Cessna 175?

[Tom-D]

You need to learn how to read. It doesn't say don't use it in engines with transmissions, it says to not use it in engines with friction clutches that share the oil between the transmission/clutch and the rest of the engine. It's not clear what a LYCOMING service bulletin has to do with a CONTINENTAL engine.

What do you believe the G0-300 does, the gear box starter clutch and every thing else in the engine uses the same oil system. Ron believes the oil is good to go in all engines it simply is not.

I'm also trying to figure out what "friction clutch" you've got in your GO-300.

The 0-300/GO-300 as a vac pump pad and a angle drive starter with a friction clutch just like many of the Continental engines.

The only "clutch" is the starter assembly and it's not what Lycoming is talking about (they're talking about helicopter engines like the VO-435).

However, there have been issues with the starter drive and the additive, but not from the clutch plates but the spring.

What do you believe is the root cause of the spring to be polished to the point of slipping? the spring is the friction clutch.

If Lycoming needed the snake oil in their 0-320 H2AD and the 0-360-E series, but put out a service letter like the one linked above to not use it in friction clutches, why would any one believe it's good to go in any continental engine with the friction clutches Lycoming says not to use it in ?

the next time you see a C-150 key start having a slipping starter try this, remove the starter assembly, disassemble the prowl clutch and wash with electronic cleaner, change oil to 20W50 phillips and see if that doesn't cure the slipping problem. It has for every 150 I service. and the 0-470 my hangar neighbor has and the 4, 0-300-Ds I've owned.

So, if you want to run with Rons advice go ahead, we A&Ps need the work.

 

[kgruber]

His opinions are not shared by the FAA......

Which makes me even more in agreement with Tom. The FAA is anti aviation in the wide extent. Just a bureaucratic bunch of pencil pushers.

 

[BiffJ]

According to the info I've seen the 175 fuselage is basically the same as the mid 50's 180, not the 172. I know my 175 is wider than the early 172's and has the same fuse width inside as the 180 from the same period. Mine is a 1960 so it was the first year for the swept tail. A 172 instrument panel won't fit it as its narrower. Its only a 2 inch difference if I recall but 2" at the shoulders can make a big difference in comfort. The fuel tanks are 26gal per side but only 43 useable in all attitudes. I think the 172 was 40 total and 36 useable??? In any case its a bit more fuel than the bladder can make comfortably in one shot.

Mine has an STC'd 160HP lycoming conversion with a constant speed and it climbs and cruises well. The constant speed prop seems to make up for the difference in the horsepower from the original 175HP rated engine. The company that did the STC did both the 160HP/CS and a 180HP conversion. I believe both choices used the engines and props off the apache. Mine originally had an accumulator installed to unfeather the prop for starting. I think they redid the stops in the prop to keep that from being needed now. I do have some time in the GO-300 powered planes and this one climbs better with less rated power and I think its due to the prop being able to keep things winding up where they work better.

All in all the 175 is a great plane. Its similar enough to a 172 that its no problem to transition as long as you pay attention to the GO-300's needs. Don't run low rpm and think you're babying it. Read what Tom wrote about that....
Find one with a lycoming and there are fewer issues for the average pilot and easier parts sourcing. The 40deg manual flaps are really nice . I've always hated the pokey electrics and the crappy indicator in the later planes.

Frank

 

[RotorAndWing]

The FAA is anti aviation in the wide extent. Just a bureaucratic bunch of pencil pushers.

 

[denverpilot]

kgruber doesn't know there's a few of you good ones left R&W.

Glad to see you guys might get your first official funding/authorization bill in over a decade from the ass-hats on both sides of the fictitious aisle, sometime soon!

 

[Tom-D]

kgruber doesn't know there's a few of you good ones left R&W.

Glad to see you guys might get your first official funding/authorization bill in over a decade from the ass-hats on both sides of the fictitious aisle, sometime soon!

Explain "Good ones"

 

[denverpilot]

Well...

He's one of the few who venture out into public (even if it's under a pseudonym) to interact with us peasants who pay his bills, for starters.

There's hints of what his job role might be in some posts, therefore his posts are one of the only forms of confirmation that he's worth paying in the first place.

His employer has a pretty bad PR problem these days when it comes to budget vs. worth so, he's helping that a bit in his own small way.

He may not always be right, but he at least tries to make the old "I'm from the FAA and I'm here to help" joke not quite as laugh-worthy.

 

[Tom-D]

Well...

