Hey Guys,

I'm looking at at 172 that has 1100 hours since overhaul, holding 73/90
++ on all cylinders...the only thing holding me back, last overhaul was
1976...

I've talked to several seasoned pilots / aircraft owners that say as
long as it's holding good compressions, don't sweat it....

Any opinions?

Thanks,

Jamie A. Landers
PP-ASEL
Looking for a 172

In a previous article, said:
>I'm looking at at 172 that has 1100 hours since overhaul, holding 73/90
>++ on all cylinders...the only thing holding me back, last overhaul was
>1976...

1100 hours in 29 years? That's 38 hours a year. The insides of that
engine are full of rust and everything is going to go to hell all at once.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Heuristics are bug ridden by definition. If they didn't have bugs,
then they'd be algorithms.

> I'm looking at at 172 that has 1100 hours since overhaul, holding 73/90
> ++ on all cylinders...the only thing holding me back, last overhaul was
> 1976...

Don't pass yet!
Are you sure that's not supposed to read 73 / 80 compressions on all cylinders?
How many hours has it flown in the last year?
In the last 6 months?
Does it have chrome cylinders?
Does the static run-up meet the type certificate minimum rpm?
How many major overhauls and was the last one a quality job?
Is the engine on a low to mid time airframe?
Is the price discounted enough to account for the fact you may need an overhaul soon?

I'm gonna get flamed here, but if it has been flying quite a bit recently, makes good static rpm, has chrome
cylinders and good logbooks, you may be on to a good buy. I'd have a pre-buy inspection done including a borescope
of the cylinders. You should also consider asking the trusted A&P to pull a jug and inspect the camshaft. If
everything checks out okay make an offer based on the above considerations.
--
Joe Schneider
8437R
(Remove No Spam to Reply)




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

That is patent bull****.

Jim



>
> 1100 hours in 29 years? That's 38 hours a year. The insides of that
> engine are full of rust and everything is going to go to hell all at once.

I'd probably want to get a look at the camshaft. That sits out of the oil
and can get pitted by lack of use. Might want to take off a jug and have a
look.

mike

"RST Engineering" > wrote in message
...
> That is patent bull****.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>>
>> 1100 hours in 29 years? That's 38 hours a year. The insides of that
>> engine are full of rust and everything is going to go to hell all at
>> once.
>
>

Start it, get it warm and pull an oil sample. If the cam it tits up,
the metal will be visable in the sample. Also, pulling a single jug
won't get ALL the lobes visable, and I've never seen ALL the lobes have
trouble
at the same time.

Don't ask us if it's any good. The ONLY way to tell that is with a
thorough pre-buy inspection by someone who knows what they are doing.
How long since annual? If you are serious it may be worth negotiating
with the owner to put it through annual and you pay the prebuy portion.

As you describe it, the plane may be in great shape - it may not -
thaqt's why you need at least the pre-buy.
But you do have a great bargaining chip!

Good luck with it.

Tony
--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE


In article . com>,
wrote:

> Hey Guys,
>
> I'm looking at at 172 that has 1100 hours since overhaul, holding 73/90
> ++ on all cylinders...the only thing holding me back, last overhaul was
> 1976...
>
> I've talked to several seasoned pilots / aircraft owners that say as
> long as it's holding good compressions, don't sweat it....
>
> Any opinions?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jamie A. Landers
> PP-ASEL
> Looking for a 172

whats the recient history.
Time sucks for normal things, but an engines history can tell a lot.
When was the time put on?
was it all in the first years or was it in the last years?
If it was in the first few years, i would be more suspect. if it was in
the last few years, i would feel very comfortable.
If it was mostly old time, that should reflect in the asking price, ie
engine rebuild time may be near.

Fly it and then get a good prebuy
Dave

tony roberts wrote:
> Don't ask us if it's any good. The ONLY way to tell that is with a
> thorough pre-buy inspection by someone who knows what they are doing.
> How long since annual? If you are serious it may be worth negotiating
> with the owner to put it through annual and you pay the prebuy portion.
>
> As you describe it, the plane may be in great shape - it may not -
> thaqt's why you need at least the pre-buy.
> But you do have a great bargaining chip!
>
> Good luck with it.
>
> Tony

> I'm looking at at 172 that has 1100 hours since overhaul, holding 73/90
> ++ on all cylinders...the only thing holding me back, last overhaul was
> 1976...

