend the time metal parts develop corrosion. In our specific situation, the snake oil is 25$ per bottle, and it works out to a cost of 50c per hour. The engine is 1400 hours since major, so I am going to pay 300$ extra to run it to TBO. The engine time is 12$ an hour, or the extra 300$ is worth it if it extends the engine life by 25 hours. What do you think? You are the only person I have ever heard from that suggested changing oil viscosities caused an outright engine failure. Do youj have a tail number, NTSB report, anything? I am curious if this was the sole cause. Did you do the teardown? Was it an approved oil for that engine? I'm not calling you a liar, but this is truly something. Quote: Sabremech Byron, sorry that you don't agree. Have you run an engine to TBO using no additives? Have you run an engine to TBO using additives? What's your documented difference in wear characteristics between the two? Do you have the data that supports using additives will cost you less when it comes time for overhaul? I certainly don't as I haven't owned my airplane long enough to get to TBO. Your best maintenance is regular oil changes. As far as your question about engine damage from changing viscosities, absolutely I've seen an engine ruin itself and having to make an emergency landing before the engine seized. I don't expect that I'll change your mind on any of this, but that's not my point. My point was to the original poster, which was keep running what your running and you're less likely to have problems. I appreciate your references and have listened to many of Mike Busch's seminars. They're very informative and useful to those folks who don't have a maintenance background. Do I believe everything he promotes? No. With that said, thanks for your input. I hope we've given the original poster the information he was looking for.

To reprint some of what I have posted on here before, and to add some fresh material. Peter: You may not believe the opinions of experts but Kollin is an industry leading petroleum engineer and Mike Busch has managed to get 3000 hours a side from his 310 that he maintains and gives plenty of talks all year round about how to get that kind of service from your plane. I have met the guy in person. He practices what he preaches. Sabremech: Can you find me one shred of proof that "Problems can arise when you start changing viscosities?" Just one. There are plenty of white papers on Techron, it is the only additive that actually works. We changed from Aeroshell 15W50 to Aeroshell W100 with Camguard at our first oil change. The engine has 1310 hours with no abnormalities other than a #2 cylinder valve guide failure. However, our decision was not based on voodoo. Heck the 15W50 bottle looked coolest and it cost the most, it must be the best, right? The decision was based on credible evidence that aviation oils containing PAO synthetic basestocks are less than optimal lubricants for an air cooled aircraft engine. Mobil AV-1 was the first full synthetic oil and it was a spectacular failure. The PAO cannot carry away lead, and it drains back into the engine after shutdown in a matter of minutes leaving only a thin film to protect the camshaft. W100 took 3 days to drain that last quart back. User-flown aircraft that sit more than 7-10 days at a time tolerate this poorly. OK, here is some info. Enjoy. from; http://www.avweb.com/news/savvyaviator/savvy_aviator_52_thinking_about_oil_changes_196730-1.html [Mike Busch] My own personal experience agrees with this: I have investigated many cases of premature cam and lifter distress(generally caused by corrosion during periods of disuse) and without exception they all involved engines operating on Aeroshell 15W-50 multigrade. Busch again: From: http://lists.kjsl.com/pipermail/beech-owners/2008-August/090163.html >These days when people ask me for a recommendation for oil usage in an owner-flown aircraft, I generally recommend either Aeroshell W100 plus ASL Camguard (which is what I'm using in my airplane), or Phillips XC 20W-50 plus ASL Camguard. The Aeroshell monograde provides somewhat greater film strength under extreme pressure conditions (e.g., red-line RPM), while the Phillips multigrade provides better cold starting pourability. My absolute LEAST favorite oil is Aeroshell 15W-50. Every single case of premature cam and lifter spalling I've investigated turned out to be an engine that was running 15W-50. IMHO it's simply the poorest possible choice for an owner-flown aircraft that flies irregularly and therefore is at rick of corrosion damage. RAM AIRCRAFT: From: http://www.ramaircraft.com/Maintenance-Tips/Oil-Recommendations.htm "Differing operating conditions and / or availability may warrant the use of multi-viscosity oils. Most important to RAM is that the oil be mineral based. RAM recommends a multi-viscosity ashless dispersant mineral based oil such as Phillips 66 X/C 20W-50. [RAM service history records indicate that Mineral Based AD oils perform significantly better than synthetic and semi-synthetic oils." ........ RAM service history records are much less favorable for engines that have a history of being operated on synthetic blends or semi-synthetic oil products. RAM encourages using Mineral Based (AD) Oils only, single or multi-viscosity as conditions require." Ed Kollin: from: from: http://www.beechtalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=58932&p=605424 First problem; Polyalpha olefin (PAO), is the synthetic basestock used in AeroShell 15W-50 (at 50%) and Exxon Elite (at 26%) and the defunct Mobil AV1 (at 100%). It has excellent high and low temperature viscometric properties, high viscosity index (doesn't’t thin as much with increasing temp) and (low temp pour point) and good high temperature stability (when used with the proper antioxidant package). However, NONE OF THIS IS IMPORTANT FOR AIR-COOLED AIRCRAFT ENGINES! PAO has terrible solvency characteristics. It is so bad, that most additives will not dissolve in it. It needs to be combined with an ester (10-20%), alkylated naphthalene (5-25%) or mineral basestock (40-75% Aeroshell and Elite) just to get the additives to dissolve. This is fine for a heavily additized passenger car motor oil but NOT for a low additive treat rate oil used in a very high blow-by, leaded fuel aircraft engine. The ability to keep an engine clean by keeping combustion by-products in suspension is essential for an aircraft oil and the basestock works hand in hand with the dispersant to achieve this. In my opinion PAO is the worst possible choice of basestock for piston aviation oils, and Exxon and Shell did not learn anything from Mobil’s AV1 spectacular failure. Mineral oils (non dispersant) by themselves, have difficulty solubizing the blow-by for long (witness the engine varnish with the use of non-dispersant oils) but it is nothing compared to the problem PAO has with it. The problem with Mobil AV1 was never the lead bromide (lead salt) particles, it has always been the partially combusted blow-by fuel in the crankcase that forms resinous varnish and captures the lead particles making a thicker deposit that is the problem. It was that way with Mobil AV1 and it remains so with the semi-synthetics. http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-12586945/Aircraft-engine-oils-BP-vs.html http://www.avweb.com/news/maint/answers_about_oil_195194-1.html Failure of Mobil AV-1: (100% synthetic. AS 15W50 is 50% synthetic.) http://www.avweb.com/news/news/182891-1.html http://kas.e.thomas.googlepages.com/Mobil.pdf ----“Most of the calls we get on the subject of cam scuffing come from users of 15W50”

