Pulling the Prop through by Hand

YMMV, do whatever you want with your plane.YMMV, do whatever you want with your plane.YMMV, do whatever you want with your plane.YMMV, do whatever you want with your plane.YMMV, do whatever you want with your plane.YMMV, do whatever you want with your plane.YMMV, do whatever you want with your plane.
 
If it gets in the cylinder and it's too much, it can do that. But it's not clear that it will get in the cylinder at all prior to cranking.

Cars that sit a lot need to be hand cranked prior to a restart after a long sit. It's best done with the spark plugs removed.
 
From the Cessna 172 SP POH for cold weather operations:

"When air temperatures are below 20°F (-6°C), use an external preheater and an external power source whenever possible to obtain positive starting and to reduce wear and abuse to the engine and electrical system. Preheat will thaw the oil trapped in the oil cooler, which probably will be congealed prior to starting in extremely cold temperatures.

Prior to starting on cold mornings, it is advisable to turn the propeller manually through several engine compression cycles by hand to loosen the oil, so the engine cranks (motors) more easily and uses less battery power. When the propeller is turned manually, turn it in the opposite direction to normal engine rotation for greater safety. Opposite rotation disengages the magneto impulse couplings and prevents possible unwanted ignition."

So, according to Cessna, it's the preheat that helps with the oil and wear and tear. Turning the prop only helps out the starter and battery.
Bingo! Thats the reference!
 
All has to do with the AR Index


AR = Anal Retentive

Coincidentally, over on the Cirrus Owner's website I was the founder (well, actually the flounder) of ARCOPA. Anal Retentive Cirrus Owner's and Pilots Association.

You could actually earn an ARCOPA number, and I was the final arbiter.

As far as the chances being that I ran my car yesterday, no, I didn't. Nor the day before. And only one the day before that. Blizzard of the century in the N GA mountains, and all that.

We're fortunate enough to have several cars and several motorcycles, and some don't get started for weeks or even months at a time. And when they do, we just start and drive them. And none seem the worse for wear.
 
Last edited:
We're fortunate enough to have several cars and several motorcycles, and some don't get started for weeks or even months. And when they do, we just start and drive them. And none seem the worse for wear.

Not to be a spoilsport or nothing but would you 'splain to me how aircraft oil and auto oil are/aren't the same? (of course Rotax aircraft oil is excepted from said 'splainin').
 
Just curious...

...has the "loosening" of the oil, whatever that means, ever actually been measured or documented?

I think that this question is very similar if not the same as I asked. Certainly static and dynamic viscosities of the oil are different.
 
Just curious...

...has the "loosening" of the oil, whatever that means, ever actually been measured or documented?
Not to my knowledge, and regardless of what Cessna says in their POH, Lycoming says to preheat the engine rather than this "trick", and says nothing about "pulling the engine through" or "loosening the oil". For more on cold weather starting of a Lycoming, google "Lycoming Key Reprints" and turn to page 47.
 
I think that this question is very similar if not the same as I asked. Certainly static and dynamic viscosities of the oil are different.

Seems like it would be easy to demonstrate.

Take two cans of 50w oil on a cold morning. Stir one but not the other and do some sort of pour test.

Unless the oil had separated and congealed somehow, I don't see how just moving it around a little would change its "looseness". Not saying it wouldn't, but without some sort of data it just sounds like speculation.
 
Not to be a spoilsport or nothing but would you 'splain to me how aircraft oil and auto oil are/aren't the same? (of course Rotax aircraft oil is excepted from said 'splainin').

Additives are somewhat different, but I doubt it makes much difference.

More importantly, 15W-50 or 20W-50 is not often used in spark-ignition cars. Modern ones seem to like 0W-20 or 0W-30. There is a BIG difference between 0W (or 5W) and 20W at freezing temperatures.

It is, however, speculation. One would expect shearing to heat the oil some. Multigrades are made with long-chain polymers, and they will reorient to some extent.

But I'd take rather seriously that the engine manufacturer isn't recommending this.

