Aero Classic Leakguards Review

Lowflynjack

En-Route
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
4,334
Display Name

Display name:
Jack Fleetwood
So in the last two weeks, I've had people mention they had flats. Each time I asked them if it was an Aero Classic Leakguard tube. Both times it was. Both times, pinholes in the side of the tube.

I've replaced at least 5 of these, on two different planes, all for pinholes in the sidewall area. Don't buy this junk!!! You'll save a little money until you have a flat and have to call you buddy to fly you a new tube, or pay a mechanic their weekend rate!

There are a lot of good reviews, but when you start looking at the bad reviews, they almost all mention pinholes in the sidewalls.

Below are reviews... all from the first page on Aircraft Spruce. This is not a new issue, review go back to 2016 and they're still getting bad reviews today. They should be ashamed to sell them.

Last annual I replaced my original Leakguard tubes with new. 9 months later 1 tube developed a pin hole leak in the side causing deflation and damage to the wheel pant. Upon disassembly and inspection 3 more spots on the same side of the tube show potential pin holes developing, indicating possible manufacturing defect.

These WILL develop a pin holes after a very short time and leave you with a flat unexpectedly. I thought maybe it was a bad batch or something so I tried another order and same thing happened.

Had this 500x5 tube in my nose wheel for 17 months. Tube went flat for no reason. Found pin hole on side at mold seam. Shop told me they have had a large number of these tubes failing.

I have used these for years, on my personal aircraft, my company aircraft and my clients aircraft. In the last three years I have had 6 failures in 6.00x6 LeakGuards due to either pin holes in the sidewalls or failed seams.

Never again. This is the second Aero Classics tube that has failed on my antique airplane that is flown often with meticulous attention paid to tire pressure, tire condition, wheel condition, etc. This failure was a pin hole opposite the valve stem. I own three vintage taildraggers that fly all the time - my daily driver flies 100+ hours per year. I cant risk a high value vintage airplane over a poorly made inner tube. Just ordered six Michelin Airstops from Aero Performance - all the Aero Classics junk is going in the trash where it belongs.

I only had my old one for less than fifteen hours when it developed a pin hole leak. The material appears to have broken down.

Did not last 4 months before it had pin hole leaks, pay me now or pay me later - get michelin.

Another pinhole failure report for Aero Classic Leak-Guard 6.00-6. It lasted 3.4 years (and 137h TT). No crease in the pinhole location.

I replaced both tires and tubes on my Stinson three years ago and both have failed due to the same pin hole flaws in the sidewalls. I use 700x6 tubes and got two replacements from a friend and both failed with the same flaws in the sidewall.
 
Last week I had to replace a six monthnold Aero Classic innertube on our nosewheel. Looks like the leak was right where the valve stem meets the rubber. I had kept it inflated to 38-42 PSI, no hard landings, no rough surface taxiing. Didn’t see any signs that the tube had been chafing inside the tire, and there was nothing that could have snagged the valve stem and induced a side load.
 
Good post. We all need to know the good, bad and the ugly. <scratches aero performance off the tube list>
 
Add me to the list of not being happy with Aero Classics.

I talked to Desser at OSH about my experiences and they said to keep the tires on my Warrior at around 35 PSI vs the 24 the book says. Basically, it sounded like any of the ply ratings should be above 30. We’ll see…
 
Good post. We all need to know the good, bad and the ugly. <scratches aero performance off the tube list>
It's been mentioned on the forum before, but I felt like it was time to start a thread. Too many people getting ripped off! It's average $100 for the Aero Classic tube, $154 for the Michelin Air Stops, which get great reviews.

One of the guys I mentioned recently had a flat on his Mooney. He had to pay for a hotel for the night, buy another tube, and fuel for another pilot to fly it out to him. Luckily it went flat on the ground, so it didn't chew up a tire or cause a safety issue.
 
This is what I’m running into as well, I cannot remember how many flats I’ve had or when to consider it a flat. I would add air and fly and it would be fine then a few days later it’s flat or I’m landing and it becomes flat. I have spare tubes in the baggage compartment and an air compressor handheld tool. Shut down the engine, add air, I can taxi back to where I need to go and the air might hold for another day or so. Not sure what’s going on. My mechanic said I’m using the brakes too much so I started to think it was my fault. I’ve replaced 3 tubes and 1 tire so far. I was stuck on the runway with a flat and tried to get off the runway and that messed up the tire I think or it might have been that way from landing with a flat. Anyway I’m also not happy. I have spares of those tubes too and they are already installed in my tires. o_O So I’ll probably be stuck with them for awhile.

Are Michelin tubes the ones to buy?
 
My friendly neighborhood A&P will only grudgingly install non-Michelin tubes. He prefers the Michelin Airstop tubes.
 
For 20 years, we've only used Michelin tubes and we only need to add some air occasionally. If it works, don't fix it.
 
