Continental 0-200A issues?
- Thread starter Sundancer
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2005
- Messages
- 9,486
- Display Name
Display name:
Pilawt
Exhaust valves.
I had a 2007 S-LSA with a factory-new O-200-A. The engine was a selling point for me at the time. I've been flying airplanes (mostly C-150s) with the O-200-A since the mid-1960s, so I figured I knew how to operate it.
It needed new exhaust valves on all cylinders at 125 hours TT.
I was told Conti had recently redesigned the exhaust valve seats. A significant number of that make/model S-LSA had the same issue. Those that had the cylinders reworked by reputable outside shops had no further problems.
I had a 2007 S-LSA with a factory-new O-200-A. The engine was a selling point for me at the time. I've been flying airplanes (mostly C-150s) with the O-200-A since the mid-1960s, so I figured I knew how to operate it.
It needed new exhaust valves on all cylinders at 125 hours TT.
I was told Conti had recently redesigned the exhaust valve seats. A significant number of that make/model S-LSA had the same issue. Those that had the cylinders reworked by reputable outside shops had no further problems.
Exhausts valves. I’ve had then stick on brand new cylinders within 50 hours.
The Centre Main Bearing you know the one that’s the same size as that on the A65 is also a perennial problem and that's expensive. And this problem is worse with a metal prop.
I know people lament about the O-200 but it my experience of 20 plus thousand hours of operating them. Its not a good engine. The O-235 in a high use environment is far better.
And what gets me most is Continental do absolutly nothing to address the engines weakness but are happy to charge you 44K for a new one.
That Rotax 912 that is a long lived engine. I ran one to 5500 hours with out a single problem.
Why Cessna put it in the Skycatcher and Vashon put it in the Ranger I have no idea.
The Centre Main Bearing you know the one that’s the same size as that on the A65 is also a perennial problem and that's expensive. And this problem is worse with a metal prop.
I know people lament about the O-200 but it my experience of 20 plus thousand hours of operating them. Its not a good engine. The O-235 in a high use environment is far better.
And what gets me most is Continental do absolutly nothing to address the engines weakness but are happy to charge you 44K for a new one.
That Rotax 912 that is a long lived engine. I ran one to 5500 hours with out a single problem.
Why Cessna put it in the Skycatcher and Vashon put it in the Ranger I have no idea.
Grum.Man
En-Route
Well it’s a 17 year old engine so even being a Continental it could be subject to corrosion issues. The only real weak spot in my opinion are the valves. Not hard to address but they will need the occasional lapping and cleaning to keep the compressions up.