Pour point is not the same as viscosity. Viscosity is conventionally measured by pouring through a known orifice. You can get a different answer.

And DO NOT put 50W oil into your airplane, even if you can find it. I've never seen a POH that calls for that. 50 is not anywhere near the same as 50W.
 
Last edited:
Is this not 50w oil?*

b-135-000.gif


And don't many aircraft owners use this in the summer?


*or is 50w not the same thing as SAE 50?
 
*or is 50w not the same thing as SAE 50?

50W isn't even close to SAE 50.

One is a high temperature spec, the other a low temperature spec. Even if the viscosity specs were the same (they aren't), 100 deg C temperature change is worth multiple orders of magnitude of difference.

The "W" stands for "winter," not "weight." It means the spec is done at 0 deg C, rather than at 100 deg C (meant to approximate operating temperature).

A multigrade -- like 15W-50 -- has viscosity specs at 0 deg C and at 100 deg C. It's an attempt to remove some of the temperature variation.
 
Last edited:
I sure hope so. I used it for years as fifty weight in summer, champs , cubs , Taylorcrafts.

We use it year 'round.

50 is NOT 50W.

API/SAE doesn't make any attempt to resolve that confusion. In fact, they make it worse -- gear oil indices are wildly different, but look the same. 50W gear oil is a very light oil. 50W crankcase oil is very heavy. 50 is somewhat heavy, but rather common (it's commonly used in Diesel engines).
 
Seems like it would be easy to demonstrate.

Take two cans of 50w oil on a cold morning. Stir one but not the other and do some sort of pour test.

Unless the oil had separated and congealed somehow, I don't see how just moving it around a little would change its "looseness". Not saying it wouldn't, but without some sort of data it just sounds like speculation.

One way that it might is that by stiring it, you will be converting some kinetic energy to heat energy. Not much, but some.
 
learned something new here ... I always assumed the "W" was synonymous with "weight" ...
 
learned something new here ... I always assumed the "W" was synonymous with "weight" ...

Believe me, you're not the only one.

Oil grades are confusing as hell.

The API designations are even more confusing than SAE. But those are more about additives than the oil itself.

If you want to really pull your hair out, go look up what octane ratings mean. There are at least three answers.
 
Last edited:
Believe me, you're not the only one.

The absolute best text string I can ever type to a forum consists of "I stand corrected".

I, too, thought 50w=50 weight=SAE 50. I thought the "W" number was just doubled for aircraft use, for some obscure reason, so that 100W=SAE 50.

I stand corrected.

I'm still a little confused but will try to be more concise with my terminology going forward.
 
First, there is nothing in the standards using the term "weight" for oil types. There is only an SAE standard in which the oil's viscosity is defined by an SAE value, typically in the range 5 to 50 for aircraft engine oils (lower being less viscous thus better in cold ambient starting conditions, and higher being more viscous thus better in hot ambient starting conditions).

Aeroshell uses its own numbering system for its single-grade oils, in which the number is roughly twice the SAE standard value (but not always). So, Aeroshell 100 is SAE 50 viscosity oil. Some people will call that "hundred weight", and some people will call that "fifty weight". Whether that means to you that it's "hundred weight" or "fifty weight" is something you have to work out to yourself. In addition, Aeroshell's number system is not hard and fast -- their SAE 30 oil is "Aeroshell 65".

In addition, the "W" in those oil titles has nothing to do with viscosity, but rather indicates that the oil includes an ashless dispersant additive. This is the big difference between "regular" oil we normally use, and pure mineral oil with no additives at all generally used during cylinder break-in. So, Aeroshell 100 is their pure mineral SAE 50 viscosity oil with no additives, and Aeroshell 100W is their SAE 50 viscosity with the ashless dispersant additive. Aeroshell further differentiates them by putting straight mineral oils in white containers, and ashless dispersant oils in black containers.

Likewise, Aeroshell's multiviscosity oil is their 15W-50. The 15-50 indicates first that it function properly in conditions as cold as those requiring an SAE 15 viscosity oil, and from there anything up to conditions hot enough to require SAE 50 viscosity oil. As always, the W tells you it has the ashless dispersant additive.

