Cessna 180

If I remember right, the manufacturers recommend pickling the engine anytime it is going to sit for 30 days or more. There is a pickling procedure available on how to do it. I don't know the specifics and I have never done it and my plane has sat for a few months on end. I never intend for that to happen but sometimes that is just the way it goes. If you knew ahead of time it would be a different thing altogether, like the guys who put up their plane for the winter and don't take the floats off. They know they aren't going to use it. I wonder how many people really do the pickling thing and what their results are and how they feel about if that is a worthy procedure.
Captain Ron
8)

180

Jason - use camgaurd! change oil, put camgaurd in , run engine for 1 minute, put it away and don,t turn the prop. You can pull the plugs and put storage plugs in also if you wish. This was recomended to me by a good engine builder in MN. He has tested his 550 powered 185 for many years with little flying, stored winters and most summers also with very little flying and no corrosion yet. Also we should be comming through Gillam this summer again up to the arctic, wanna join us?

Brian, i haven't used camguard but regularily use AVblend which i believe to simular camguard. I would love to take in the arctic trip with you guys. What are the dates that your going this year?

Jason

Jason,

AvBlend is NOT the same or even similar to CamGuard. CamGuard is the only additive that's approved for use in Lycoming engines by the manufacturer.

This stuff is not snake oil, it's the real deal. MMO, AvBlend, etc are not approved by the engine manufacturers (which doesn't mean they're not legal--just means the engine manufacturers haven't agreed that they do anything productive in their engines).

I've used CamGuard since the stuff came out, and if you read up on it, I think you'll find that it is the only one of these additives that is really thoroughly tested and proven to work. That is by other than subjective evaluations. The fellow who developed the stuff was a lubricant engineer for Exxon I believe, so he knows of which he speaks.

See: http://www.aslcamguard.com/

If I were going to park an engine over winter, however, I'd still go through the engine manufacturer's recommendation for pickling the engine.

The down side to NOT doing so could be corrosion in your engine, and shortened engine life.

MTV

jason crozier said:

Brian, I would love to take in the arctic trip with you guys. What are the dates that your going this year?

Jason

Click to expand...

Brian, I heard Florida was a good time. Kirk said he could feel the rocket kind of buffet the airplane when it launched. What is this Arctic Trip all about? You guys flying up to the Hudson Bay? I've always wanted to make my way that far North, but figured in summer on floats would be the time.

OKMike

okmike said:

Also can someone tell me how does the differential pressure tester with the Master Orifice Tool discussed in the S.B. work? How is it different?

Click to expand...

Bob Moseley just got back to me on the Master Orifice tool question.


"The "Master orifice" is related to how it is manufactured, along with how big the hole is. Approach angle to the hole is 60 degrees, hole size is .040 and exhaust angle is 60 degrees. Hole depth is I think from memory is 1/2". All these specs are from memory. What it does is take all compression gauges in use in all shops and calibrates them so they read a minimum allowable static compression check to be airworthy.

mose"

well, I haven't read the rest of the posts, so excuse me for reposting. but I have had almost all of my engines go untill TBO. Keeping the CHT below 400 is important as well as flying the plane as often as possible. More importantly though, you should pull the power back 1" every to 5 minutes approx at a time when approaching your landing area and use your cowl flaps to aid in slowing down engine cooling when its cold out. It will say in the manual how many degrees per minute the engine should cool, i can't remember exactly, but the way i approach my landing area give alot of room for error. Letting the engine shock cool is the biggest reason you will lower your tbo, because of different metals cooling too quick. on top of that, as soon as you break ground/water, get the power back ASAP, to climb power. and never run lean of peak, i always lean rich of peak, the little bit extra you burn in fuel will save you lots in overhauls. I also advise using 15w50 in the winter and w100 in the summer, especially if the plane will sit for a week at a time, as the w100 will stick to the cam lobes and other engine components better while it sits.

this is just an opinion btw!

Mr.J

The Big Continental engines have their camshafts located below the crankshaft in the case. So, when stored for long periods of time, oil continues to drip onto the cam from the crank, making them (continentals) less susceptible to cam spalling when not flown regularly.

As Brian noted, however, I'd still run camguard in those engines.

The O-470 R model engine is about as reliable an engine as you'll find. It seems to be the preferred model of O-470, and the only one I have a lot of experience with. I think if you start off with a good one, and don't do anything really stupid, your chances of getting it to TBO are really good.

Shock Cooling: Engine experts have been saying for years that shock cooling damage is probably more a factor of re-using cylinders for many runs, instead of replacing them, rather than how pilots operate an engine.

There are LOTS of examples of flight training airplanes, which are generally operated regularly, and go from wide open throttle to throttle closed (or nearly so), with long glides pretty regularly. And, often in some pretty cold weather. Our engines all go to 500 over tbo, with this kind of abuse.

