Camguard and Continental

[DonMuncy]

Back in 2014, Continental started an investigative program with one of the engine overhaul shops, to assess the results of using Camguard in Continental engines. It was my understanding that up to that time, Continental did not accept its use in turbocharged engines. I have never seen any write-up on the results of that program. Has anyone heard what they finally decided. Is it recommended by Continental for their turbocharged engines. 

[Bob_Belville]

11 minutes ago, DonMuncy said:

Back in 2014, Continental started an investigative program with one of the engine overhaul shops, to assess the results of using Camguard in Continental engines. It was my understanding that up to that time, Continental did not accept its use in turbocharged engines. I have never seen any write-up on the results of that program. Has anyone heard what they finally decided. Is it recommended by Continental for their turbocharged engines. 

Maybe @mike_elliottor someone who has attended the CamGuard presentation at Summit can gives us the details. Continental's field testing with CamGuard was part of Ed Kollin's presentation though I don't recall if it included turbos. (I have neither a turbo nor a Continental engine so I didn't pay attention to the details.)

[mike_elliott]

I cant comment on if Continental recommends its use in turbos now or not, but can say that Ed Kollin said it was not FAA approved yet for the turbos, however it was forthcoming and there was no negative results of any test to preclude FAA approving Camguard for use in turbos that he has any knowledge of.  Those of us that have attended Ed's presentations were able to digest the data and make informed decisions on a lot of things concerning lubrication of our air cooled internal combustion engines, and did so without a snake oil salesman's slant. His factual data of the various "blends" of oils, especially synthetics vs. dinosaur grease was a real eye opener for me.

 

[Bob_Belville]

5 minutes ago, mike_elliott said:

I cant comment on if Continental recommends its use in turbos now or not, but can say that Ed Kollin said it was not FAA approved yet for the turbos, however it was forthcoming and there was no negative results of any test to preclude FAA approving Camguard for use in turbos that he has any knowledge of.  Those of us that have attended Ed's presentations were able to digest the data and make informed decisions on a lot of things concerning lubrication of our air cooled internal combustion engines, and did so without a snake oil salesman's slant. His factual data of the various "blends" of oils, especially synthetics vs. dinosaur grease was a real eye opener for me.

 

Thanks Mike, that's what I meant to say on another thread earlier today. Ed's knowledge is obvious. A couple of years ago I sat in the Origin lobby for more than a hour picking his brain.

I came away convinced to be skeptical of any "data" from oil company marketing departments. 

[Cruiser]

All I have seen are nebulous claims that cannot be proven. 

If Camguard was really that beneficial they would certify a test that could be duplicated to prove the results. 

Of course there will always be believers and non-believers just ask GAMI about the physics of LOP .......... yet many still don't believe.

On the other hand, someone due the math for me. How much do I invest in Camguard to be "protected" ?

[LANCECASPER]

40 minutes ago, Cruiser said:

All I have seen are nebulous claims that cannot be proven. 

If Camguard was really that beneficial they would certify a test that could be duplicated to prove the results. 

Of course there will always be believers and non-believers just ask GAMI about the physics of LOP .......... yet many still don't believe.

On the other hand, someone due the math for me. How much do I invest in Camguard to be "protected" ?

I have liked Camguard on the Lycomings I've owned and use it now on the airplane I fly. However, after the first bottle of Camguard I put in a Continental IO-550, two days later the starter adaptor was slipping and needed to be rebuilt - not sure if there's a connection there, but it caught my attention.

[Bravoman]

13 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

I have liked Camguard on the Lycomings I've owned and use it now on the airplane I fly. However, after the first bottle of Camguard I put in a Continental IO-550, two days later the starter adaptor was slipping and needed to be rebuilt - not sure if there's a connection there, but it caught my attention.

I'm no mechanic for sure, but I really can't see any possibility of a connection there.

[LANCECASPER]

Just now, Bravoman said:

I'm no mechanic for sure, but I really can't see any possibility of a connection there.

https://www.beechtalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=126742&start=15

[Jsavage3]

I've heard nothing from TCM, but here's an article by Mike Busch regarding the use of Camguard in turbo Continentals. Seems to sum it up nicely, IMHO.  J

 

Mike Busch from the Savvy Aviator does some Q&A

Bob Klee:

I was under the impression we could not use Camguard in Turbo engines? This from their website: “Turbocharged engine acceptance pending”, so is it our call if we use it or not?

I’ve researched this quite extensively (including with my Principal Maintenance Inspector at the FSDO who oversees my IA activities).

There is no such thing as an FAA-approved oil additive.