You had me worried that I was using those tubes?
I don't think they are air stops?
Been on the plane for close to 2 years now with no trouble.
I personally believe low air pressure causes early failures in tubes.
I hope I didn't jinxed myself?
IMG_1542.JPG
 
You had me worried that I was using those tubes?
I don't think they are air stops?
Been on the plane for close to 2 years now with no trouble.
I personally believe low air pressure causes early failures in tubes.
I hope I didn't jinxed myself?
IMG_1542.JPG
Not sure, but I just put the Desser Monsters on my plane. I've heard good things about them!
 
I've been using leakguards for 8 years. Only had one problem, and that was installer error (me).
 
Not sure, but I just put the Desser Monsters on my plane. I've heard good things about them!
Yes I have been very happy with the monster retreads. I Noticed how much nicer and solid they seem to be landing on turf and have always run smooth. They are tough as nails.
 
Last edited:
We keep both the Michelin Air Stop and the Aero-Classic Leakguard in stock at the shop. The Michelin is definitely our preferred tube when doing the replacements, but they are a lot pricier, so some folks prefer the Leakguard (usually the same folks using AirHawk tires). I can't say we've seen any trouble with the Leakguards, however. I actually can't recall the last time we had a tube failure from a regular customer of the shop. One thing that we have seen a lot of with transient aircraft that experience flats that we help out, is exceedingly excessive talc application, and every time we see that we find little balls of talc or talc/rubber and these seem to be what then causes the trouble.
 
One thing that we have seen a lot of with transient aircraft that experience flats that we help out, is exceedingly excessive talc application, and every time we see that we find little balls of talc or talc/rubber and these seem to be what then causes the trouble.
Someone told me using baby powder instead of talc causes this. They said baby J&J added corn starch after lawsuits for cancer.
 
Someone told me using baby powder instead of talc causes this. They said baby J&J added corn starch after lawsuits for cancer.
I only use tire talc from ACS/Dresser because I learned not to use baby powder drag racing with tubes years ago.
I flew these tires until they were bald with 2500 landings and no flats, 3 years time. Airhawks and the same tubes pictured above .
IMG_21011.jpg

I will never run them this bald again. They were very thin in the tread. Not much puncture protection.
IMG_1893.JPG
 
Last edited:
I talked to Desser at OSH about my experiences and they said to keep the tires on my Warrior at around 35 PSI vs the 24 the book says. Basically, it sounded like any of the ply ratings should be above 30. We’ll see…
Since we're ressurecting this thread, any other opinions or real-life experiences on running these higher pressures?
 
I have always run my tires a little over inflated unless I am looking for a smoother ride.

35 psi all the way around on my 4 ply 172 tires.

OT a little...trailer tires I run 10 psi over what the sidewall says. Been doing it for 25 years and over 100K miles with everything from a 49' trailer to a open car trailer. Do it on trailer tires!
 
Since we're ressurecting this thread, any other opinions or real-life experiences on running these higher pressures?
I’ve been running them higher, as per the post you quoted, and no problems so far, although I’d like that to be for years rather than months so as to confirm the benefit.

The one caveat to the increased pressure solution is that someone observed long ago that the tubes (and tires) are part of a landing gear system and changing the pressure changes the contribution of shock absorption by that component. Not sure how relevant the increased pressure is for that aspect but it’s worth considering.
 
The one caveat to the increased pressure solution is that someone observed long ago that the tubes (and tires) are part of a landing gear system and changing the pressure changes the contribution of shock absorption by that component. Not sure how relevant the increased pressure is for that aspect but it’s worth considering.
On my Cessna 140, I remember my tires always looked low when inflated to the recommended pressure. I was told not to add air because the factory calculated how much load goes into the landing gear when you land. On the other hand, I had to add a little air to my 182 tires so that I could push the plane back into the hangar by myself!
 
Since we're ressurecting this thread, any other opinions or real-life experiences on running these higher pressures?
So like car tires and as someone has already mentioned, that Cessna Beech, Piper. et al. they calculate the standard tire pressure based on foot print.
The size of tire contact where it meets the macadam...
Now, just like our cars (as opposed to reading the sidewalls for "max pressure" ) the correct tire pressure is published in the POH and it is up to the PIC to operate the aircraft in a safe manner.

On my cars, I take on the responsibility of gaining greater MPG (less rolling resistance) by over inflating my tires by 5-7 psi (*if I am expecting good weather driving conditions)

I would (if I over inflated my aircraft tires) that there would be a longer landing roll and less controllability than if they were inflated as the aircraft was type certificated...
 
Tire pressure. The POH has tire pressures listed, but that differs from the higher pressure listed by the tire manufacturer for the given size, ply number, and weight/load.

I’m thinking that the POH recommended pressure based on 1974 tire technology should be superseded by the 2024 tire manufactures recommendation.

Thoughts?
 
Tire pressure. The POH has tire pressures listed, but that differs from the higher pressure listed by the tire manufacturer for the given size, ply number, and weight/load.

I’m thinking that the POH recommended pressure based on 1974 tire technology should be superseded by the 2024 tire manufactures recommendation.

Thoughts?
Just because a tire mfg rep says that you can put so many psi in certainly does not mean that you should...
I'd follow the Pilot Operating Handbook... the ONLY place where the tire pressure is published.
* I don't believe tire pressure is listed in the maintenance manual
 
Back
Top