Start with a good solid engine core, and don't re-use cylinders that have been run through a half dozen runs. The metal in those old cylinders starts to work harden and crystalize over time, and then crack.

Now, PLEASE don't suggest that I'm saying you should abruptly reduce engine power, or otherwise abuse your engine, BUT, I think the engine manufacturers have now pretty well concluded that shock cooling doesn't apply to good engine components, and those old multi-run cylinders are probably going to crack anyway at some point.

So, reduce power judiciously, but I sure wouldn't spend a LOT of time in loooonnngggg shallow descents while worrying about shock cooling, especially if that long slow descent will put you lower than comfortable over hostile terrain.

MTV

cessma 180

I used to believe the old advice of 1" per five minutes untill i started using engine analyzers, not saying you should pull the power all at once from a high power setting but 4 or 5 inches at a time doesn't cause any shock cooling in my opinion, however i believe quickly going to full power rather than a gradual advance of the throttle (on a long runway) does a lot more damage than shock cooling, i also am a big fan of camguard

Keeping the CHT's below 400 is a good start, and if you don't let them get too hot to begin with, then they won't need to cool down very much after the fact. However, if you believe in "Shock Cooling" then you have to believe in "Shock Heating" too! Because they heat up a lot faster going to full throttle on take-off than they cool down pulling the power off.

And it may seem counter-intuitive but it's been proven time and again on the test stand that reducing the power ASAP after take-off for the climb, is actually harder on the engine in the long run. When pulling the throttle back from wide open in the climb, your disengaging the Power Enrichment Valve (Economizer Valve) in the carburetor, who's sole purpose is to enrichen the mixture at high power and help control over heating. By reducing the throttle from "wide open", your effectively leaning the mixture without ever touching the red knob and prolonging the climb at slower speeds and/or reduced rates of climb, which in turn reduces the airflow needed for additional cooling. With an Engine monitor and Fuel Flow gauge you can easily see the results and verify the effects. It's true! :lol:

i didnt think there was an economizer valve on the o-470?

Mr J,

mr.jinks said:

i didnt think there was an economizer valve on the o-470?

Click to expand...

There should be, at least there is on the ones I've seen. On the other hand, I haven't seen all of them either! :lol:


Maybe this will help.

http://home.comcast.net/~r123rs/Documents/Carb Manual.pdf

Skip
That explains alot, very interesting.

huh... i guess you learn something new everyday, I haven't flown the 180 in a while, but i seem to recall climbing out at 23"/2400 after breaking water. I guess it'll be WOT and 2400 from now on. I will admit that I'm more familiar with the 185..

Mr J

I haven't flown the 180 in a while, but i seem to recall climbing out at 23"/2400 after breaking water.

Click to expand...

That sounds about right and probably exactly what the "Book" called for. Then they went on to justify one of the reasons for the reduction is for "passenger comfort" or "cabin comfort". :roll:

Today that wouldn't seem to have much merit but of course, that was written way back before anyone knew what a headset was, let alone actually used one. So I guess maybe there was some truth to it, way back when........

I will admit that I'm more familiar with the 185.

Click to expand...

I Wish I could say that with a straight face.

i have found with the carb'd 540 to leave my prop set so that it wont let things scream on takeoff in the back-country as to not rile the natives and other users...i find that reducing the throttle works good for my motor, with the edm running to monitor cht's and such. full rich is ok, but i have found i like to lean as i climb out...if we're in the middle fork, the flaps stay at 20 anyway...so 1/2 throttle and 65 for the speed works really good, leave the cowl flaps open 3/4...then it is just full flaps, speed to 55,12",1600 rpm, and land and stop in 450'...! gotta love those heavy old 182T's with the better cuff and the vg's...

I have never seen or heard of a 540 in a 180? I have seen the 550 conversion in the odd 185 , but never a 540. The only 540 I have ever flown was in a Wilga 2000 but that was only a 20 minute check flight, I have seen a few in maules and the odd homebuilt though.

Many airplanes which were destined for the far north were equipped with an oil dilution system. The way the system was INTENDED to be used is that prior to shutdown, when the airplane is to be parked out in very cold weather, you'd use the dilution system to introduce gasoline into the oil system. This thinned the oil, and thus made cold starts easier.

Click to expand...

In a book written by Erich Hartmann (all-time high ace of ANY war...German) who got many of his kills on the Eastern front, he said the Luftwaffe was unable to operate in the cold Russian winter temperatures but the Russian planes could. A captured Russian pilot told them they used oil dilution to thin the oil so they would start the next time. And of course the gas evaporates as temperatures increase. The Germans adopted this technique.

