Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:50 AM - Old 912s (Paul Folbrecht)
2. 07:43 AM - Re: Old 912s (Roger Lee)
3. 08:41 AM - Re: Re: Old 912s (Pete Christensen)
4. 01:01 PM - Possible reasons for low compression... (pasj66)
5. 02:25 PM - Rotax 912ULS Question (JohnF)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
It seems that we are now seeing a lot of planes on the used market (Rans, Foxes,
etc) with 912s in the 10-12 year-old range.
According to Rotax such engines (except possibly for certain SN that can be extended
to 15 yrs, though I don't think that applies to any this old) are due for
OH, regardless of time on the engine.
Of course, even with certified engines (in non-commercial use), TBO is just a guideline,
and an engine that's behaving well (compressions, not making metal)
can go long past TBO.
I do know of my Lyc 235s (for example) that are running healthy long after the
10-year TBO has passed. (Maybe that is the most bulletproof GA engine ever.)
You can probably see where this is going: I'm in the market for some light two-place
and most of them have 912s, many of them 10 years or older but with < 500
hours, frequently way under that.
Any reason to fear such engines? If a scoping looks Ok and compressions are good
- are you in the clear? Does that really diagnose the low-end? If the owner
has not been doing filter analysis - no way to know if it's making metal, is
there? Although I think usually that will affect compressions.
I apologize for the vague questions. If there were a book on this subject I'd read
it. Local Rotax expertise is not high. I am in the market now and am seeing
many such engines.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=297590#297590
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
If you have an experimental you can go past the TBO, but should have been doing
good maintenance all along, including oil analysis. The majority of the experimental
owner's do not follow the exact Rotax recommendations and maint. schedules,
but should have. There is no reason to fear going past TBO. Some engines
have 3000+ hours on them, but the older they get the more attention they should
have. Trying to save a dollar or two along the way can cost thousands later.
Just to let people know that if you own an SLSA then the TBO is mandatory. On experimental's
and some GA aircraft it is not.
--------
Roger Lee
Tucson, Az.
Light Sport Repairman - Maintenance Rated
Rotax Repair Center
520-574-1080
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=297599#297599
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Roger is right. My Kitfox has a 912 with 500+ hours and is 18 years old.
Rotax says rebuild after 12?? years I believe or maybe it's 15 years. I
baby mine.
Pete
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger Lee" <ssadiver1@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 9:42 AM
Subject: RotaxEngines-List: Re: Old 912s
>
> If you have an experimental you can go past the TBO, but should have been
> doing good maintenance all along, including oil analysis. The majority of
> the experimental owner's do not follow the exact Rotax recommendations and
> maint. schedules, but should have. There is no reason to fear going past
> TBO. Some engines have 3000+ hours on them, but the older they get the
> more attention they should have. Trying to save a dollar or two along the
> way can cost thousands later.
>
> Just to let people know that if you own an SLSA then the TBO is mandatory.
> On experimental's and some GA aircraft it is not.
>
> --------
> Roger Lee
> Tucson, Az.
> Light Sport Repairman - Maintenance Rated
> Rotax Repair Center
> 520-574-1080
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=297599#297599
>
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Possible reasons for low compression... |
Hello all,
I am hoping to get some input on a problem I noticed on the first 200 h service
on my 914 UL3. When the engine was new the compression was 87/86 on all cylinders.
Now it was 87/58 on cyl 1, 87/66 on cyl 2, 87/81 on cyl 3 and 4. A couple
of months ago I did the SI regarding oil leakage from the cylinder barrels so
a MIF (maintenance induced error) is not ruled out. Do anyone have experience
with misaligned piston ring gaps? what is the remedy? new piston rings? I have
4 EGTs and the front cylinders usually runs richer but the plugs are clean
after running on cruise power. Mag drops 240/270.
Happy for your input.
Best regards
Patrik
--------
MCR R100, R914UL3 W/IC
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=297627#297627
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Rotax 912ULS Question |
Rotax instructions for purging the air from a new engine has you pressurize the
oil reservoir to force oil through the engine as you turn the prop. They also
instruct you to drop the line from the bottom of the engine (sump) that normally
is the return line to the reservoir and put it from the sump into a bucket
on the floor under the engine.
On the RV-12 I am building that line takes over an hour to snake through all the
other hoses, wires, cables, etc, and requires dropping the exhaust muffler to
get at the sump fitting.
I see no reason for that. The line could be simply removed from the oil reservoir
and the normal input then capped so that when pressure from your air compressor
is put into the reservoir and you turn the prop you force oil through the
engine...if it collects in the sump and you have that recommended hose connected
to a bucket the oil will have to be poured back into the reservoir (I am assuming
a new engine and the oil is still unused and clean.)
When you remove the air pressure from the reservoir and reconnect things you then
turn the prop and get the sump pressurized which forces the collected sump
oil back into the reservoir.
What good does dumping it into a bucket do? Just extra work, and a very difficult
trick on an RV-12.
If anyone knows why Rotax suggest this I would like to know.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=297637#297637
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|