What year 172? Does it have the H2AD engine?

How many hours in RECENT years is most important. If it got 1000 hours from
'76 to '86, and then 100 hours since '87, run like hell.

If, on the other hand, it's flown a lot in the last five years, you may be
okay.

Study the logs, young Grasshopper, as they will tell the tale.

:-)

(And get a thorough pre-buy inspection!)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On 9/10/05 15:28, " > wrote:

> Hey Guys,
>
> I'm looking at at 172 that has 1100 hours since overhaul, holding 73/90
> ++ on all cylinders...the only thing holding me back, last overhaul was
> 1976...
>
> I've talked to several seasoned pilots / aircraft owners that say as
> long as it's holding good compressions, don't sweat it....
>
> Any opinions?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jamie A. Landers
> PP-ASEL
> Looking for a 172
>

1100 hours in 30 years. Can you say, "Rust"? I knew you could...

-> Don
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters
would be to limit the spirit - Stephen Hawking

Manufacturer TBO is 2000 hours OR 12 years - its a runout engine, and
the price should reflect it. The cam is the most vulnerable as far as
disuse, yes - all splash lubrication up there. Pull a jug or two and
look, beyond that, if it isn't making metal, burns reasonable amount of
oil, and has decent compressions, I wouldn't sweat it much, either.



wrote:
> Hey Guys,
>
> I'm looking at at 172 that has 1100 hours since overhaul, holding 73/90
> ++ on all cylinders...the only thing holding me back, last overhaul was
> 1976...
>
> I've talked to several seasoned pilots / aircraft owners that say as
> long as it's holding good compressions, don't sweat it....
>
> Any opinions?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jamie A. Landers
> PP-ASEL
> Looking for a 172

("omk" wrote)
> Manufacturer TBO is 2000 hours OR 12 years - its a runout engine, and
> the price should reflect it. The cam is the most vulnerable as far as
> disuse, yes - all splash lubrication up there. Pull a jug or two and
> look, beyond that, if it isn't making metal, burns reasonable amount of
> oil, and has decent compressions, I wouldn't sweat it much, either.


OP'er ...grab a copy of AircraftOwner at you local FBO
(www.aircraftowner.com) or Trade-A-Plane and count up how many 30+ year old
Cessna 172 planes are up for sale ...TODAY.

Write down each one on a yellow legal pad. Year - PRICE - hours - top 5
features - location - comments - whatever.

Now, how long did it take to compile your list? Do the same thing next
month - how many new planes between the two lists?

Keep in mind there are even more 172's for sale than just the ones seen in
those two publications.


Montblack

Thanks for all the advice guys!!!

I just got a call from the current owner...I should have mentioned that
it is going in tomorrow for a complete pre-buy by an AP that is
unfamiliar with the airplane.

I might ask them to pull one or two of the jugs and have a look at the
cam. Is that typically a part of pre-buy???

The airplane is delivered to the AP, my insurance is lined up,
financing is not a problem, I'll post the link and let you guys see
what you think http://tappix.com/728539

Opinions????

Don't pass yet!
Are you sure that's not supposed to read 73 / 80 compressions on all
cylinders?


ha ha, yeah, I noticed I miskeyed that about .5 seconds after I hit
post, unfortuanltey that was about .75 seconds too late....then I
thought it would look even more stupid to make a correction post!

YOU GOT ME!!!!!!!

Thanks again for the advice! Us younger guys would be lost without some
assistance!

Absolutely not. You pull so much as a single nut off a jug of mine, you've
bought the airplane.

Jim


> I might ask them to pull one or two of the jugs and have a look at the
> cam. Is that typically a part of pre-buy???

> Absolutely not. You pull so much as a single nut off a jug of mine, you've bought the airplane.
>
> Jim

Jim,
You are right. I wouldn't want anyone doing that to mine either. What would you recommend on a plane like this
as far as satisfying ourselves that the cam is o.k.? Is a static rpm check and oil filter inspection good enough
(along with the other things mentioned)? An oil analysis history sure would be nice. How about doing one now?
Would you have enough data without an earlier baseline test to make the call?
--
Joe Schneider
8437R
(Remove No Spam to Reply)



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Unfortunately there's no oil analysis history...that was my first
question....