Finally, Aeroshell also premixes the Lycoming LW-16702 required in certain Lycoming engines (mainly the 0-320-H and O/LO-360-E types -- see Lycoming SI 1014M for more on that). Aeroshell indicates the presence of this additive in their single grade oils by a + in the name, e.g., Aeroshell 100W+. This additive won't hurt engines that don't need it (although they interfere with break-in, which is why Aeroshell doesn't make a straight mineral oil with it), but it's essential for those that do require it. It's also included in their multiviscosity 15W-50 even though they don't put the + in the name.

And just for a bit more fun, Aeroshell 15W-50 multiviscosity oil is has a semi-synthetic stock base, as opposed to their single grade oils which are all made from a 100% "natural" mineral oil base. For comparison, Phillips' X/C 20W-50 (covers the viscosity range from SAE 20 to SAE 50 and has an ashless dispersant) comes from a 100% natural mineral oil base, but Exxon Elite's 20W-50 is semi-synthetic, like Aeroshell's multiviscosity oil. And there is nothing in the numbering system to tell you that -- you have to either be familiar with the products or read the label to know (or know that the price per quart is nearly double for semi-synthetics than for all-natural mineral based oils).

Finally, there's the table in that SI linked above regarding what SAE viscosity value you want in your Lycoming engine depending on ambient starting conditions. No doubt TCM has a similar instruction with similar table for those with Continental engines.
 
Last edited:
I think one would find the viscosity of 50 weight SAE oil to be pretty close to 100W aviation oil at rated temp. At least that was true of MIL grade aviation oil, but not sure which grading the current viscosity scale uses.
 
I think one would find the viscosity of 50 weight SAE oil to be pretty close to 100W aviation oil at rated temp. At least that was true of MIL grade aviation oil, but not sure which grading the current viscosity scale uses.
Since the label on the Aeroshell 100W bottle says "SAE 50", I'd expect it to meet that SAE 50 viscosity spec spot on (within whatever tolerances are in that spec), not just "pretty close". Go to some other company's "100W" oil, and you'd have to look further than just that name to find out exactly what the name means.

As for "weight", I'd expect it to weigh 7.5 lb/gallon regardless of its viscosity.
 
Seems like it would be easy to demonstrate.

Take two cans of 50w oil on a cold morning. Stir one but not the other and do some sort of pour test.

Unless the oil had separated and congealed somehow, I don't see how just moving it around a little would change its "looseness". Not saying it wouldn't, but without some sort of data it just sounds like speculation.

But moving oil does change it's viscosity. Dynamic viscosity is (always) less than static viscosity.
 
In addition, the "W" in those oil titles has nothing to do with viscosity, but rather indicates that the oil includes an ashless dispersant additive.

To be clear, this is probably Shell's "W"'s. Not the SAE's.

Here is the actual SAE spec. Note which columns are filled for the "W"'s.

http://www.widman.biz/English/Tables/J300.html

It's a little different from what I said. Not 0 deg C (anymore), but even colder. My info is prior to 1999, and would appear out of date.
 
Additives are somewhat different, but I doubt it makes much difference.

More importantly, 15W-50 or 20W-50 is not often used in spark-ignition cars. Modern ones seem to like 0W-20 or 0W-30. There is a BIG difference between 0W (or 5W) and 20W at freezing temperatures.

It is, however, speculation. One would expect shearing to heat the oil some. Multigrades are made with long-chain polymers, and they will reorient to some extent.

But I'd take rather seriously that the engine manufacturer isn't recommending this.

Pour point is not the same as viscosity. Viscosity is conventionally measured by pouring through a known orifice. You can get a different answer.

And DO NOT put 50W oil into your airplane, even if you can find it. I've never seen a POH that calls for that. 50 is not anywhere near the same as 50W.

You're missing my point. Automotive oils act very differently than aviation oils in terms of "clinging" and in compatibility. They are very different oils.
 
