Hi,

I've owned my airplane, a '69 piper Cherokee, for about 5 years now, and
it's finally time that one "annual from hell" that happens to everyone at
some point or another to hit. The engine is a lycoming O-360 and currently
has around 850 SMOH. It's been overhauled once in it's lifetime.

It started with some aluminum shavings which led us to suspect bad piston
pin plugs. My A&P pulled the cylinders, found that the piston pin plugs
were indeed bad, and sent the cylinders to a cylinder shop for evaluation.

Unfortunately, the shop has found that one cylinder had a cracked exhaust
port and is unservicable. It needs to be replaced. I'm still waiting to
hear on the other three, but at minimum they need to be rechromed and
possibly some repair work as well.

My A&P says that the lower half of the engine is in excellent condition,
so there is no need for a full overhaul.

This leaves me with three options:

A) Replace all four cylinders with new at a cost of $1500 each. Times four
that is $6000.

B) Replace all four cylinders with "used" (reconditioned?) at a cost of
$900 each. Total of $3700.

C) Replace only the bad one and get the three remaining good ones
rechromed and/or repaired. I don't know what the rechroming/repair fee
will be on the other three yet, so that option is unknown. I'm supposed to
hear back from the shop by tomorrow with an estimate.

Of course, added to these costs are whatever labor and parts my A&P has
accumulated during the annual, the labor to put the replacement cylinders
back on, torque everything down, etc. Generally the rest of the annual
went very well (which is the sole bit of good news).

Anyway, my question to the other airplane owners out there -- which of the
three options A, B, or C would you choose? In generally, my philosophy has
been to avoid using "used" parts when at all possible, but of course these
are very expensive parts. Unfortunately I have no budget saved up for
this, so cost is a major factor to me.

I'm probably looking at owning the airplane for another 400-500 hours
maximum. Thus when I go to sell, the ad would read something like "1250
SMOH 400 STOH". Is the top-overhaul a selling point? Is the buyer going to
care significantly whether I use new cylinders or used/reconditioned?

Thanks!

-----------------------------------------------------------
Posted using Android Newsgroup Downloader:
.... http://www.sb-software.com/android
-----------------------------------------------------------

In article >, wrote:

[snip]
> Anyway, my question to the other airplane owners out there -- which of the
> three options A, B, or C would you choose? In generally, my philosophy has
> been to avoid using "used" parts when at all possible, but of course these
> are very expensive parts. Unfortunately I have no budget saved up for
> this, so cost is a major factor to me.

how much time on each cylinder?

(if you have a 150hp cherokee, then I'd overhaul the engine and upgrade
it to 160hp).

I personally would opt for new cylinders.




>
> I'm probably looking at owning the airplane for another 400-500 hours
> maximum. Thus when I go to sell, the ad would read something like "1250
> SMOH 400 STOH". Is the top-overhaul a selling point? Is the buyer going to
> care significantly whether I use new cylinders or used/reconditioned?

To me, "STOH" is completely meaningless. 1250 SMOH would be the driving
factor. However, I would be very doubtful of used/reconditioned cylinders.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

In researching a crash of a Cessna 414, I found the following just this
morning. The crash was in 2001, and the full NTSB narrative written in
2003. I found the information below very interesting as we have 3 ECi
cylinders on our Aztec.

Maybe we should think more about the heads than the cylinders.

YMMV

Jim



Excerpt from NTSB narrative:

"Lycoming makes use of only new cylinder heads and new barrels in all of its
cylinder assemblies, which are ultimately used on their factory new engines,
engine overhauls, and rebuilt engines. Lycoming does not repair any
component of its cylinder assemblies. Teledyne Continental makes use of only
new cylinder heads and new barrels in its manufacture of new and rebuilt
engines.

ECi received FAA STC (SE4408SW) approval for the repair of 38 different
Lycoming engine cylinder assemblies ranging from 320-720 series engines. The
STC authorizes ECi to repair cylinder assemblies by removing and reusing
used cylinder heads onto new ECi barrels, regardless of the cylinder head's
time in service or number of times that it had been reassembled onto a
cylinder head.