Let's say this engine DID need at least a TOH.....how much money we
talking about?

I have a 1975 172M now at 1700 hrs TTSN that has never been open except
for the oil pump AD. Oil stays clean using mostly autofuel, with
steady consumption of 35 hrs/qt, compression is good (never has been
great), and past oil analyses have always been excellent. The engine
is smooth, and I don't plan to overhaul it until there is some sign of
degradation. The hours went on somewhat faster when new than now, and
the oil only gets changed annually now.

I bought it new, know its exact history, cruised it at ~55% power, kept
in a low corrosion environment (MN and WI), and preheated always and
only before cold-starting it. Not for sale though.

36K I would walk now 26k would be worth a look!c


> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Thanks for all the advice guys!!!
>
> I just got a call from the current owner...I should have mentioned that
> it is going in tomorrow for a complete pre-buy by an AP that is
> unfamiliar with the airplane.
>
> I might ask them to pull one or two of the jugs and have a look at the
> cam. Is that typically a part of pre-buy???
>
> The airplane is delivered to the AP, my insurance is lined up,
> financing is not a problem, I'll post the link and let you guys see
> what you think http://tappix.com/728539
>
> Opinions????
>

Depends on if it needs jugs or not... Figure around 1.5 - 2.0 AMU's
without jugs and add another .8 - 1.2 AMU's for each jug. Please no
flames as this is an off the cuff estimate only. YMMV

Jon Kraus
'79 Mooney 201
4443H @ TYQ


wrote:

> Unfortunately there's no oil analysis history...that was my first
> question....
>
> Let's say this engine DID need at least a TOH.....how much money we
> talking about?
>

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 15:18:04 -0700, "RST Engineering"
> wrote:

>Absolutely not. You pull so much as a single nut off a jug of mine, you've
>bought the airplane.
>
>Jim


Agreed.

z

John....I guess this shows my newbe status....What is an AMU????

John....I guess this shows my newbe status....What is an AMU????

Aviation Monetary Unit. 1 AMU = $1000. So our spouses won't know how
much we are spending on our planes. :-)

Jon Kraus
'79 Mooney 201
4443H @ TYQ

wrote:

> John....I guess this shows my newbe status....What is an AMU????
>

Jon Kraus wrote:
> Aviation Monetary Unit. 1 AMU = $1000. So our spouses won't know how
> much we are spending on our planes. :-)
>
> Jon Kraus
> '79 Mooney 201
> 4443H @ TYQ
>
> wrote:
>
> > John....I guess this shows my newbe status....What is an AMU????
> >

now that's funny stuff....

wrote:
>
> I might ask them to pull one or two of the jugs and have a look at the
> cam. Is that typically a part of pre-buy???

No, that's not normally part of a pre-buy.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

Perhaps if in a darkened area, drop a small light thru both spark plug
holes of each cylinder and see if there is any sign of cylinder wall
corrosion & that the valve openings seem normal. It would be better to
check in the rocker box covers though that is another level of
invasiveness. I agree jug removal only after a sale.

Reasonable oil consumption, clean plugs and a successful oil analysis
I'd think could confirm a reliable engine.

Assuming an O-320E2D with reasonable care, has there ever been any
engine more bulletproof?

wrote:
> John....I guess this shows my newbe status....What is an AMU????
>
AMU = Aviation Monetary Unit = $1000. Become an owner and you learn all
too quickly about AMUs. Still, saying "We just spent 1.5 AMUs sounds a
lot better than "We just spent $1500".

Good luck with the buying process. The only advice I can offer is use
your head and not your heart. Be prepared to walk away from the deal.
If you eat the cost of the pre-buy and it turns out to be a turkey,
you'll be money ahead in the long run.


--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-IA Student
Arrow N2104T

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth
with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there
you will always long to return"
- Leonardo Da Vinci

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

Jon Kraus wrote:
> Aviation Monetary Unit. 1 AMU = $1000. So our spouses won't know how
> much we are spending on our planes. :-)

Oops, replied to the earlier post before I scrolled down and saw your
reply Jon. IIRC, I first heard the term from you when you were in the
buying phase of your Mooney. Where did you hear it from?


