Superior Crankshaft AD on O/IO-360 ... yay

Kenny Phillips

Kenny Phillips

Final Approach
Joined
Jul 29, 2018
Messages
5,671
Display Name
Display name:
Kenny Phillips
[Docket No. FAA-2018-1077; Project Identifier 2018-NE-40-AD; Amendment 39-21354; AD 2020-25-12]
RIN 2120-AA64
"The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Superior Air Parts, Inc. (SAP) Model IO-360-series and O-360-series reciprocating engines and certain Lycoming Engines (Lycoming) Model AEIO-360-, IO-360-, and O-360-series reciprocating engines with a certain SAP crankshaft assembly installed."
There are under 200 as of now, but they are all relatively recent (2012 and later.)
This one is worth reading if just for the FAA monetary justification. The cheapest one could hope to get out of this is about fifteen grand, and likely more, and because commenters had noted the cost, the FAA put it in a dollars of fix vs. dollars per death. This is unique in an AD.
These are in the Superior experimental engines, and also PMA'd for replacement in Lycoming engines. The AD cannot affect the experimental engines, but the FAA figures that a fairly high percentage will fail.
 
Well, just more proof can't even manufacture the old design that we have decades of experience with, why would I trust a new design with little experience that costs 5 times more?
 
You mean that design that Lycoming had the AD on about 15 years ago? The cranks in the AD are dead-nuts clones for Lycoming. I suspect the issue is metallurgy. A few years ago when I was waiting for my IO-400 Superior was struggling with QC problems from their crank vendor in Germany.
 
bnt83 said:
The comments section suggests otherwise.

View attachment 92421
Click to expand...

My DAR has a different opinion. EXP guys should check with their own DARs to see what they say.

I stand corrected. But I'd still comply if it was mine. https://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/media/advisory_circular/ac 39-7d.pdf

b. Non-TC’d Aircraft and Products Installed Thereon. Non-TC’d aircraft (e.g., amateur-built aircraft, experimental exhibition) are aircraft for which the FAA has not issued a TC under part 21. The AD applicability statement will identify if the AD applies to non-TC’d aircraft or engines, propellers, and appliances installed thereon. The following are examples of applicability statements for ADs related to non-TC’d aircraft:
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Stewartb said:
You mean that design that Lycoming had the AD on about 15 years ago? The cranks in the AD are dead-nuts clones for Lycoming. I suspect the issue is metallurgy. A few years ago when I was waiting for my IO-400 Superior was struggling with QC problems from their crank vendor in Germany.
Click to expand...

There is no end to crankshaft ADs, just slight pauses. Who is next? Continental again?
 
I've always been amazed that you never seem to hear about any manufacturer liability in ADs like this, just what it is going to cost the owner. Not that I'm trying to put any more pressure on GA manufacturers as it is, but I couldn't imagine a car manufacturer making you pay the cost of a recall for a dangerous part.
 
Does anyone have any info about Superior picking up any or all of the tab and what the rules might be? They sure treated us EXP guys well when buying back every IO-400 and IO-382 they made. In the big picture I hope Superior survives this. We need them in the engine and engine parts business.

The bigger issue will be replacement crank availability. I'd bet lots of guys will be grounded for quite a while waiting for cranks. I'm sure Lycoming and the big shops' phones are already ringing off the hook from guys trying to buy cranks.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
The AD cannot affect the experimental engines
Click to expand...
FYI: ADs have and do affect E/AB aircraft and it depends on the AD applicability statement. While I believe Superior sells their experimental engines under the trademark "XP360" I think they are still identified as an IO-360 or O-360 which would make the AD applicable if those 2 cranks are installed. Can't see them bringing out the fatality/cost benefit math again and leave half the potential deaths off the list. Definitely worth an email to the AD managing ACO or Superior for clarification.
 
The AD applies, the AD doesn’t apply. When you are flying and the crank fails does it really matter? I am sure there is a fool owning and experimental that won’t get a new crank.
 
Clip4 said:
The AD applies, the AD doesn’t apply. When you are flying and the crank fails does it really matter? I am sure there is a fool owning and experimental that won’t get a new crank.
Click to expand...
You spell it EXPERIMENTAL.. you buy it, you build it, you take your chances.
 
Clip4 said:
What about the poor unknowing fool who accepts an invitation for a ride?
Click to expand...
They see this warning prominently displayed:
6206_250w.gif

and they are free to make their choices also.
 
Clip4 said:
What about the poor unknowing fool who accepts an invitation for a ride?
Click to expand...
I have seen some beautiful EXP aircraft, It would a shame that a Ly engine ruins one.
 
While this subject has been beat to death, why is it I can buy a Lunati forged crankshaft for a big block Chevy from Jeg's for less than $2K, and the replacement Superior crank costs five times that much?

I can run the Lunati crank in a 1,000 HP blown or turbocharged application, beat the hell out of it, and it'll last forever.

https://www.jegs.com/i/Lunati/638/B...X7vy_VGVctI3BFiamgEVzbNQ5IDqD0CUaAoF1EALw_wcB

Lunati Pro Series forged crankshafts are top of the line units, manufactured from the highest quality 4340 certified steel. Their 4340 steel forgings meet aircraft quality standards for material cleanliness and purity. Every crank is American forged, American machined and quality checked to meet our exact specifications including: a shaft surface finish of grade 5 RMS or better, journal radii are ground to .140 inch, roundness of each journal is .0001 inch or less and each rod journal is drilled with a 7/8 inch or 3/4 inch lightening hole to reduce the inertia weight of the crankshaft. The Pro Series by Lunati is engineered with high performance street and all-out race engines in mind. Pro Series Crankshafts have been successfully used in 1,500+ hp applications.
 
3393RP said:
While this subject has been beat to death, why is it I can buy a Lunati forged crankshaft for a big block Chevy from Jeg's for less than $2K, and the replacement Superior crank costs five times that much?

I can run the Lunati crank in a 1,000 HP blown or turbocharged application, beat the hell out of it, and it'll last forever.

https://www.jegs.com/i/Lunati/638/B...X7vy_VGVctI3BFiamgEVzbNQ5IDqD0CUaAoF1EALw_wcB

Lunati Pro Series forged crankshafts are top of the line units, manufactured from the highest quality 4340 certified steel. Their 4340 steel forgings meet aircraft quality standards for material cleanliness and purity. Every crank is American forged, American machined and quality checked to meet our exact specifications including: a shaft surface finish of grade 5 RMS or better, journal radii are ground to .140 inch, roundness of each journal is .0001 inch or less and each rod journal is drilled with a 7/8 inch or 3/4 inch lightening hole to reduce the inertia weight of the crankshaft. The Pro Series by Lunati is engineered with high performance street and all-out race engines in mind. Pro Series Crankshafts have been successfully used in 1,500+ hp applications.
Click to expand...
because the 1000 HP crank weighs 5 times much, and has the heat treatment to with stand it.
and the number made brings the unit cost way down.
 
I'm sure they'll say weight and economies of scale.

ETA: yup they beat me to it already :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top