$3500.00

Tom-D

Tom-D

Taxi to Parking
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
34,740
Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Thought you would like to see what $3500.00 looks like in engine parts, for those of you who would consider running with metal in your oil, add this to your overhaul costs.
 

Attachments

  • DSCN3440.JPG
    DSCN3440.JPG
    212.7 KB · Views: 259
  • DSCN3441.JPG
    DSCN3441.JPG
    208.6 KB · Views: 222
aviatingfool said:
Oil analysis didn't see this coming?
Click to expand...

some engines have a maximum metal they can still be airworthy.

Lycoming 0-320 is one.

This is an 0-200-A that failed the allowable size to regrind due to groves in the main bearing journals, due to no filtration on the engine when it started to make metal.

no Oil analysis was used.
 
Tom-D said:
Thought you would like to see what $3500.00 looks like in engine parts, for those of you who would consider running with metal in your oil, add this to your overhaul costs.
Click to expand...

Is that parts only? If this is the only issue, what does that tear down average labor-wise?
 
Tom can you describe what the damage looks like. I'm not sure what I'm looking out.
 
Good thing it's a Continental crank. A Lyc crank would cost way more.

The screens used in those engines don't stop a lot of metal. Much better to have an adapter for the spin-on filters, and cut the filter apart at every oil change to see what's there.

Dan
 
AdamZ said:
Tom can you describe what the damage looks like. I'm not sure what I'm looking out.
Click to expand...

I don't have the old crank back from Aircraft specialities yet, Apparently they condemned it for being unable to grind to .010" under and clean it up for new bearings.

What you are looking at is a brand new 0-200-A crank from new old stock. bought thru National Aviation in SEA.

this engine will have the filter adaptor installed when it goes back together. along with 4 new ECI. cylinders, 8 new lifter assemblies, new Cam, we did save the case and data tag. :)
 
KeithASanford said:
Is that parts only? If this is the only issue, what does that tear down average labor-wise?
Click to expand...
Yes that is the cost of a new 0-200 crank. + or - pocket change.

over and above the normal overhaul costs.
 
Dan Thomas said:
The screens used in those engines don't stop a lot of metal. Much better to have an adapter for the spin-on filters, and cut the filter apart at every oil change to see what's there.
Click to expand...

That was one of the first things we did to the 310 when we got it. Dumped the screens for spin-on filters, added air-oil separators, and added a JPI.

Big bonus.
 
I feel a lot better, I kept looking at Toms pictures and thinking, wow that looks like a new crank, I just can't seen any damage. Now I know why.
 
While I'm a big fan of remote oil filters, and have one on my engine, I'm not a fan of air 'oil' separators.

I think there is a misunderstanding, prompted by the marketers of the products about what they do. The canister has nothing to do with any chemical separation, it is simply a precipitator which separates liquids and gasses and collects the liquid for return to the crankcase. Surly some of that liquid is oil vapor but the majority of it is the precipitate of the products of combustion. It comes from ring blowby, which is quite significant in aero engines, and from oil guide blowby which usually isn't a lot of the problem.

However, the precipitate that is returned to the crankcase from the canister isn't something I really want back in there. So, I've taken my air 'oil' separator off and gone back to a simple vent tube with appropriate screen to keep out bugs getting back in the engine. Modern auto engine use a check valve and return the products of combustion back to the intake for reburning.
 
I put a brand new crank in my O-200 also. The engine had 4,500 TT on it. No oil filter just the screen for 4500 hours...

It was the thrust bearing surface worn out that Aircraft Specialty Services red tagged it for. I agreed after measuring it myself.

The engine was not making metal at the time of teardown
 
bnt83 said:
I put a brand new crank in my O-200 also. The engine had 4,500 TT on it. No oil filter just the screen for 4500 hours...

It was the thrust bearing surface worn out that Aircraft Specialty Services red tagged it for. I agreed after measuring it myself.

The engine was not making metal at the time of teardown
Click to expand...

They do wear out, and the FAA stubbornly refuses to authorizes a build up process for them.
 
docmirror said:
While I'm a big fan of remote oil filters, and have one on my engine, I'm not a fan of air 'oil' separators.