The "serviceable" yellow tags for all the cylinders from the left engine do
not make any reference that the assembly is an STC. The only regulatory
reference provided on these tags was listed as:

"Item Has been repaired by FAA approved process as follows:"

Replacement parts per FAA approved applications listing"

For product definition Refer to ECI's FAA approved Class Reference Manual."

A cylinder assembly consists of two main components, the aluminum alloy head
and the steel alloy barrel, which according to assembly procedures provided
by the FAA, are screwed together while the head is at an elevated
temperature in the vicinity of 600 ºF.

"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
> In researching a crash of a Cessna 414, I found the following just this
> morning. The crash was in 2001, and the full NTSB narrative written in
> 2003. I found the information below very interesting as we have 3 ECi
> cylinders on our Aztec.
>
> Maybe we should think more about the heads than the cylinders.
>
> YMMV
>
> Jim
>
>
>
> Excerpt from NTSB narrative:
>
> "Lycoming makes use of only new cylinder heads and new barrels in all of
> its
> cylinder assemblies, which are ultimately used on their factory new
> engines,
> engine overhauls, and rebuilt engines. Lycoming does not repair any
> component of its cylinder assemblies. Teledyne Continental makes use of
> only
> new cylinder heads and new barrels in its manufacture of new and rebuilt
> engines.
>
> ECi received FAA STC (SE4408SW) approval for the repair of 38 different
> Lycoming engine cylinder assemblies ranging from 320-720 series engines.
> The
> STC authorizes ECi to repair cylinder assemblies by removing and reusing
> used cylinder heads onto new ECi barrels, regardless of the cylinder
> head's
> time in service or number of times that it had been reassembled onto a
> cylinder head.
>
> The "serviceable" yellow tags for all the cylinders from the left engine
> do
> not make any reference that the assembly is an STC. The only regulatory
> reference provided on these tags was listed as:
>
> "Item Has been repaired by FAA approved process as follows:"
>
> Replacement parts per FAA approved applications listing"
>
> For product definition Refer to ECI's FAA approved Class Reference
> Manual."
>
> A cylinder assembly consists of two main components, the aluminum alloy
> head
> and the steel alloy barrel, which according to assembly procedures
> provided
> by the FAA, are screwed together while the head is at an elevated
> temperature in the vicinity of 600 ºF.
>
That does not mean NEW ECi cylinders have used heads. WWW.ECI2Fly.com You
are comparing apples to oranges.

Allen

You can do the 150-160 upgrade during a top overhaul. It doesn't involve the
bottom.

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, wrote:
>
> [snip]
> > Anyway, my question to the other airplane owners out there -- which of
the
> > three options A, B, or C would you choose? In generally, my philosophy
has
> > been to avoid using "used" parts when at all possible, but of course
these
> > are very expensive parts. Unfortunately I have no budget saved up for
> > this, so cost is a major factor to me.
>
> how much time on each cylinder?
>
> (if you have a 150hp cherokee, then I'd overhaul the engine and upgrade
> it to 160hp).
>
> I personally would opt for new cylinders.
>
>
>
>
> >
> > I'm probably looking at owning the airplane for another 400-500 hours
> > maximum. Thus when I go to sell, the ad would read something like "1250
> > SMOH 400 STOH". Is the top-overhaul a selling point? Is the buyer going
to
> > care significantly whether I use new cylinders or used/reconditioned?
>
> To me, "STOH" is completely meaningless. 1250 SMOH would be the driving
> factor. However, I would be very doubtful of used/reconditioned
cylinders.
>
> --
> Bob Noel
> Looking for a sig the
> lawyers will hate
>

"Allen" > wrote in message
> That does not mean NEW ECi cylinders have used heads. WWW.ECI2Fly.com
You
> are comparing apples to oranges.
>
> Allen

Completely correct. I was not intending to compare a used cylinder to a new
cylinder. Nor did I say that. It may not have been evident from the
excerpt that I quoted, but the engine failure was due to cylinder head
fatigue. What I gathered from this is that you should be aware that, unless
you buy new cylinders, you may be buying a new barrel and a used head
because some companies mate used heads to new barrels and market them under
STCs as cylinder replacements. The other point being that the FAA doesn't
limit the hours on a head that can be mated to a new barrel.