You're missing my point. Automotive oils act very differently than aviation oils in terms of "clinging" and in compatibility. They are very different oils.

The multigrade additives are the same. Anti-scuffing additives aren't. Airplanes don't have catalytic converters to foul.

A viscosity spec is a viscosity spec. Whether it's an aviation oil, automotive oil, gear oil or canola oil, if it meets SAE J3000 (which is what those SAE grades mean), its viscosity is the same for the same grade.
 
The multigrade additives are the same. Anti-scuffing additives aren't. Airplanes don't have catalytic converters to foul.

A viscosity spec is a viscosity spec. Whether it's an aviation oil, automotive oil, gear oil or canola oil, if it meets SAE J3000 (which is what those SAE grades mean), its viscosity is the same for the same grade.

If everything is the same why do the oils behave differently? Or are you going to try to tell me that they don't? I'll tell you up front that I'll believe my eyes before I believe you.

And no, a viscosity spec is not a viscosity spec. The method of testing is a critical part of it.
 
The "W", as Ron said, indicates an AD oil. It doesn't mean winter and it doesn't mean weight and the oil viscosity is established using exactly the same tests as auto oils. Google SSU, or Saybolt Seconds Universal.

SAE numbers are about half the aviation number. Aeroshell's 15W50 is an SAE 15 oil with viscosity modifiers added to make it behave like a 50 when it's hot. Aviation 100 is an SAE 50 oil. Aviation 80 is an SAE 40.

Oil is not a thixotropic substance. "Shearing" it doesn't make it less viscous once the movement stops again. If anything, moving the prop might put a tiny bit of oil between the rings and cylinder walls, where the constant pressure of the rings over time would have pushed the oil out enough to make the rings stick a tiny bit more.

MAKG, these engines have gear-driven cams. Turning them backwards doesn't hurt them.

Someone else mention the Detroit Diesel running backwards. They'll sometimes do that, since they are two-strokes and use compression ignition. Lycs and Continentals aren't going to run backward very often, and if they do it's very brief like my old Dodge pickup did. If you use the ignition to shut it off, it pumps air/fuel mix into the exhaust system. If there's hot carbon spots in the cylinder heads, they can fire that mix as the piston approaches TDC, kick the engine backwards, and draw that air/fuel mix from the exhaust and burn it until its gone. You get a bunch of smoke out the air cleaner.

Dan
 
And no, a viscosity spec is not a viscosity spec. The method of testing is a critical part of it.

The method of testing is specified by J300. Shell cannot claim compliance and cannot use an SAE grade number if it uses a different method.

Oil standardization specs exist for a reason.

Dan, I can't speak for Shell's marketing titles as they could mean anything at all, but the "W" in 15W-50 refers to the temperature at which the sample is measured. 15W is measured at very cold temperatures, and 50 at much higher temperatures. See the SAE J300 spec. Especially, note the difference between 20W and 20, as both exist and are in common use.
 
Last edited:
The method of testing is specified by J3000. Shell cannot claim compliance and cannot use an SAE grade number if it uses a different method.

I understand that you are ignoring the fact that aviation oil and automotive oil are very different animals. They may use some of the same additive but they are not compatible and do not behave the same way in static or dynamic situations.
 
I understand that you are ignoring the fact that aviation oil and automotive oil are very different animals. They may use some of the same additive but they are not compatible and do not behave the same way in static or dynamic situations.

I know you're ignoring that "SAE 50" on your bottle.

I'm not telling you to use automotive oils in your airplane. Just what that SAE 50 means. It means the same thing for cars as it does for airplanes. You know what SAE stands for, right? SAE specs are about viscosity. The API spec is about additives, and I'd be thoroughly shocked to see an API S rating on your aviation oil.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Shearing oil as it passes through the oil pump even at very low speeds makes an enormous difference in viscosity. There are people *cough* who have studied this extensively while working for a company that uses hydraulically actuated diesel fuel injectors, which present great challenges for engine cold starts.

