• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Odyssey Battery ???

Alex Clark

Alex Clark

Registered User
Life Long Alaskan
I have been looking at the Odyssey J-16 battery for my new C-172.
That particular battery is PMA and is STCed for Super Cubs.
It weighs 10 pounds less than the old Gill battery that I currently have on the firewall.
Plus my old Gill is dying every couple days.


Some folks think I would need a field approval and some folks think it counts as a minor alteration and thus I would only need an IA to sign it off...

Thoughts ???
 
Alex Clark said:
I have been looking at the Odyssey J-16 battery for my new C-172.
That particular battery is PMA and is STCed for Super Cubs.
It weighs 10 pounds less than the old Gill battery that I currently have on the firewall.
Plus my old Gill is dying every couple days.


Some folks think I would need a field approval and some folks think it counts as a minor alteration and thus I would only need an IA to sign it off...

Thoughts ???
Click to expand...

Not wanting to wade into your question too deep, I can tell you that the Odyssey PC680 is identical to the J16. Just a different sticker and price.

Also, Odyssey lists these at 15.4 pounds. I weighed a PC680 last week and the actual weight is 14.2 pounds on an accurate digital scale.
 
2 things...

(if you buy the PMA'd one..)it's PMA'd that means its a real aircraft part, use it

the STC for installation is for a cub... STC's not really needed anymore.. so that just confuses the issue...

there is some part in 43.13 about batteries... that gives you the basis to install now?..

there ARE other threads on here about this....
 
The F.A. Dodge fire wall install of their battery box on a C-180 calls for use of the J-16......... fyi

kem
 
Basically I just want to replace the old Gill 25S with a new & lighter battery.
I guess I could even use the same battery box by putting in a spacer.
 
The PC680 in my Legend which has an O-200 and the starter from Continental was still going strong at 6 years when I replaced it because I thought I ought to. I gave the old one to a friend who put it in a riding lawn mower he resurected. It's still going strong. I even killed the old one at least once by leaving the master on for a week. Came right back after a charge.

Best part is, for the LSA category, you can buy the battery at Amazon!

Rich
 
Alex Clark said:
Basically I just want to replace the old Gill 25S with a new & lighter battery.
I guess I could even use the same battery box by putting in a spacer.
Click to expand...

reeves has a couple different local brands of boxes there on the shelf for these batteries if you go that route...
 
spinner2 said:
Not wanting to wade into your question too deep, I can tell you that the Odyssey PC680 is identical to the J16. Just a different sticker and price.

Also, Odyssey lists these at 15.4 pounds. I weighed a PC680 last week and the actual weight is 14.2 pounds on an accurate digital scale.
Click to expand...

i have been told that the difference between thee two batteries is the J 16 has a metal case, while the 680 has a plastic case. That is allegedly why the J 16 was used in the aircraft approvals.

Alex, you don't need any fancy battery box. Install the J 16 in the existing box, and shim it so it won't rattle around with a chunk of styrofoam. A little redneck, but it worked fine for me for 12 years or so.

MTV
 
Apex battery www.apexbattery.com has the Odyssey PC680MJ metal jacket battery on sale for $128.03 and they say if you call them they will give you another $10.00 off coupon. I use them for my batteries.

Si
 
We installed one with Atlee Dodge's Firewall battery Box on our 180 HP converted 1964 C172 after the 3rd Gill died. Had to get a FAA Field Approval which was no biggie.
 
Alex, talk to Bob at Seaplane Services, seaplaneservices.com 651-792-4703 at Surfside SPB in MN. He has built and field approved nice Oddessy battery boxes for several 172's at our base, he may be going for a STC? He has done 2 for me and they make a very nice install. I sure like mine for float training, much more comfy than my super cub and 2 doors for docking, Ya the cub is more fun to fly if staying local!
 
Some folks think I would need a field approval and some folks think it counts as a minor alteration and thus I would only need an IA to sign it off...

If it's a minor alteration you only need an A&P sign off, an IA and a 337 is needed for any STC, or field approval.
 
I replaced the RG25 in my old C150/150 with the J16 Odyssey, installed it in the existing battery box with an aluminum hat section spacer. We did a 337 with an FAA field approval. I used the SBS J16 instead of the PC680 because the J16 is PMA'd and approved in other airplanes (PA18 & 19). I've been told that if something requires refiguring the W&B, it needs a 337 and not just a logbook entry. Since neither Odyssey battery is specifically for Cessnas, my IA's opinion (and mine) was that a field approval was required, and we figured it would go a lot easier with the PMA'd battery.
A smaller & lighter battery box/bracket usually makes for a nicer installation, but using the existing battery box sure is a lot easier.
 
