Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Many 231s have been updated over the years...

  • preferred engine block....
  • MP controller...
  • Intercooler...
  • Rocket package... :)

Nothing wrong with the original set-up....  just more options became available over the years...
 

Backwards integration is always a possibility... just make sure you know before you buy...

PPhoughts only, not a plane sales guy....

Best regards,

-a-

Posted

If you do add the intercooler, be sure to strictly follow the revised power settings for the setup. Otherwise will likely end up overboosting your engine.

Posted
23 hours ago, TNIndy said:

Did the 1985 231 have a factory installed inter-cooler or was the 252 the first? 

I have 25-0883 - one of the last 231's built in '85.   LB, Merlyn, GAMI.   No intercooler.  I can't say in two years of ownership that I've ever had a moment where I said "damn, I wish I had an intercooler".  I'll probably install the Turboplus next year just to bring it closer to 252 spec - but I'm not desperate to do that in any way. 

Posted

I finally have the logs for the 1985 231. Inter-cooler and Merlyn wastegate were installed not long after initial purchase. More recently #1,3, and 5 cylinders were replaced due to low compression in the first 600 hrs on a factory re-manufactured engine. #5 cylinder has been replaced twice. Ideas as to why this might happen? 

Posted
18 minutes ago, TNIndy said:

I finally have the logs for the 1985 231. Inter-cooler and Merlyn wastegate were installed not long after initial purchase. More recently #1,3, and 5 cylinders were replaced due to low compression in the first 600 hrs on a factory re-manufactured engine. #5 cylinder has been replaced twice. Ideas as to why this might happen? 

"due to low compression"......  that's not sufficient to condemn a cylinder.  See Mike Busch on the subject:

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2017/may/pilot/savvy-maintenance-borescope

That said, if you fly a 231 in a ham-fisted fashion you will fry the cylinders and mid-life top overhauls are common enough. Why it's #1,#3 and 2x #5 I leave to the experts.  

Posted

Thanks, I agree with Mike's opinion on low compression, TBO, etc. The first time compression's were 60, 60, 62. The second time #5 was replaced it was 35 

Posted

Some planes live in a different environment...

They are treated like a business machine....

Flown in flying dragon mode... cylinders only go half as far... (economic choice, not a safety issue...)

A Continental cylinder #5... is up front on the co-pilot side... often hiding behind the alternator... (less airflow because of it...)

Flown LOP, with an eye on CHTs... non-flying dragon  is quite possible to have a set of cylinders go much further...

 

See if you can check the JPI data... it may show what is going on with the engine over time...

Best regards,

-a-

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.