He's one of the few who venture out into public (even if it's under a pseudonym) to interact with us peasants who pay his bills, for starters.

There's hints of what his job role might be in some posts, therefore his posts are one of the only forms of confirmation that he's worth paying in the first place.

His employer has a pretty bad PR problem these days when it comes to budget vs. worth so, he's helping that a bit in his own small way.

He may not always be right, but he at least tries to make the old "I'm from the FAA and I'm here to help" joke not quite as laugh-worthy.

I believe the good ones are at the office at 6:00 AM and available on the phone for guidance on any question you may have as a mechanic, and they are out and around to help the wrench bender any time they need the guidance, and they make time to get out of the office any time they are requested.
The good ones are the ones who have the right answers and the guidance to help get thru the paper work for any project you have.

 

[schmookeeg]

I believe the good ones are at the office at 6:00 AM and available on the phone for guidance on any question you may have as a mechanic, and they are out and around to help the wrench bender any time they need the guidance, and they make time to get out of the office any time they are requested.
The good ones are the ones who have the right answers and the guidance to help get thru the paper work for any project you have.

I thought we were talking about the FAA?

Ours get in at 10, make an appointment with you "as a favor, on short notice", for 4pm, leave for the day at 12:30.

Ours cancel CFI checkrides multiple times in a row with ZERO notice, yet will not allow us to use a DPE because "they responded within the 60 day window", thus dragging an applicant out for 4 months now.

Ours don't even want to see our tools, techniques, or areas of expertise, just our paperwork. Ours have said to us (after a non-maintenance induced incident) "if these logbooks were one hair out of compliance, we'd be pulling your mechanic's IA ticket" (they weren't, so they didn't)

Even asking one "what are the other guys up to?" to establish some sort of "best practice" earns one a pile of doubletalk and non-committal language around here.

We had one red-tag a plane at a checkride for chipped paint on the yoke on a C172.

We are in year 4 of our Part 141 process. When we submitted our letter of intent, we were told, "unofficially, we just don't DO 141s at this office, this is gonna go nowhere"


...But I like R&Ws posts, even though he catches a lot of hell on these forums, and even though he could be one of my above examples, and might crush me like a bug tomorrow

 

[denverpilot]

I believe the good ones are at the office at 6:00 AM and available on the phone for guidance on any question you may have as a mechanic, and they are out and around to help the wrench bender any time they need the guidance, and they make time to get out of the office any time they are requested.
The good ones are the ones who have the right answers and the guidance to help get thru the paper work for any project you have.

Not a bad definition either.

Although I haven't reached anyone at a government office at 6AM in a long time unless I knew their direct line and they recognized the number calling. (Not saying they're not there, saying the "main number" isn't open for biz 24/7.)

As a pilot there's never been the equivalent to what you're getting from them as a mechanic, really. (If you're not being facetious and you've really gotten that kind of help.) Well not since I've been flying, anyway.

You can't call up an FAA office and say, "Hey, I'm not understanding something in the Instrument Handbook you guys published. Think someone could pop over and show me in the airplane?"

They'd point you to a FAAst team member, maybe. But that's not the same thing.

I hear lots of stories from the old timers from a long ago time who say things like, "So and so worked for the FAA and he and I went flying up in the mountains all the time. He then decided to write this book/make this video to help people know more about Mountain Flying and we helped him gather information for it..."

The chances of that same thing happening to me in my lifetime? Probably about zero.

 

[Tom-D]

Not a bad definition either.

Although I haven't reached anyone at a government office at 6AM in a long time unless I knew their direct line and they recognized the number calling. (Not saying they're not there, saying the "main number" isn't open for biz 24/7.)

As a pilot there's never been the equivalent to what you're getting from them as a mechanic, really. (If you're not being facetious and you've really gotten that kind of help.) Well not since I've been flying, anyway.

You can't call up an FAA office and say, "Hey, I'm not understanding something in the Instrument Handbook you guys published. Think someone could pop over and show me in the airplane?"

They'd point you to a FAAst team member, maybe. But that's not the same thing.

I hear lots of stories from the old timers from a long ago time who say things like, "So and so worked for the FAA and he and I went flying up in the mountains all the time. He then decided to write this book/make this video to help people know more about Mountain Flying and we helped him gather information for it..."

The chances of that same thing happening to me in my lifetime? Probably about zero.

I have my PMI's phone number at his desk which is his cell, given to him by the FSDO. I know the best time to get him is at 07:00 before he off to the day out of the office.
I can leave a V/M on his cell and with in 30 minutes he is back to me.