Don't know when 2B went from accepted to approved, we did the Odyssey in that airplane back around 2009.
So nowadays a 337 is still required, but not a field approval. What if the stock battery box was removed, and a new one was installed-- let's say Odyssey's own simple mounting bracket? Still in the realm of approved data, or are we back to needing a field approval?
 
Just my two cents, but my mechanic put an Odyssey in my PA-12 9 months ago, and I'm having to replace it today. Left me stranded. Just deader than a doornail and won't take a charge. My hangar partner had one in his RV8 and same thing happened to him, worked fine for two years and one day left him stranded. Two years I can understand, but 9 months? Makes no sense to me, I'm going back to the Concorde.
 
Spyder said:
Just my two cents, but my mechanic put an Odyssey in my PA-12 9 months ago, and I'm having to replace it today. Left me stranded. Just deader than a doornail and won't take a charge. My hangar partner had one in his RV8 and same thing happened to him, worked fine for two years and one day left him stranded. Two years I can understand, but 9 months? Makes no sense to me, I'm going back to the Concorde.
Click to expand...
I had one do that and it was replaced under warranty no issues for 3+ years thereafter.
 
Spyder said:
Just my two cents, but my mechanic put an Odyssey in my PA-12 9 months ago, and I'm having to replace it today. Left me stranded. Just deader than a doornail and won't take a charge. My hangar partner had one in his RV8 and same thing happened to him, worked fine for two years and one day left him stranded. Two years I can understand, but 9 months? Makes no sense to me, I'm going back to the Concorde.
Click to expand...

Do you happen to have an electric clock installed? That will kill a battery if the plane isn't flown regularly.
 
I'd contact the manufacturer of the battery. That is NOT "normal" service for an Odyssey battery. I put one in my Cessna 170, which lived outside in Fairbanks, AK for many years.....seven years later, I started getting nervous because of the age of the battery. The battery cranked just fine, but it was seven years old. I pulled it, installed a brand new one, and put the old one in my lawn tractor. The one in the lawn tractor is now eleven years old, and I'm told by the fellow who bought it that it still starts just fine, even after having sat in the cold all winter in NW MN.

The newer one in the plane is now back in Fairbanks....and as far as I know, working fine.

I'd check my charging system, and as Pete suggested, a clock or other continuous draw.

MTV
 
Spyder said:
Just my two cents, but my mechanic put an Odyssey in my PA-12 9 months ago, and I'm having to replace it today. Left me stranded. Just deader than a doornail and won't take a charge. My hangar partner had one in his RV8 and same thing happened to him, worked fine for two years and one day left him stranded. Two years I can understand, but 9 months? Makes no sense to me, I'm going back to the Concorde.
Click to expand...

Have you converted your airplane to an alternator? The Odyssey needs more charging voltage than a lead/acid battery, the often overlooked information is in the battery paperwork, and perhaps your old regulator is not doing the job. Jim
 
cruiser said:
Have you converted your airplane to an alternator? The Odyssey needs more charging voltage than a lead/acid battery, the often overlooked information is in the battery paperwork, and perhaps your old regulator is not doing the job. Jim
Click to expand...

If you do decide to junk it, I will take a chance on it and will pay to have it shipped to me. PM me if that works for you. Jim
 
As usual, I learn something every day. I spotted that "approved data" caveat in 43-13-2b when looking at a skin repair on an aluminum airframe part. I thought it had always been there, and I just happened upon it.

So chapt. 10 does address batteries, and one paragraph says "whether TSO or not . . .". Another paragraph has note in bold type saying "this type of alteration requires a field approval or an STC". It is not at all clear what it refers to - easy to asume it refers to some complicated shift from one battery type to another, and not all of Chapt. 10.

Anyway, I agree with Mike - use this AC to your advantage. If it says "approved data" then you do not need a field approval. AC 23-27 also says it is "Approved Data" up front, and goes on to mumble things about the appropriate way to do things is with a field approval.
 
bob turner said:
As usual, I learn something every day. I spotted that "approved data" caveat in 43-13-2b when looking at a skin repair on an aluminum airframe part. I thought it had always been there, and I just happened upon it...
Click to expand...

no, the first half has always been approved data(skin repair you mention.)

but the second half was always ONLY ACCEPTABLE data which required a field approval still...

but when they updated the second part, for better or worse, or if they intended it, it changed to APPROVED data...
 
Talked to the company - interesting to learn from one of the manufacturer's tech reps exactly what the difference is between the PC680 and J16. (Hint: I went with the PC680.)