--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-IA Student
Arrow N2104T

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth
with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there
you will always long to return"
- Leonardo Da Vinci

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

I bought a 172 and it had only 4 hours in the last 3 years when I bought
it. I got a very good deal and the only problem was one bad exhaust
valve. That was found in the prebuy and the owner had it fixed. I flew
that engine for 400 hours when I finally installed a factory OH engine.
The engine ended it life at 2000 hours due to the uncertainity of the
oil pump AD and what I was going to have to spend just to find out.


Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI


Paul Tomblin wrote:
> In a previous article, said:
>
>>I'm looking at at 172 that has 1100 hours since overhaul, holding 73/90
>>++ on all cylinders...the only thing holding me back, last overhaul was
>>1976...
>
>
> 1100 hours in 29 years? That's 38 hours a year. The insides of that
> engine are full of rust and everything is going to go to hell all at once.
>
>

You would need to get a filter sample too. An oil analysis will only catch
wear particles small enough to pass the filter.

Mike
MU-2


"pbc76049" > wrote in message
...
> Start it, get it warm and pull an oil sample. If the cam it tits up,
> the metal will be visable in the sample. Also, pulling a single jug
> won't get ALL the lobes visable, and I've never seen ALL the lobes have
> trouble
> at the same time.
>

You should also note that this particular plane has damage history X 2. Check the NTSB site.

The people who think you can detect camshaft lobe damage by oil analysis might want to check this - http://www.sacskyranch.com/camshaft.htm They also describe the easiest method for camshaft lobe inspection for this aircraft. They also give the proper method for filter examination.

Jack,

I got the AMU term from the Mooney email list I subscribe to at
aviating.com. I liked it so I use it freely....

Jon Kraus
'79 Mooney 201
4443H @ TYQ

Jack Allison wrote:
> Jon Kraus wrote:
>
>> Aviation Monetary Unit. 1 AMU = $1000. So our spouses won't know
>> how much we are spending on our planes. :-)
>
>
> Oops, replied to the earlier post before I scrolled down and saw your
> reply Jon. IIRC, I first heard the term from you when you were in the
> buying phase of your Mooney. Where did you hear it from?
>
>

Lycoming says 12 years or 2000 hours, whichever comes first. However,
many airplanes exceed these "limits" under certain conditions. Flight
schools regularly exceed 2000 hours because their engines are flown so
frequently they avoid internal corrosion which is the main killer of air
cooled engines in airplanes. So, if flying MORE frequently makes the
engine last longer, guess what flying LESS frequently does???

Exactly.

One poster responded that the engine was probably rusted up internally.
Others said that this conclusion was "defective" (I am using polite
language). Their opinions, your money. Others also balked about pulling
a jug for a prebuy. Normally, it is true that this is not done. There
are plenty of uninformed buyers with enough credit to buy a bird
uninspected and sight unseen. So, an unusual request like pulling a jug
will no doubt get you a firm "No F^@%!*G Way" of some kind of robust
belly laugh.

It is still your money. If you want to price the thing as a runout and
deduct the full overhaul value (along with any other firewall forward
item likely to be worn out - like everything) from the price and make an
offer, go right ahead. I would. However, it is likely the owner will
pass on such an offer and sell the plane to a less informed buyer,
probably for full price.

The reason many owners will tell you the engine is perfectly fine is
because they have an old overhaul themselves and are in denial. Some
have glowing anecdotes about old overhauls that are "running fine". I
have never seen anyone follow up with the report that the "fine" engine
self destructed some time after they weighed in with their opinion. If
you are curious, call up the engine shops and ask what they are seeing
for this particular engine/bird combination. Might be a good piece of info.

Compressions are ONE of the signs. Calendar time since overhaul, hours
since overhaul, oil analysis, oil CONSUMPTION, climate, frequency of
hours flown, type of use (training, long x-country, pipeline survey,
etc) are all contributing factors.

Good luck,
Mike

wrote:
> Hey Guys,
>
> I'm looking at at 172 that has 1100 hours since overhaul, holding 73/90
> ++ on all cylinders...the only thing holding me back, last overhaul was
> 1976...
>
> I've talked to several seasoned pilots / aircraft owners that say as
> long as it's holding good compressions, don't sweat it....
>
> Any opinions?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jamie A. Landers
> PP-ASEL
> Looking for a 172
>

Well, ok - but if you [devil's advocate here :-) ] insist the airplane
should command a premium due to its supposedly mid-time, *thirty-year
old* overhaul, then you might just have to let someone peek little more
than usual. Taking off a cylinder on a horizontally opposed, air-cooled
engine like an O-320 is not such a big deal, after all. And the cam is
very vulnerable on disused Lycomings, no question about that.