I think there is a misunderstanding, prompted by the marketers of the products about what they do. The canister has nothing to do with any chemical separation, it is simply a precipitator which separates liquids and gasses and collects the liquid for return to the crankcase. Surly some of that liquid is oil vapor but the majority of it is the precipitate of the products of combustion. It comes from ring blowby, which is quite significant in aero engines, and from oil guide blowby which usually isn't a lot of the problem.

However, the precipitate that is returned to the crankcase from the canister isn't something I really want back in there. So, I've taken my air 'oil' separator off and gone back to a simple vent tube with appropriate screen to keep out bugs getting back in the engine. Modern auto engine use a check valve and return the products of combustion back to the intake for reburning.
Click to expand...

A third choice exists for us experimental guys...

I run a crackcase evacuation system that uses vacuum created by the exhaust to burn off any blow-by and as an added benefit I get a perfectly clean belly on the plane. Another plus is it adds a slight vacuum to the crankcase for a bit of added horsepower.... it is literally a win /win/win situation.:yes:

http://www.moroso.com/catalog/categorydisplay.asp?catcode=13023
 
N801BH said:
A third choice exists for us experimental guys...

I run a crackcase evacuation system that uses vacuum created by the exhaust to burn off any blow-by and as an added benefit I get a perfectly clean belly on the plane. Another plus is it adds a slight vacuum to the crankcase for a bit of added horsepower.... it is literally a win /win/win situation.:yes:

http://www.moroso.com/catalog/categorydisplay.asp?catcode=13023
Click to expand...

Seen them before. It's a good solution except I don't think I believe the 'added HP' deal unless someone has a dyno with before/after.
 
docmirror said:
Seen them before. It's a good solution except I don't think I believe the 'added HP' deal unless someone has a dyno with before/after.
Click to expand...

I have probably 1000 hours of running a dyno and years of R&D experience on serious race engines........

Properly installed and placed close to the exit of the collectors, the system can produce 7" of vacuum @5000 rpm on a 358 cu in motor.. We usually gain 10-14 hp.... tested them dozens of times and all results are repeatable......

They will NOT work if you have mufflers that are placed after the welded in venturi tube.. The back pressure of the mufflers actually force exhaust back up into the valve covers... That is the main reason they run check valves...

Other then that it is FREE hp on a race motor..:yes:
 
Last edited:
It is really simple actually, reducing crankcase pressure increases the delta P across the piston, presto more power!

You can then also do some tweaks that can be done to take advantage of the vacuum but just the vacuum itself is of benefit.
 
If you have dynos with the before/after and nothing else was changed then it sounds good to me. The link had no dyno info, just a marketing slogan of 'more HP' which I've heard before.

One of the cars I work on regularly has a serious issue with crankcase pressure and oil packing in the heads. I'm going to look into this further. The only issue is we run muffs of course.
 
Skylane81E said:
It is really simple actually, reducing crankcase pressure increases the delta P across the piston, presto more power!.
Click to expand...

More work done on the expansion / exhaust strokes. Lost work during the compression / intake strokes. The delta pressure across the piston should come out at a net zero power change.

Pulling a little more residual out of the cylinders, on the other hand could potentially make a difference. :dunno:

They claim better ring seating and if the dyno shows a boost, it's doing something. But I wouldn't expect it to be due to just having a vacuum below the pistons (which works against you during half the cycle).
 
Could a dyno really measure such a small change? I can't even tell the difference between a 150 hp O-320 vs 160 hp O-320


Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
More work done on the expansion / exhaust strokes. Lost work during the compression / intake strokes. The delta pressure across the piston should come out at a net zero power change.

Pulling a little more residual out of the cylinders, on the other hand could potentially make a difference. :dunno:

They claim better ring seating and if the dyno shows a boost, it's doing something. But I wouldn't expect it to be due to just having a vacuum below the pistons (which works against you during half the cycle).
Click to expand...
 
bnt83 said:
Could a dyno really measure such a small change? I can't even tell the difference between a 150 hp O-320 vs 160 hp O-320
Click to expand...


Yup....

Back when I got out of racing 25 years ago we could build 10 motors as close to the same as possible... We would run all 10 to break them in and get numbers... Good HP back then was 720-730.... People would kill for a 732 HP motor,.......... that was legal.;).