My 180 also came with an oil dilution valve and panel control, but I removed it when it stopped working. Plane was purchased and used in Maine by Folsom's Flying Service in Greenville.

mr.jinks said:

I have never seen or heard of a 540 in a 180? I have seen the 550 conversion in the odd 185 , but never a 540. The only 540 I have ever flown was in a Wilga 2000 but that was only a 20 minute check flight, I have seen a few in maules and the odd homebuilt though.

Click to expand...

There was an old 180 done by a guy I think in Montana 20 some years ago on a one time field approval. Used a modified Cherokee Six cowl. It was an OK looking airplane, needed painted when I saw it. I spoke with the guy, he said it was a hell of a project, would never do it again.

-540 is a great engine. The abuse they stand up to in these air taxi Cherokee 6's is amazing. The FAA allows them 2500 TBO now if they meet the maintenance and usage requirements.

There is a TSIO-540 conversion out there for 185's and I believe there are a few of the '64 and newer 180's converted as well.

gb

mr.jinks said:

I have never seen or heard of a 540 in a 180? I have seen the 550 conversion in the odd 185 , but never a 540. The only 540 I have ever flown was in a Wilga 2000 but that was only a 20 minute check flight, I have seen a few in maules and the odd homebuilt though.

Click to expand...

The post you were responding to clearly said 182T. All T182s used lycoming 540s as far as I know. There was an STC to install a TSIO-540 @ 350 hp in 185s, but not many are around.

SB

my bad

gbflyer said:

There was an old 180 done by a guy I think in Montana 20 some years ago on a one time field approval. Used a modified Cherokee Six cowl. It was an OK looking airplane, needed painted when I saw it. I spoke with the guy, he said it was a hell of a project, would never do it again.

Click to expand...

I know of one of those, we may be thinking of the same plane. Based at Merrill field here in Anchorage. 540 with a Cherokee 6 cowl.

Thread revival...

I have an O-470U, 1850 SMOH. Flies 100-125 hours a year and never had a problem with it. This year I had bad compression on the #1 cylinder, as in 30s or worse. Borescoped it, then pulled the cylinder and the exhaust valve is bad. Replaced with an overhauled cylinder.

IA says all I need to do to seat the rings on this new cylinder is run it at peak EGT for a few hours. In addition, I have an engine vibration that I never had before. It's not bad (whatever that means) but it is noticeable. Does the IA's break-in advice sound good, and any thoughts on the vibration? Should I expect it to smooth out as the new cylinder breaks in or do I have another problem?

Thanks!

Did you check piston size and weight?
DENNY

Maybe another bad E valve? With that many hours your guides have got to be worn.

Re: break in? I use XC 20-50 so when my cylinders have been repaired I don't do anything extra. No Camguard for 25 hours. Run it normally and don't lope around at low rpms.

Thanks for the tips... keep em coming.

Reference piston weight, it's the same piston that was there before. Vibration started right after the new cylinder was installed so I think it must be related. My other 5 E valves were good on the annual, and I've flown a .5 since then.

Prop indexed the same? Piston pin the same? Do mag check at 2500 rpm and make sure plugs are good. I would run rich at break in but I am not a IA or A&P, take my advice with caution. Do you have a 6 cylinder EGT/CHT? You can spend a lot of money throwing parts at stuff but real information is what you need.
DENNY

slowmover said:

I have an O-470U, 1850 SMOH. Flies 100-125 hours a year and never had a problem with it. This year I had bad compression on the #1 cylinder, as in 30s or worse. Borescoped it, then pulled the cylinder and the exhaust valve is bad. Replaced with an overhauled cylinder.

IA says all I need to do to seat the rings on this new cylinder is run it at peak EGT for a few hours. In addition, I have an engine vibration that I never had before. It's not bad (whatever that means) but it is noticeable. Does the IA's break-in advice sound good, and any thoughts on the vibration? Should I expect it to smooth out as the new cylinder breaks in or do I have another problem?

Click to expand...

I don't know either you or your IA and do not mean to insult anyone, but the logic of what you've done and the recommendation for breaking it in escapes me. You have an engine with 1850 SMOH which you fly 100-200 hours a year. Do you know what the recommended TBO is for that engine? That one cylinder was talking to you and no one has been listening. Granted the lower end of the big Continentals are very strong so at the very least you should have topped all six cylinders. That engine is telling you that it is time for an overhaul.

Skywagon8a: no offense taken, thanks for the post. But the rest of the engine is good, runs smooth, consistent oil use, compressions and borescopes are good everywhere else. TBO is 2000 hours and I hope to get another year or three out of this engine. Help me understand... why would I top the engine or do a full overhaul for one exhaust valve?

Are you certain the replacement cylinder is correct for your U motor?
Edit. I see you re-used your piston. Nevermind.