Question:

Since it would be going from approximately 22.5 lbs to about 14.2 lbs, which is a reduction in weight (which does require a W&B Amendment/revision), why would that - the reduction in weight - be considered a Major Alteration?

"Appendix A to Part 43—Major Alterations, Major Repairs, and Preventive Maintenance
(a) Major alterations—(1) Airframe major alterations. Alterations of the following parts and alterations of the following types, when not listed in the aircraft specifications issued by the FAA, are airframe major alterations:
(i) Wings.
(ii) Tail surfaces.
(iii) Fuselage.
(iv) Engine mounts.
(v) Control system.
(vi) Landing gear.
(vii) Hull or floats.
(viii) Elements of an airframe including spars, ribs, fittings, shock absorbers, bracing, cowling, fairings, and balance weights.
(ix) Hydraulic and electrical actuating system of components.
(x) Rotor blades.
(xi) Changes to the empty weight or empty balance which result in an increase in the maximum certificated weight or center of gravity limits of the aircraft.
(xii) Changes to the basic design of the fuel, oil, cooling, heating, cabin pressurization, electrical, hydraulic, de-icing, or exhaust systems.
(xiii) Changes to the wing or to fixed or movable control surfaces which affect flutter and vibration characteristics."

Notice no comma, semicolon, break or anything between "certificated weight or center of gravity" - the FAA is, as a rule, very precise with their grammar.

Just curious...

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Not wanting to change the threads initial intent and whether or not a battery change is major or not. I just want to make sure that everyone is not making the wrong interpretation of the weight and balance portion of the modification. The wording that is being left out of the conversation is "Increase in the maximum". If the reason for recalculating of the weight and balance doesn't increase the maximum certificated weight or increase the center of gravity limits, as specified in the TCDS, it is not major. Now with that said, you may need to recalculate your weight and balance for any minor or major modification, however the weight and balance update in itself does not make the determination of whether it is a minor or major modification.
 
Last edited:
(xii) Changes to the basic design of the fuel, oil, cooling, heating, cabin pressurization, electrical, hydraulic, de-icing, or exhaust systems.
Click to expand...

Would this apply to cooling baffles?
 
(xi) Changes to the empty weight or empty balance which result in an increase in the maximum certificated weight or center of gravity limits of the aircraft.

I get in arguments about this a LOT and I shouldn't as it is a very straight forward statement. If you have an INCREASE in the CERTIFICATED WEIGHT, it's a major. So, for instance, if you install a gross weight increase kit, this will allow you to bump your gross weight from 1750 lbs to 2000 lbs. THAT is an increase to the certificated weight.

The second part deals with center of gravity LIMIT changes, not center of gravity changes. This means that if you change something in the airframe design that requires a change in either the forward CG limit or the rear CG limit, it is a major. This does not mean that a weight change of, say, a battery, becomes a major, as the fore and aft CG limits have not changed. If that were the case, we would have to do a 337 every time we put a bag or passenger in the aircraft or removed them.

As certificated aircraft owners, operators, and mechanics, we have got to stop with this idea of doing 337's for the shear joy of it. Carefully read FAR part 43, appendix A. If you don't want to look it up, just scroll up to post #26. It is actually very precise in it's wording. If you alter structure, controls, or the systems that actuate them, it becomes a major alteration and requires a 337. As one of the electrical guys here, I'd like to point out that replacing a battery, moving it, moving a switch, or even adding a master relay to your battery system is NOT a major. No where is it listed in appendix A. The design and function remain as intended. If you need more ammo for this argument, go download CAR 3 or CAR 4, as appropriate for your aircraft, and read what is required for electrical equipment installations. Very little. And what is listed is extremely basic. The upside to all this is that we cannot be forced to build and maintain our aircraft to FAR part 23 regulations. So the next time anyone tells you you need to do a 337 on a repair or installation, tell them to prove it. Have them show you in part 43 or CAR 3 or 4, where it is required. Especially if they are feds. Lets get back to what's required and enjoy flying.

Okay, I'm done.

Web
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Battery favorites?
Replies
16
Views
4K
aerialimage
A
texmex
Odysssey Battery Q.
Replies
7
Views
5K
supercub24a
S
S
How have you installed an Odyssey or SBS-J16 battery in the stock battery box
Replies
13
Views
7K
NDRII
NDRII
S
battery replacement
Replies
19
Views
8K
wireweinie
wireweinie
behindpropellers
W&B change question
2 3
Replies
63
Views
30K
Charlie Longley
Charlie Longley
Back
Top