Jim

Bob Noel wrote:
> In article >, wrote:
>
> [snip]
> > Anyway, my question to the other airplane owners out there -- which of the
> > three options A, B, or C would you choose? In generally, my philosophy has
> > been to avoid using "used" parts when at all possible, but of course these
> > are very expensive parts. Unfortunately I have no budget saved up for
> > this, so cost is a major factor to me.
>
> how much time on each cylinder?
>
> (if you have a 150hp cherokee, then I'd overhaul the engine and upgrade
> it to 160hp).

did they make 150hp O-360's?

Ah ha.. I missed that point.

Please ignore my previous post. I know nothing about O-360 upgrades.


"xyzzy" > wrote in message
ups.com...


> did they make 150hp O-360's?

"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
> "Allen" > wrote in message
>> That does not mean NEW ECi cylinders have used heads. WWW.ECI2Fly.com
> You
>> are comparing apples to oranges.
>>
>> Allen
>
> Completely correct. I was not intending to compare a used cylinder to a
> new
> cylinder. Nor did I say that. It may not have been evident from the
> excerpt that I quoted, but the engine failure was due to cylinder head
> fatigue. What I gathered from this is that you should be aware that,
> unless
> you buy new cylinders, you may be buying a new barrel and a used head
> because some companies mate used heads to new barrels and market them
> under
> STCs as cylinder replacements. The other point being that the FAA doesn't
> limit the hours on a head that can be mated to a new barrel.
>
> Jim
That's true. They also do not limit the hours that can be on a crankshaft
or crankcase, or the number of times it has been overhauled. You can get a
NEW or REBUILT engine from TCM with a .010 under crankshaft and is still
considered within NEW limits.

Allen

If you REALLY plan on offing the bird in 400-500 hours, you may get away
with overhauls. But, if I were on the "receiving" (buying) end, I would
give you zip for overhauled cylinders and consider the engine a runout.

My bird got .010 oversized "first run" overhauls 800 hours ago from a
"big name" shop. I am about to replace the THIRD cylinder. How much did
I save??? (answer: nothing).

Some say they get good service from overhauls. Other say they are junk.

I don't understand how you get from approx $3700 to $7000 on a set of
Superiors.

Your wrench may charge you 20 hours for the swap. Even at $100/hour you
should not break $6k total.

Keep asking questions.

Good Luck,
Mike

>
> This leaves me with three options:
>
> A) Replace all four cylinders with new at a cost of $1500 each. Times four
> that is $6000.
>
> B) Replace all four cylinders with "used" (reconditioned?) at a cost of
> $900 each. Total of $3700.
>
> C) Replace only the bad one and get the three remaining good ones
> rechromed and/or repaired. I don't know what the rechroming/repair fee
> will be on the other three yet, so that option is unknown. I'm supposed to
> hear back from the shop by tomorrow with an estimate.
>

I had a friend with a Mooney with an 0-360 that was topped at 2500
hours and made it to 4500 hours. I would go with new cylinders.
Personally I like Lycoming cylinders, but the others are ok too. There
is a chance of problems with any of them.

> If you assume that you are going to keep the airplane a 1000 or more
> hours, then factory new cylinders are the only way to go... If you are
> going to keep the airplane for the forseeable future then a complete
> overhaul at this time is the smart money...

I was with you up to that last line, Denny. Why do you conditionally
advocate a complete overhaul (if he's keeping it 1000 or more hours) when
the engine only has 850 hours on it?

To Scott: Personally, I'd go with all new Millennium cylinders, and find a
different A&P. His quote is too high, IMHO.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Vapor lock of the prefrontal lobes, aka, brain fart.... Scratch that
line, just put new cylinders on it...



************************************************** *************************************************8
I was with you up to that last line, Denny. Why do you conditionally
advocate a complete overhaul (if he's keeping it 1000 or more hours)
when
the engine only has 850 hours on it?