However, while the basic physics are true, to affect the oil flow through an ENGINE (as opposed to the miniscule flow through a fuel injector actuator) you would have to shear all the oil and return it to the pan. How many revs would that take? Certainly not something you are going to do pulling it through by hand.
 
Lots of miss info in this thread. I strongly suggest every one read "Oil Talk For Dummies" at the ECI web site I linked above.

It was written for discussions like this.
 
From Aeroshell's site http://www.shell.com/global/products-services/solutions-for-businesses/aviation/aeroshell/products/piston-engine-oils/about.html

...we read:


"AeroShell Oils W65, W80, W100 and W120



AeroShell 'W' (ashless dispersant) Oils were the first aviation piston engine lubricants to be formulated with non-metallic dispersant additives. They provide exceptional lubricant performance and help avoid the build up of metallic ash residues on critical engine components. These oils are intended for use in a wide range of four-stroke aircraft piston engines, including fuel injected and turbocharged variants."


Shell has this to say at http://www.shell.com/global/product...edge-centre/answer-book.html#textwithimage_45


"Does the W in AeroShell Oil W stand for winter?




No. The W is just a model designator to differentiate between AeroShell ashless dispersant oils (Oil W) and straight mineral AeroShell oils which have no letter designator."





From Exxon's site: http://www.exxonmobil.com/USA-English/Aviation/PDS/GLXXENAVIEMAviation_Oil_Elite_20W-50.aspx


We see that the W oils are viscosity-rated at 40 and 100 degrees C just like any other oils.


As are the Phillips oils: http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j...5XnLPQbuUlL1p1bTxsY4iQw&bvm=bv.61190604,d.cGU


Dan
 
Last edited:
You got that wrong. "W" has nothing to do with a "D" (dispersant) oil.
It does on the Aeroshell oils, no matter what ECI says. Read Aeroshell's marketing material.
AeroShell Oils W65, W80, W100 and W120
AeroShell 'W' (ashless dispersant) Oils were the first aviation piston engine lubricants to be formulated with non-metallic dispersant additives. They provide exceptional lubricant performance and help avoid the build up of metallic ash residues on critical engine components. These oils are intended for use in a wide range of four-stroke aircraft piston engines, including fuel injected and turbocharged variants.
http://www.shell.com/global/product...oshell/products/piston-engine-oils/about.html

However, I got it a bit backwards -- the "W" for ashless dispersant comes before the number, not after, i.e., Aeroshell W100, not Aeroshell 100W. Likewise, per that material, their multiviscosity oil is actually "Aeroshell W 15W-50" -- two W's, the first for ashless dispersant and the second as explained above.

And I see Dan beat me to it.
 
Shearing oil as it passes through the oil pump even at very low speeds makes an enormous difference in viscosity. There are people *cough* who have studied this extensively while working for a company that uses hydraulically actuated diesel fuel injectors, which present great challenges for engine cold starts.

However, while the basic physics are true, to affect the oil flow through an ENGINE (as opposed to the miniscule flow through a fuel injector actuator) you would have to shear all the oil and return it to the pan. How many revs would that take? Certainly not something you are going to do pulling it through by hand.


Great point....:yes:..

Also, at "pulling the prop through" speed,the vacuum pump vanes are not even close to being slung out by centrifugal force...:nonod:
 
It does on the Aeroshell oils, no matter what ECI says. Read Aeroshell's marketing material.

If you wish to believe the marketing agents you go right ahead, they are not following the industry standards in marking their products.

"W" = winter
"A" is ashless
"D" is Dispersant

We all use a AD oil. even the products that are known as XX W XX oils are AD oils.
The oil we do not want in the engines during break in is a EP oil. these will hinder the break in process. The Dispersant will not.
Believing other wise has been proven a OWT and proven to be incorrect many times over and over again.
The only time we do not want a "D" oil is when you have no filter on the engine, we want the debris sludge and yucky stuff to fall out of solution in the sump.

OBTW "Oil Talk For Dummies"wasn't written by ECI. They posted it because they believe it. The standard Letter designation is industry wide except for Areoslime.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top