ASL Camguard has been “accepted” by the FAA Engine & Propeller Directorate for normally aspirated engines. What that “acceptance” means is that the FAA wrote ASL a letter saying that they are persuaded that Camguard “does no harm” when used in normally aspirated engines.

ASL has requested such “acceptance” from the FAA Engine & Propeller Directorate for turbocharged engines, but the FAA has indicated that they will require ALT to submit the results of endurance tests that ASL anticipates will take them at least two years to complete. Thus, do not expect FAA type acceptance any time soon.

There is no regulatory requirement that an oil additive be FAA “accepted.” People have been using Marvel Mystery Oil in aircraft engines for five decades (at least) and I’ve yet to hear of one of them being busted. I actually used a little in one of my engines years ago (the statute of limitations has run) when I detected some valve lifter clatter. The lifter clatter cleared up. NOTE: This is NOT an endorsement of MMO!!! I do not use it and do not recommend it except in abnormal circumstances.

The issue of TCM acceptance is a totally different matter. TCM specifically does not accept ANY aftermarket oil additive, even those that have been FAA accepted. In fact, TCM states that the use of any aftermarket lubricants may void TCM’s warranty. The reference is TCM SIL99-2B. In fact, however, I am unaware that TCM has ever denied warranty coverage based on the use of any aviation oil additive, and it’s clear from the wording of SIL99-2B that TCM is primarily concerned about the use of automotive products in aircraft engines.

Bottom line: I have written extensively and spoken publically about my own experience using Camguard in the turbocharged engines of my own airplane. I have done this quite high-profile under FAA scrutiny and I have received no push-back from anyone in the FAA. I have discussed this issue face-to-face with my FAA PMI, who told me that while he’s not exactly thrilled about my public endorsement of Camguard in the context of turbocharged engines, he knows of no regulatory issues that would make such use problematic.

As for TCM, their stance against the use of aftermarket additives applies to all additives and all engines equally. In theory, TCM could deny warranty coverage on the basis of the use of any aftermarket additive in any TCM engine, whether normally aspirated or turbocharged. In practice, I have never heard of a single instance in which they did so.

The language is SIL99-2B is clearly CYA boilerplate. With respect to Camguard, the issue is moot anyway because TCM does not offer any warranty for engines in SR22 Turbos (Cirrus provides the warranty for those engines).

SIL99-2B has a lot of problems. For example, I have been using Aeroshell W100 in all my TCM piston engines for well over 4 decades. If you look at the list of approved aircraft oils in SIL99-2B, you’ll observe that Aeroshell W100 is NOT on the list! (Aeroshell W100 Plus is on the list, but the non-Plus variety that I have always used is not on the list.) However, SIL99-2B also says:

Lubricating oils qualified for use in Teledyne Continental Motors engines are required to meet SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) specifications.

SAE specification J 1899 (formerly MIL-L-22851) is the approval for aircraft piston engine ashless-dispersant oil.

SAE specification J 1966 (formerly MIL-L-6082E) is the approval for aircraft piston engine non-dispersant mineral oil.

Aeroshell W100 meets SAE J 1899 and MIL-L-22851 (says so right on the bottle).

Just use whatever oil and additives you think best (as long as they’re intended for use in piston aircraft engines), and don’t worry about the FAA or TCM. There is no oil police.

My recommendation is to use either Aeroshell W100 single-grade or Phillips X/C 20W-50 multigrade and to add at least 5% ASL Camguard (1 pint per 10 quarts) at each oil change. (A little extra Camguard doesn’t hurt, and a 10% concentration is recommended as a “pickling oil” if the aircraft will be idle for a significant length of time.) For our Savvy clients, we recommend W100 with Camguard as our first choice unless the airplane is likely to encounter unpreheated cold-starts in sub-freezing OATs, in which case we recommend Phillips 20W-50 with Camguard.

We have several Cirrus clients who had lousy looking oil analysis reports and cleaned up nicely after a couple of oil changes with Camguard. I have seen the same thing occur in at least a dozen engines in non-Cirrus aircraft (Bonanzas, Centurions and twin Cessnas) as well. I have documented my own oil analysis results from my own airplane in considerable detail in several aviation magazines. I am personally persuaded that the stuff works quite well and has no adverse side effects. (If I wasn’t , I sure wouldn’t be using it in my own engines, which are now approaching 200% of TBO.) I used Camguard quietly for almost two years before I started talking about it in public, because I was skeptical and wanted to see plenty of data before putting my reputation on the line.

Mike Busch (A&P/IA CFIA/I/ME)
2008 National Aviation Maintenance Technician of the Year
Savvy Aircraft Maintenance Management, Inc. (SAMM)