![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() text news wrote: Second option is to use Norvic but go for their "Millenium" rebuild at £11491 in which "new cylinders are the Millenium investment cast type and the crankshaft and connecting rods are rebalanced to a finer tolerance than standard Lycoming limits" whatever that really means. Most companies use a technique called "sand casting" to make the cylinder blanks. Millenium uses "lost wax" casting, AKA "investment" casting. The lost wax technique captures finer details and will allow greater precision. You will be able to see this in the cooling fins. There are also claims that investment casting produces a better quality metal with less tendency to have embedded stress points. It is certainly possible to accomplish this, since one can use higher pressures when forcing the metal into the mold. "Rebalancing to a finer tolerance" simply means that they try to make the counterweights on the crankshaft match the pistons. If they do a better job of this than Lycoming does, the engine will vibrate less. I understand that with "re-built" you get a new log book. This sounds good but in practice it is because the engine has been re-built from a collection of untraceable parts, hence the new log book, so the advantage seems emotional rather than mechanical! You've been lied to. When Lycoming creates a remanufactured engine, they use mainly new parts. Whether new or used, all parts used meet the spcifications for new parts. That's the logic behind the new logbook. When Lycoming overhauls an engine, they also use used parts "from a collection of untraceable parts", but those parts only have to meet the specifications for return to service. Either way, they install new pistons and cylinders. One big question...... As far as we know, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with our engine and it has a "known" history, no prop strikes or anything nasty. What is the chance of finding a cracked crankshaft or something equally nasty? There's an excellent chance that the crankshaft will be pitted, possibly badly enough to require replacement with a solid crank. It's highly unlikely that it would be cracked. The camshaft is more likely to require replacement. If we have our own engine overhauled (zero timed) is that better than swapping it for a Lycoming overhauled engine whose history we have no knowledge of? The main thing that gives problems is the cylinders. In a field overhaul, your old cylinders are usually bored and re-used. If necessary, the bore may be plated back up to size. Other things may be done to recondition them, but, any way you look at it, they've put up with a lot of abuse. Few cylinders will reach TBO three times; some won't make it twice. Lycoming replaces the cylinders with new. I have heard that engines can only be re-worked about three times before they are out of spec. If we get a Lycoming exchange engine how do we know that it hasn't already been re-worked two or three times and would be rejected at the next overhaul? As far as the "bottom end" is concerned, you don't. George Patterson A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that you look forward to the trip. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
G.R. Patterson III wrote:
text news wrote: snip I understand that with "re-built" you get a new log book. This sounds good but in practice it is because the engine has been re-built from a collection of untraceable parts, hence the new log book, so the advantage seems emotional rather than mechanical! You've been lied to. When Lycoming creates a remanufactured engine, they use mainly new parts. Whether new or used, all parts used meet the spcifications for new parts. That's the logic behind the new logbook. If "mainly" means pistons and cylinders, yes. So by parts-count, I guess you could say "mainly". But AFAIK you are taking pot luck on some pretty expensive parts: crank, cam, case. When Lycoming overhauls an engine, they also use used parts "from a collection of untraceable parts", but those parts only have to meet the specifications for return to service. Either way, they install new pistons and cylinders. New pistons and cylinders, yes. Since the prices of new pistons and cylinders from Lyc have dropped so drastically a few years ago, I don't think anyone is overhauling Lyc cylinders any more. The cost of overhaul is too close to the new price. snip The main thing that gives problems is the cylinders. In a field overhaul, your old cylinders are usually bored and re-used. If necessary, the bore may be plated back up to size. Other things may be done to recondition them, but, any way you look at it, they've put up with a lot of abuse. Few cylinders will reach TBO three times; some won't make it twice. Lycoming replaces the cylinders with new. I think this is obsolete information. It was true a few years ago, but these days field-overahulers are putting in all-new cylinders. snip Dave Remove SHIRT to reply directly. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Proposals for air breathing hypersonic craft. I | Robert Clark | Military Aviation | 2 | May 26th 04 06:42 PM |
Advice on Ford V-8 Engine Thought | Holger Stephan | Home Built | 3 | February 20th 04 04:04 PM |
engine overhaul & autopilot question | CriticalMass | Owning | 8 | February 13th 04 06:11 PM |
How much to replace cracked crankshaft in 1972 skyhawk O-320-E2D engine | Dave Gribble | Owning | 2 | February 4th 04 08:30 AM |
When does an engine needs an overhaul? | Victor | Owning | 9 | August 15th 03 04:17 PM |