As am sure data acquisition systems are far more accurate now, but we could see 1.5-2 hp differences between motors and tuning set ups.
 
Ben,
Would you run your auto conversion if it were making metal?

what would a new crank cost for it? and how many hours would it require to replace it?
 
perhaps I misunderstood Ben's solution, but it reminds me of the perpetual machine...I'm a bit skeptical of anyone that offers a free lunch, except if they're trying to sell me something.
 
Selling HP. Someone has before/after dynos with this mod isolated.
 
Tom-D said:
Ben,
Would you run your auto conversion if it were making metal?

what would a new crank cost for it? and how many hours would it require to replace it?
Click to expand...


I'd be at least somewhat concerned that an engine making more metal than normal, might toss a chunk large enough to obstruct and oil galley and starve a highly stressed bearing.

BANG!!! and a rod hangs out of the case and the windscreen is brown...:yikes:

Oil filters catch the biggest chunks too.
 
Tom-D said:
Ben,
Would you run your auto conversion if it were making metal?

what would a new crank cost for it? and how many hours would it require to replace it?
Click to expand...

No sir... First sign of any motor I run is making ANY metal at all is going to get a thorough examination on how and why it's failing... You and I both know ,the first 10 hours or so any motor will produce small glitter in the oil from bushings, rings, gears and various other mating parts seating in together, so a very small metallic sheen on the oil when changed is expected. I am so anal I actually do oil analysis on that first oil change to and use those numbers as a reference... Keep in mind the testing company will usually send you a OMG report since they don't know it is a first run /break in batch.. After that, any abnormal analysis report gets my full attention..

Metal in suspension in the oil acts just like a lapping compound and as for the last "discussion" we had on that topic we all know lapping compound will wear metal down....


My auto engine conversion is based on "off the shelf" parts so future customers can have readily available parts to refresh their motors in case I fall over dead. Since the Ford 302 stroked to 347 cu. in. is a somewhat popular trick, cranks are available from various sources... I use only the best in my plane, and it is a 4340 steel forging.. Ground to std, polished, balanced and ready to bolt in, the crank is about 700 dollars...

ps.. I did see the pics you posted up above and two things struck me.

1- The crank didn't look all that bad...

2- I am amazed they don't offer .020 under bearings.. Reducing the journal size by .010 on each side is not going to effect the strength of it at all.. For all the others reading this that don't grasp what 20 thousand's looks like .. just take 3 pieces of printer paper and that is about how much material will be removed from the crank when ground for a .020 undersized bearing.

Edit.... Oops.. I didn't see your question on time to replace my crank... I consider that a MAJOR overhaul as the entire motor has to come apart so if I had all new parts sitting in front of me, replacing the crank would probabaly take 12-15 man hours.
 
Last edited:
bnt83 said:
I'd be at least somewhat concerned that an engine making more metal than normal, might toss a chunk large enough to obstruct and oil galley and starve a highly stressed bearing.

BANG!!! and a rod hangs out of the case and the windscreen is brown...:yikes:

Oil filters catch the biggest chunks too.
Click to expand...

I can't believe motor were actually built using just screens for oil filtration... :yikes::hairraise::eek:.. I know they were, but I just can't wrap my mind around that silly concept..
 
N801BH said:
No sir... First sign of any motor I run is making ANY metal at all is going to get a thorough examination on how and why it's failing... You and I both know ,the first 10 hours or so any motor will produce small glitter in the oil from bushings, rings, gears and various other mating parts seating in together, so a very small metallic sheen on the oil when changed is expected. I am so anal I actually do oil analysis on that first oil change to and use those numbers as a reference... Keep in mind the testing company will usually send you a OMG report since they don't know it is a first run /break in batch.. After that, any abnormal analysis report gets my full attention..

Metal in suspension in the oil acts just like a lapping compound and as for the last "discussion" we had on that topic we all know lapping compound will wear metal down....


My auto engine conversion is based on "off the shelf" parts so future customers can have readily available parts to refresh their motors in case I fall over dead. Since the Ford 302 stroked to 347 cu. in. is a somewhat popular trick, cranks are available from various sources... I use only the best in my plane, and it is a 4340 steel forging.. Ground to std, polished, balanced and ready to bolt in, the crank is about 700 dollars...

ps.. I did see the pics you posted up above and two things struck me.