Our engine's previous owners used Aeroshell 15W50. According to Ed Kollin (camguard inventor) and Mike Busch, its about the worst oil you use in a Lycoming, its 50% synthetic. it runs off the cam after shutdown. Also the most expensive. FWIW Busch runs Aeroshell W80 in his 310R with Camguard. We switched to Aeroshell W100 for the summer, and Phillips X/C 20W50 for winter both with Camguard. We may just stay with it. It has more oil pressure and uses even less oil on the Phillips.

We wash our aircraft cover in the front-loading washing machine every couple monthes when we are using it regularly.

Ray, we have been using Clearview, and it works great. It even cleaned oil form a leaky crank seal off the windshield with one try. 5$ a can, its les than half the price of Plexus. http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/cspages/avlcvcc.php

Lots of times an overhaul is an inspection and a new tag for 1200$. What ever happened to IRAN?

The engine has no book value but it might run some time before needing overhaul. I would be concerned about the cam. Pull a cylinder and do a visual on all the lobes and lifters. If any are spalled, you have your answer. We did that.

You would think with an engine monitor you could tell if they were leaking.

.

You can still get to all your instruments. Its just easier with those access panels.

Hank, have you tried leaning the EGT in climb to the sea level target EGT? The enigne will run at the same EGT all the way up, otherwise it just gets richer with altitude. We have found above 5000 you can lean about 100 degrees leaner than target EGT.

Some people bring the MP back to 26", then add an inch a minute, in 3 minutes its back at full throttle all over again. Thats a lot of work. Some carburetors have a full throttle enrichment circuit that is bypassed when the throttle is brought back. The engine then runs leaner, which may be hotter.

This was covered in a diffrent thread, but the -A1B6D and -A3B6D are the only ones not allowed to have the 20 degree optional timing, per the Type Certificate. My data plate was stamped with a "0" over the "5", but it was done incorrectly. Its more than just a timing change, the magnetos were modified as well. http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/8DF482166B82DD2386256E75005A0248?OpenDocument

I think according to the POH the gear down indicator in the floor is primary, the light is secondary.

Check out the new standard hydraulic fluid, MIL-H-83282. It is not nearly as flammable as it is a synthetic fluid It is purported to be compatible with all 5606 fluids. Aeroshell 31 conforms to this standard, as does Royco 782. We are switching to it. I did read a VAF forum that the conclusion was Mobil 1 synthetic ATF is virtually the same as the MIL-H-83282. http://www.skygeek.com/royco-782-aircraft-hydraulic-fluid.html