Sudden Increase in Oil Consumption on IO-360-A3B6D

[PT20J]

1 hour ago, WAFI said:

I run Philips 20w50 in South Florida and everyone seem to think its not a good idea unless I run cam guard as well because I guess there's no additives in the Philips. 

Well, you have to ask what additives they are talking about.

Lycoming had lifter problems with certain engines and there is an AD requiring addition of LW-16702 (Tricresyl Phosphate — an extreme pressure anti-scuff agent) to the oil in these engines. Since procuring, measuring and mixing this with each oil addition is a pain, Shell came up with the marketing idea to sell Plus oil premixed. Phillips now offers a premixed version - Victory - also. This is a great convenience to those affected by the AD.

Since other Lycoming engines have had random cam spalling issues, some believe that oils with the Lycoming additive will be beneficial. While it can’t hurt (well, maybe it can. Read the article below), I don’t think anyone has definitely proven it prevents cam issues in most engines.

Camguard is completely different and was developed by a former Exxon chemist. The claim is that Exxon found the mixture of exotic chemicals too expensive and so the inventor went off and created camguard. 

https://www.aviationconsumer.com/maintenance/phillips-66-new-oil-lycoming-additive/

Skip

[toto]

1 hour ago, WAFI said:

I run Philips 20w50 in South Florida and everyone seem to think its not a good idea unless I run cam guard as well because I guess there's no additives in the Philips. 

It really depends on how much you fly. If you're flying daily, you can run any oil and be just fine. If you're letting the plane sit for long periods of time (say, more than a week between flights on a regular basis) then an anticorrosion additive package is your friend. Camguard is all about preventing corrosion in airplanes that sit. 

[WAFI]

10 hours ago, PT20J said:

Well, you have to ask what additives they are talking about.

Lycoming had lifter problems with certain engines and there is an AD requiring addition of LW-16702 (Tricresyl Phosphate — an extreme pressure anti-scuff agent) to the oil in these engines. Since procuring, measuring and mixing this with each oil addition is a pain, Shell came up with the marketing idea to sell Plus oil premixed. Phillips now offers a premixed version - Victory - also. This is a great convenience to those affected by the AD.

Since other Lycoming engines have had random cam spalling issues, some believe that oils with the Lycoming additive will be beneficial. While it can’t hurt (well, maybe it can. Read the article below), I don’t think anyone has definitely proven it prevents cam issues in most engines.

Camguard is completely different and was developed by a former Exxon chemist. The claim is that Exxon found the mixture of exotic chemicals too expensive and so the inventor went off and created camguard. 

https://www.aviationconsumer.com/maintenance/phillips-66-new-oil-lycoming-additive/

Skip

Good article, but I think it confused me more. LOL!!!

Opinions only- what oil should I use? IO-360-A3B6D

I fly hard for about a week or two a month and the plane sits for a week or two. I have a buddy who can go and warm it up every now and then but he's not check off to fly yet.  

[WAFI]

9 hours ago, toto said:

It really depends on how much you fly. If you're flying daily, you can run any oil and be just fine. If you're letting the plane sit for long periods of time (say, more than a week between flights on a regular basis) then an anticorrosion additive package is your friend. Camguard is all about preventing corrosion in airplanes that sit. 

This is the general consensus that I have been running into. I get mixed opinions regarding 20w-50 or straight 100.

[PT20J]

You might check Mike Busch’s recommendations.

[toto]

6 hours ago, WAFI said:

This is the general consensus that I have been running into. I get mixed opinions regarding 20w-50 or straight 100.

If the airplane will spend all of its time in warm weather climates, then there is some argument that a straight weight 100 will better protect against corrosion because it takes longer to drip off engine components. This has been mentioned by Busch and Aviation Consumer, among others - but I don’t believe it’s much more than a gut feeling. I haven’t seen any studies proving this. 

If you occasionally fly to cooler climates, just fill with multi weight and be done with it. 

I used to do the straight weight thing, but I was always stressed when seasons changed. I had one particular trip where my destination forecast temps were dropping, and would be way outside operating temperature for Aeroshell W100 with no preheat available. I had to do a middle-of-the-night oil change with quart bottles I bought from the FBO counter. That was the first time I did Phillips XC and I haven’t gone back to straight weight since. 

[PT20J]

6 minutes ago, toto said:

If the airplane will spend all of its time in warm weather climates, then there is some argument that a straight weight 100 will better protect against corrosion because it takes longer to drip off engine components. This has been mentioned by Busch and Aviation Consumer, among others - but I don’t believe it’s much more than a gut feeling. I haven’t seen any studies proving this. 

If you occasionally fly to cooler climates, just fill with multi weight and be done with it. 

I used to do the straight weight thing, but I was always stressed when seasons changed. I had one particular trip where my destination forecast temps were dropping, and would be way outside operating temperature for Aeroshell W100 with no preheat available. I had to do a middle-of-the-night oil change with quart bottles I bought from the FBO counter. That was the first time I did Phillips XC and I haven’t gone back to straight weight since. 

Me too.

[A64Pilot]

When the oil is hot, 15W-50 and straight 50W have the same viscosity, that is to say that straight weight oil is not thicker and won’t hold onto the cam longer when it’s hot. and who shuts down a cold motor? Sure it’s thicker when cold, but how is that any kind of advantage?