I would verify the accuracy of the log books by checking for entries related
to the 1971 and 1975 substantial damage accident reports as mentioned by
another poster.
I would be very wary of the logs if they are not recorded.

"JJS" <jschneider@remove socks cebridge.net> wrote in message
...
> > I'm looking at at 172 that has 1100 hours since overhaul, holding 73/90
> > ++ on all cylinders...the only thing holding me back, last overhaul was
> > 1976...
>
> Don't pass yet!
> Are you sure that's not supposed to read 73 / 80 compressions on all
cylinders?
> How many hours has it flown in the last year?
> In the last 6 months?
> Does it have chrome cylinders?
> Does the static run-up meet the type certificate minimum rpm?
> How many major overhauls and was the last one a quality job?
> Is the engine on a low to mid time airframe?
> Is the price discounted enough to account for the fact you may need an
overhaul soon?
>
> I'm gonna get flamed here, but if it has been flying quite a bit recently,
makes good static rpm, has chrome
> cylinders and good logbooks, you may be on to a good buy. I'd have a
pre-buy inspection done including a borescope
> of the cylinders. You should also consider asking the trusted A&P to pull
a jug and inspect the camshaft. If
> everything checks out okay make an offer based on the above
considerations.
> --
> Joe Schneider
> 8437R
> (Remove No Spam to Reply)
>
>
>
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----

OK, let's say that you pull a jug for "inspection". Exactly what do you
expect to find by this? Where is this "rust" going to be? At BEST you will
see four camshaft lobes. That isn't going to tell you squat except for
those four lobes. If the engine has been run recently, all the splash hot
oil will have removed any rust particles you have a chance of seeing.

Now you've pulled the jug. New rings, a hone job on the cylinder, new
cylinder gasket kit, change oil to breakin oil, and for what? And who is
going to pay for it? Lemme TELL you who is going to pay for it, buy the
airplane or not. And if the airplane doesn't break in properly within a
couple of dozen hours, guess who gets to pay for the REdo. You do, redo and
all.

Airplanes are best sold on the "this is the price, no matter what your
mechanic finds" basis. You find some stuff that doesn't make you want to
buy, that's fine. No problem. See ya later.

Jim



"Mike Spera" > wrote in message
link.net...


.. Others also balked about pulling
> a jug for a prebuy. Normally, it is true that this is not done. There are
> plenty of uninformed buyers with enough credit to buy a bird uninspected
> and sight unseen. So, an unusual request like pulling a jug will no doubt
> get you a firm "No F^@%!*G Way" of some kind of robust belly laugh.

Hands down, price it as a runout.

Even if there is zero corrosion, engines have a lot of soft parts,
rubber and cork gaskets and the like that go bad with age alone.
Corrosion is the insidious enemy of engines that sit. It would be better
if the engine were 6 years old and 2000 hours then 30 years and 1100
hours. Unless it was stored in corrosion inhibiting oil for most of
those years, that engine has corrosion.

Lycoming says TBO is 2000hrs or 12yrs, whichever comes first.

Any time you get out of that engine is a bonus.



In article . com>,
wrote:

> Hey Guys,
>
> I'm looking at at 172 that has 1100 hours since overhaul, holding 73/90
> ++ on all cylinders...the only thing holding me back, last overhaul was
> 1976...
>
> I've talked to several seasoned pilots / aircraft owners that say as
> long as it's holding good compressions, don't sweat it....
>
> Any opinions?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jamie A. Landers
> PP-ASEL
> Looking for a 172

Exactly why I offered the advice that I did. Namely, pulling a cylinder
is not what most think of as a "normal" prebuy operation. Also, the
suggestion may get a "smart" reply or outright laugh.

I agree that pulling one jug gives you a limited view. What are you
looking for? Well, how about a lobe that is ground off 30-50%? for
starters. If you catch a copy of Light Plane Maintenance, they have an
easier way to determine this on all the lobes by dial gauging the backs
of the tappets. Still requires some disassembly, but nowhere near as
radical as pulling a jug. Please don't mix up the pushrods.