If I need a airworthiness compliance inspection he will do that time permitting. I simply need to be at the hangar with the log books, he will inspect the aircraft logs and tell me what to fix, and how to do that.

And doesn't go one websites like this, he's to busy actually helping mechanics and pilots.

 

[Tom-D]

Getting back to topic, How do you tell when a GO-300-D gear box is worn beyond tolerances?

With out disassembly and measuring.

 

[RotorAndWing]

Explain "Good ones"

Hey, at least I know what oil to use.

 

[RotorAndWing]

And doesn't go one websites like this, he's to busy actually helping mechanics and pilots.

Nice little swipe there Tom.

FWIW, Sometimes helping people takes different shapes and forms. There's been a few folks on this board I've been able to help and I've taken my own time to do it and help them cut through some red tape, just as I've done with my customers who come or phone into the office. I don't like the image of the stereotypical Fed and when I took my job I vowed to do things differently as well as do my part to help out with Aviation Safety.

This web board is a hobby for me in my off time as I don't work 24 hours a day. Sorry that it obviously offends you that I occasionally post here, but so be it.

 

[Skylane81E]

Ive delt with some real clowns before, but my normal guys are fanfrikintastic. They really are out to help

 

[Pilawt]

According to the info I've seen the 175 fuselage is basically the same as the mid 50's 180, not the 172.

There may be some structural strengthening similar to a 180, but the 175 fuselage was indeed a modified 172.

The original 172 inherited from the 170B a somewhat rounded cross-section at the firewall, which carried though to the instrument panel, lower windscreen and forward cabin sidewalls.

The 175 has a different, higher, more squared-off firewall. You can see the difference in the cut of the bottom of the windscreen, and the flat area at the top of the instrument panel. The 175's forward cabin was slightly modified to accommodate the new firewall. The squared-off profile likely changes some dimensions in the forward cabin.

The 1961 C-172B's forward fuselage, firewall, windscreen and instrument panel were redesigned to be more similar to the 175's.

I know my 175 is wider than the early 172's and has the same fuse width inside as the 180 from the same period.

Cessna quoted interior width at 40" for all three, 172, 175 and 180. Some years they quoted 40.5" for the 180, but the difference could be in the upholstery.

The 180/185/early-182 fuselage is externally different from a 170/172/175 fuselage. The 17x fuselage is shorter. The tailcone ends at the forward end of the rudder, while the 18x tailcone extends to the trailing edge of the rudder, and it accommodates the adjustable stabilizer mechanism. The top of the 17x fuselage lacks the slight kink in the profile that can be seen in the 18x at the first bulkhead aft of the wing trailing edge.

The fuel tanks are 26gal per side but only 43 useable in all attitudes. I think the 172 was 40 total and 36 useable???

The 1958 C-172 manual says, "two 21-gallon aluminum tanks, (of which 18.5 gallons are useable in all flight conditions)"

 

[Tom-D]

Hey, at least I know what oil to use.

You must have been listening while preached. or was I preaching to the choir?

 

[Tom-D]

Nice little swipe there Tom.

FWIW, Sometimes helping people takes different shapes and forms. There's been a few folks on this board I've been able to help and I've taken my own time to do it and help them cut through some red tape, just as I've done with my customers who come or phone into the office. I don't like the image of the stereotypical Fed and when I took my job I vowed to do things differently as well as do my part to help out with Aviation Safety.

This web board is a hobby for me in my off time as I don't work 24 hours a day. Sorry that it obviously offends you that I occasionally post here, but so be it.

Why should his reluctance to enter the internet reflect on you? or what you do as a hobby. That statement wasn't a clap on you simply a statement on his actions and belief.

 

[Tom-D]

Ive delt with some real clowns before, but my normal guys are fanfrikintastic. They really are out to help

Yep, 2% of the people make 100% of the news, but today I spent all day trying to deal with 1 of the 2% in manufacturing. He doesn't even know his side of the house dealt with STCs.

when you run into a stupid one with an attitude .......

 

[RotorAndWing]

when you run into a stupid one with an attitude .......

Yes, we get that every now and then on this side also.

Et tu Tom?

 

[RotorAndWing]

That statement wasn't a clap on you simply a statement on his actions and belief.

 

[wabower]

Nope, all perfect, every shot down the middle with just a little draw for extra roll. Some can even get it fixed right with only 3-4 tries.

Yes, we get that every now and then on this side also.

Et tu Tom?