1- The crank didn't look all that bad...

2- I am amazed they don't offer .020 under bearings.. Reducing the journal size by .010 on each side is not going to effect the strength of it at all.. For all the others reading this that don't grasp what 20 thousand's looks like .. just take 3 pieces of printer paper and that is about how much material will be removed from the crank when ground for a .020 undersized bearing.

Edit.... Oops.. I didn't see your question on time to replace my crank... I consider that a MAJOR overhaul as the entire motor has to come apart so if I had all new parts sitting in front of me, replacing the crank would probabaly take 12-15 man hours.
Click to expand...

Pictures are of a brand new crank. I would like to see the old crank and the bearings.

In regards to taking a crank down .020, there is an STC to do that on O-200's I believe. Other than that it’s really about how much case hardened material will be removed before it loses strength to the point it needs to be case hardened again. Or they just want to sell more parts...


This copied all screwy:

A75, C75C85A65, C90, O-200, STC SE4247SW Regrind crankshaft to .020 , undersize on crankpin and main journals
SW Engine Components, Inc. 9503 Middlex San Antonio, TX 78217
​
 
Last edited:
bnt83 said:
In regards to taking a crank down .020, there is an STC to do that on O-200's I believe. Other than that it’s really about how much case hardened material will be removed before it loses strength to the point it needs to be case hardened again. Or they just want to sell more parts...
Click to expand...

They don't case harden cranks.. it makes them too brittle...

They do Nitrite them though, and you can re- nitrite a ground crank to restore surface toughness.
 
N801BH said:
They don't case harden cranks.. it makes them too brittle...

They do Nitrite them though, and you can re- nitrite a ground crank to restore surface toughness.
Click to expand...


That's right. Been a long time since I studied that...

I don't know if the STC holder is the only one who has .020 bearings or what the deal is there.

Edit: IIRC the case has to be modified for the .020 under bearings which added to the descision to just buy a new crank when ours was rejected so many years ago.
 
Last edited:
bnt83 said:
That's right. Been a long time since I studied that...

I don't know if the STC holder is the only one who has .020 bearings or what the deal is there.

Edit: IIRC the case has to be modified for the .020 under bearings which added to the descision to just buy a new crank when ours was rejected so many years ago.
Click to expand...
\I don't know what the deal is either, the .020 under is news to me.

I will check on it.

and we will see what the rejection tag says when I get it back.
 
N801BH said:
Duh.... I must be dumber then I look.... For some reason I thought the pic was of the trashed crank..:mad2::(:redface:

[/LEFT]
Click to expand...

Do you actually read the posts?

""This is what $3500.00 looks like. "" a new crank.
 
Tom-D said:
\I don't know what the deal is either, the .020 under is news to me.

I will check on it.

and we will see what the rejection tag says when I get it back.
Click to expand...

Make sure you get your same crank back.... Hate to see you end up with a bad core and they have a good, yellow tagged .010 crank in stock...:rolleyes::eek:
 
Tom-D said:
Do you actually read the posts?

""This is what $3500.00 looks like. "" a new crank.
Click to expand...

I try to skim through most of your posts.. sir..:yes:. :rofl::lol:

My bad for not reading each one , word for word...:redface:
 
N801BH said:
You and I both know ,the first 10 hours or so any motor will produce small glitter in the oil from bushings, rings, gears and various other mating parts seating in together,
Click to expand...

That may be true with the engines you build, but not mine. I plastic gauge each and every bearing, polish the cranks, cams, and lifter bodies. I use new cylinders from ECI, checking the valve assembly and re-polish what needs to be and every part is washed and dried before assembly.
I pull the filters after the test cell run, and after the test flight, and again at 5 hours, there should never be any metal debris in the filters.
 
N801BH said:
Make sure you get your same crank back.... Hate to see you end up with a bad core and they have a good, yellow tagged .010 crank in stock...:rolleyes::eek:
Click to expand...
companies that do that in the aviation industry aren't in the industry long.

plus they were out of 0-200 cranks. I bought this one from a totally different place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top