Since Lycomings may run fine with a lobe seriously ground off, this may
be a better alternative.

Above all, as I said, chances are that any "unusual" requests (like
these) beyond the normal "once over lightly pre-buy" will likely be
rejected.

Sarcasm and anger noted below, although I'm not sure what I said to
provoke it.

Good Luck,
Mike


> OK, let's say that you pull a jug for "inspection". Exactly what do you
> expect to find by this? Where is this "rust" going to be? At BEST you will
> see four camshaft lobes. That isn't going to tell you squat except for
> those four lobes. If the engine has been run recently, all the splash hot
> oil will have removed any rust particles you have a chance of seeing.
>
> Now you've pulled the jug. New rings, a hone job on the cylinder, new
> cylinder gasket kit, change oil to breakin oil, and for what? And who is
> going to pay for it? Lemme TELL you who is going to pay for it, buy the
> airplane or not. And if the airplane doesn't break in properly within a
> couple of dozen hours, guess who gets to pay for the REdo. You do, redo and
> all.
>
> Airplanes are best sold on the "this is the price, no matter what your
> mechanic finds" basis. You find some stuff that doesn't make you want to
> buy, that's fine. No problem. See ya later.
>
> J
>
>
>
> "Mike Spera" > wrote in message
> link.net...
>
>
> . Others also balked about pulling
>
>>a jug for a prebuy. Normally, it is true that this is not done. There are
>>plenty of uninformed buyers with enough credit to buy a bird uninspected
>>and sight unseen. So, an unusual request like pulling a jug will no doubt
>>get you a firm "No F^@%!*G Way" of some kind of robust belly laugh.
>
>
>

"Even if there is zero corrosion, engines have a lot of soft parts,
rubber and cork gaskets and the like that go bad with age alone."

Then why doesn't mine leak? or use oil? or show some iron in the oil
analysis (we'll have an update on that in a couple of months though).

I agree there are a lot of raunchy abused and marginally overhauled
engines out there, but with proper care some engines can last well
beyond TBO.

Even aircraft engines don't use cork anymore.

In article . com>,
"nrp" > wrote:

> "Even if there is zero corrosion, engines have a lot of soft parts,
> rubber and cork gaskets and the like that go bad with age alone."
>
> Then why doesn't mine leak? or use oil? or show some iron in the oil
> analysis (we'll have an update on that in a couple of months though).
>
> I agree there are a lot of raunchy abused and marginally overhauled
> engines out there, but with proper care some engines can last well
> beyond TBO.
>
> Even aircraft engines don't use cork anymore.


Both Lycoming and Continental insist on supplying cork gaskets for the
rocker covers, even though the far superior silicone type are avaiable.

Mike Spera wrote:
>
> I agree that pulling one jug gives you a limited view. What are you
> looking for? Well, how about a lobe that is ground off 30-50%? for
> starters.

Just pull the valve covers, crank the engine around by hand, and watch the
operation of the rockers.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

nrp wrote:
>
> Even aircraft engines don't use cork anymore.

They sure did when this one was last assembled.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

I'd be concerned about it not flying much. Lots of potential for corrosion
and rust on the cam and insides. Might want to pull a jug and use a
bore scope to look at the insides.


> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Hey Guys,
>
> I'm looking at at 172 that has 1100 hours since overhaul, holding 73/90
> ++ on all cylinders...the only thing holding me back, last overhaul was
> 1976...
>
> I've talked to several seasoned pilots / aircraft owners that say as
> long as it's holding good compressions, don't sweat it....
>
> Any opinions?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jamie A. Landers
> PP-ASEL
> Looking for a 172
>

.....Both Lycoming and Continental insist on supplying cork gaskets for
the
rocker covers, even though the far superior silicone type are
avaiable....

The OEM rocker box gaskets are really bad & I agree won't last anywhere
near 25 much less 12 years. I wonder what happens to those aftermarket
red silicon Real Gaskets that come back to Lycoming with cores? When
my OH time comes I'm gonna try to remember to hang onto my old ones.

Which brings to mind that any older overhauled Lycoming engines should
have all the rocker boxes removed on occasion anyway to check if the
free floating rocker arm shafts are wearing their way thru the cover.
Newer engines have a nylon insert to prevent that. I don't think it is
an AD but I recall a service letter or SDR on it. It is on my engine
watch list