 

[denverpilot]

Why should his reluctance to enter the internet reflect on you? or what you do as a hobby. That statement wasn't a clap on you simply a statement on his actions and belief.

Who's reluctance? I see no statement of anyone being reluctant to do anything?

 

[Frank]

Getting back to topic, How do you tell when a GO-300-D gear box is worn beyond tolerances?

With out disassembly and measuring.

I would really like to know that answer. Anyone?

 

[Tom-D]

I would really like to know that answer. Anyone?

You measure the free play at the prop tip, it is an indicator of the backlash of the gears.

 

[stratobee]

I've flown my GO-453's on my Commander for over 350 hrs now, and I have to say that geared engines do not deserve the bad rap they get. They're great engines if flown right. Just keep positive load, don't let them chatter and let airstream drive them. Also, because they produce power at higher rpm's, they don't have to be as highly compressed. This means that most of them (not sure about the GO-300) can run on MoGas - certified for it. My 435's can run on 81 Octane RON.

Play limit on the 435's used to be 1" at 3ft out on the prop. The gearboxes will last a long time if treated right. Don't fear them.

 

[zaitcev]

Necroposting! Due to... things.

never idle the Gear box, keep a load on it and it will not self destruct. allowing it to chatter at idle will short life it.

How do you
- taxi
- descend

What's Vfe and can I get there from cruise without idling?

 

[moonshine]

How do you
- taxi
- descend

What's Vfe and can I get there from cruise without idling?

Not driving a 175, but... O-360 engine, fixed pitch prop

- taxi -1000rpm
- descend - cruise power or slightly below, depending on the bumps. Around 2100rpm on ILS
- What's Vfe and can I get there from cruise without idling? - never had to go below 1800rpm to get there

 

[BiffJ]

I've flown my GO-453's on my Commander for over 350 hrs now, and I have to say that geared engines do not deserve the bad rap they get. They're great engines if flown right. Just keep positive load, don't let them chatter and let airstream drive them. Also, because they produce power at higher rpm's, they don't have to be as highly compressed. This means that most of them (not sure about the GO-300) can run on MoGas - certified for it. My 435's can run on 81 Octane RON.

Play limit on the 435's used to be 1" at 3ft out on the prop. The gearboxes will last a long time if treated right. Don't fear them.

One minor but important detail to remember is that the GO300 uses 2 gears which I believe were spur or helical in the gearbox. That means only 2 gears in mesh. The Lycomings use a planetary gearbox with 1 sun gear, 6 planetary gears and a ring gear. This means more teeth in mesh at any given time lowering the load per tooth also spreading the load more evenly across the gear. It also means the prop shaft is still centered on the crank where the Continental has the prop shaft about 6" or so above the crank. From what I've seen in these engines the continental boxes don't last as long regardless how well you treat them. They just have a higher tooth load creating more wear. As others noted its not a problem if the engine is run right....just not the way most seem to want to run them.

Frank

 

[ChitDisturber]

The aircraft pictured is a 175, with the 0-360-??? 180 horse with constant speed prop. stall cuff, VGs, 210 nose gear, bush wheels.

I've flown it a couple times with 2 aboard and a half a tank of fuel.

It will get off in 150' and land shorter than my 170B.

The owner goes to all the back woods fly-ins like Johnson Creek ID, and when he does his hangar neighbor (our Maule operator) has him carry some of his camp gear, because the maule is maxed out, and it still gets off quicker than the Maule M4-235.

That's a nice rig!

Personally I stay away from the geared piston planes, just don't want to deal with it, that and Im a fan of KISS. YMMV

 

[Tom-D]

You need to learn how to read. It doesn't say don't use it in engines with transmissions, it says to not use it in engines with friction clutches that share the oil between the transmission/clutch and the rest of the engine. It's not clear what a LYCOMING service bulletin has to do with a CONTINENTAL engine.

I'm also trying to figure out what "friction clutch" you've got in your GO-300. The only "clutch" is the starter assembly and it's not what Lycoming is talking about (they're talking about helicopter engines like the VO-435).

However, there have been issues with the starter drive and the additive, but not from the clutch plates but the spring.

What do you think the starter clutch is in the 0-300-D and the GO-300-D? plus the key start 0-200 has a friction prawl type starter clutch.

 

[Tom-D]

That's a nice rig!

Personally I stay away from the geared piston planes, just don't want to deal with it, that and Im a fan of KISS. YMMV

the engine in that A/C is a 180 horse 0-360-A1?

that's not geared.