Most of the oil manufacturers state that the multi vis oil is their best oil and they manufacture straight weight for those that want it, but recommend the multi vis.

Lycoming goes on and on about how much better multi vis oil is for their turbo motors and pretty much says nothing about the NA motors, but it seems pretty obvious they think the multi vis is “better” better meaning better able to handle higher temps and stress.

For just about all petroleum products the “premium” product has a better additive package than the less expensive alternative, Premium auto fuel for example usually has a better detergent package than regular, it’s not just the difference in Octane,Chevron for instance has more Techron per gl in their Premium.

I just can’t make a case for not using whatever brand you chose premium product, and change it frequently.

[lukejb]

Follow up to my original post on sudden increase in oil consumption.  We ended up pulling suspected cylinder and the middle ring (one of the compression rings) was broken.  The other two rings (oil control ring and top compression ring) were stuck with a large amount of carbon build up in the ring grooves of the piston.  I guess when the ring broke it was allowing oil to go through and caused all the carbon build up that made the other rings stick.  Took it to the cylinder shop and everything is still within spec and cylinder is fine.  The guys at the cylinder shop did ask if I was using camguard.  I am and they said they see a lot of stuck rings and broke rings on cylinders that come into their shop and they attribute it to the use of camguard.  So, Not sure if I want to continue to use the camguard now…

[toto]

46 minutes ago, lukejb said:

The guys at the cylinder shop did ask if I was using camguard.  I am and they said they see a lot of stuck rings and broke rings on cylinders that come into their shop and they attribute it to the use of camguard.

This is an interesting anecdote from your cylinder shop. I haven’t heard anything about these problems being attributed to CamGuard, and as a relatively recent CamGuard convert, I’d be very interested to know whether others have heard similar from their shops. 

I’m generally very cautious about magic engine elixirs, but given the positive statements from Mike Busch, Aviation Consumer, and countless converts here on MS, I decided to take the plunge. I’ve had better oil consumption and no obvious problems, but I’m also only about four oil changes into the CamGuard thing. 

Anyone know whether Ed Kollin is on MS?

[toto]

1 hour ago, A64Pilot said:

straight weight oil is not thicker and won’t hold onto the cam longer when it’s hot. and who shuts down a cold motor?

This is a thing that I’ve always had trouble getting my head around too. My assumption has been that they’re talking about residual oil that will remain on engine components for hours or days after shutdown, where there is a theoretical difference between cold thin residual oil and cold thick residual oil.

[N201MKTurbo]

3 hours ago, toto said:

This is a thing that I’ve always had trouble getting my head around too. My assumption has been that they’re talking about residual oil that will remain on engine components for hours or days after shutdown, where there is a theoretical difference between cold thin residual oil and cold thick residual oil.

Once the engine cools, the straight weight oils will have a higher viscosity then the multi weight oils. The 10W50 oils will have the viscosity of 10 weight oil when it is cold and the viscosity of a 50 weight oil when it is hot. So you can make a case that the straight weight oils will stay around a bit longer. How long, I can't tell you.

[toto]

1 hour ago, N201MKTurbo said:

Once the engine cools, the straight weight oils will have a higher viscosity then the multi weight oils. The 10W50 oils will have the viscosity of 10 weight oil when it is cold and the viscosity of a 50 weight oil when it is hot. So you can make a case that the straight weight oils will stay around a bit longer. How long, I can't tell you.

Yeah, just haven’t seen any studies on this. Seems to be entirely in the “gut feeling” territory.

As A64 mentioned above, a 10w50 and a 100 straight weight have the same viscosity when hot, and should have the same viscosity at engine shutdown.

I *think* the argument is purely about residual oil, but I also think that residual oil adherence will have as much to do with dirt and sludge and the condition of internal components as it has to do with viscosity. 

[A64Pilot]

On 12/30/2021 at 11:50 AM, lukejb said:

Follow up to my original post on sudden increase in oil consumption.  We ended up pulling suspected cylinder and the middle ring (one of the compression rings) was broken.  The other two rings (oil control ring and top compression ring) were stuck with a large amount of carbon build up in the ring grooves of the piston.  I guess when the ring broke it was allowing oil to go through and caused all the carbon build up that made the other rings stick.  Took it to the cylinder shop and everything is still within spec and cylinder is fine.  The guys at the cylinder shop did ask if I was using camguard.  I am and they said they see a lot of stuck rings and broke rings on cylinders that come into their shop and they attribute it to the use of camguard.  So, Not sure if I want to continue to use the camguard now…

The ONLY thing the FAA ensures with additives, is that they do no harm. They do nothing to determine if they do any good.

FAA isn’t perfect of course and does make mistakes, but Camguard should do no harm, including sticking rings, they should have determined that.

Aviation is shot full of opinions, and even a whole lot of suspect “testing” that may or may not accurately reflect what is going on in the engine.

It’s my belief that if ANY product reduced cam failure in Lycoming engines, that Lycoming would heavily recommend it, Cam failure is the Achilles heel in a Lycoming, why wouldn’t they recommend a product that reduced the failure rate of their engines?