[quote="Jr.CubBuilder"]One quart per hour rename that plane "Dribbles".[/quote]
WAL IMA GONNA TOLE YOU SUMPIN U KIN LOOK UNNER, BEHINE AN ON TOP FER EENY OILY STUFF LEEKIN ROUN THAR AN U AINT GOINNA FINE EENY. HIT DOANT SMOKE NEITHER!
I'm serious. I know what oil in the lower part of the cowling looks like and if there ever was much I took care of the leak. I am relating experience with the engine I am presently running. It came off a Swift and had 150 hrs. or less since factory new. It had been removed from the Swift and pickled for some fifty years when I found it. I eagerely anticipated wonderful performance from it. My friend Virgil, an AI and I did thourough inspections and test runs and she got a clean bill of health. So off I went expecting hours of un-interupted flying. I was commuting back and forth from KC to Toledo Bend almost weekly. As I put on more hours, began to notice very erratic oil consumption. Immediately after an oil change it might go two to three hours without any useage then "bam" two quarts in one hour! I took off one afternoon from Kansas City with the oil at nearly full. I had to make a stop in Texarkana due to falling oil pressure! It had used nearly six quarts in 3+ hours. Upon arriving Toledo Bend I drained what was left in the engine and poured in 8 qts. of new It ran almost four hours without using any! Then that silent sucking sound commenced. My T B to K C trips were usually four hours so I just stopped somewhere in the middle and got a little gas and poured in whatever oil it needed to fill er up.
I have never have babied my engines and maybe that is why their useage is higher than what others experience. I have gotten used to the drill so I stop sooner and change oil more often. And like I said, I buy the stuff in 55 Gal. drums!
OLE GAR SEZ - 4 Boats, 4 Planes, 4 houses. I've got to quit collecting!
There is something strange going on with your engine to run for several hours and not use any oil, then begin to suck it down. Maybe some of the "xperts" can offer opinions, but something isn't kosher here. After my 1999 major OH I run Ole Pokey pretty hard to try to stay in sight of my fellow flyers and so far (fingers crossed) after 400 +- tsmo, I will use only about one qt in 25+ hrs. I had to have a new exhaust valve, seat & guide (new rings of course) on #2 at my Oct. annual. So far after about 5 hrs there doesn't appear to be much, if any consumption. I have to wonder if you have some rings stuck from being laid up 50 yrs or maybe one or more cylinders have the ring gaps lined up? Anyway, hope you can find an easy, inexpensive way to slow the flow. Maybe you need to dump in some MMO or some other magic potion. Surly there must be some ole Marie Lavoe type person down there in the swamps that can brew up a potion to stop the oil usage! Does that oil end up being rust preventor on your tailwheel springs?
Just curious, if I were to do a ring job on all my cylinders, should I rotate the cylinders, so that the jugs that have been running the hottest (#1 & #2) are moved to the front where they won't run as hot? Kind of like rotating your tires.
I will most likely just repair the one cylinder and go from there since the rest were in the mid 70s. But I'm still chewing on it.
David
WELL IM GONA TELL YOUU SOMPTHIN.
We had a truck that used oil like that and it was only at certain times. We finally figured out what was happening and the owner had a hose extension on the engine breather to keep the mist off the frame. The trouble was that the wind would catch the hose and bend it so that it was closed and the crankcase pressure would push the oil through the turbo. After we braced the hose and changed the mounting, presto, no more oil consumption.
John
John Hess
Past President 2018-2021 President 2016-2018, TIC170A Vice President 2014-2016, TIC170A Director 2005-2014, TIC170A N3833V Flying for Fun '67 XLH 900 Harley Sportster EAA Chapter 390 Pres since 2006 K3KNT
dacker wrote:Just curious, if I were to do a ring job on all my cylinders, should I rotate the cylinders, so that the jugs that have been running the hottest (#1 & #2) are moved to the front where they won't run as hot? Kind of like rotating your tires.
I will most likely just repair the one cylinder and go from there since the rest were in the mid 70s. But I'm still chewing on it.
David
Dave, I'm inclined to recommend you leave cylinders in their original positions. Not for any evidence that rotating them is a good/bad idea for temp. reasons, but because of fit. Despite the tolerances of mfr, once a happy fit is found, especially with regard to exhaust system match-up, I think you'd be creating possible difficulties if you mixed 'em up. If ever you've tried to fit a new (different) cylinder to a partial-time engine you'll likely know what I'm writing about, as the interference between one cylinder's intake elbow and an adjacent cylinder's exhaust can be a frustration,...or the actual match-up of a cylinder's exhaust riser to it's muffler can be 1/10" inch off...and man! what a frustration!
So once a cylinder is fitted to it all, and the exhaust system has heated up/mated up, then it's more likely to give less trouble if a repaired cylinder goes back where it once fit. That's my thought on it.
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention. An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
My thoughts are that unless these cylinders have high time and you are prepared to fully inspect, measure and fix anything that is not "like new" then leave them alone. If it's not broke don't "fix" it.
BTW if things aren't "like new" that doesn't mean they aren't airworthy and I'm not suggesting you over look a problem. Only you can decide how comfortable you are with the condition of the ALL the engine parts as well as the airframe parts.
CAUTION - My forum posts may be worth what you paid for them!
Bruce Fenstermacher, Past President, TIC170A
Email: brucefenster at gmail.com
I know what you mean about the fit. I was working with one of the mechanics on the field for a couple of months in order to try to learn a little about meching on airplanes. I assisted with an annual on an older 172 with an O-300D. Low compression on a couple of jugs and zero compression on another. While I was removing the mufflers I noticed that just about all of the exhaust risers were reversed, in other words the flat side that is supposed to give clearance to the intake riser was facing the opposite way. Once I replaced them all the right way it was amazing how much more clearance and how much better everything fit. I have at least one exhaust riser on my engine that is reversed. I guess this is a common mistake that mechs make on these engines.
Since all of my other cylinders are in the mid 70s with compressions higher than last year, and I really don't have a lot of time right now to pull all of the cylinders, I will just fix the one and fly the heck out of it. Was the common consensus to just use the regular Aeroshell and fly it at higher manifold pressures for a few hours?
David
David
You made the right decision to just pull the one. Don't worry a bit about the others until they show signs of a problem.
Assuming you have steel cylinders most of the ring seating will happen in the first hour. I would keep it at full throttle the first hour, temperatures permitting, and with as little idle ground time as possible. Then I'd stay at 75% power the next four or five hours. I'd suggest using Phillips XC 20/50 for the next 25 hours, or using mineral Aeroshell just because there are still questions in my mind about using anything else on break in. Call me old fashioned....
rename that plane "Dribbles".[/quote]
