WingFlaps wrote:
On Feb 15, 8:11 am, Gig 601XL Builder
wrote:
WingFlaps wrote:
That apart, I'd like to dig a bit deeper into this reliability issue.
What percentage of Lycs or Cons mahe it to TBO without major part
replacements (such as cylinders, cylinder heads, magnetos etc.). Put
another way, is there anyone here who has _ever_ seen one go to TBO
without major working?
Cheers
Of course there are I've seen Lyc and Conts go WAY over TBO. Anyone that
has spent much time around personally owned aircraft (Not Rental) has
seen the same.


Now I could be wrong, but I thought not making TBO implies a bad
failure? So in my thinking, my question remains since an engine may
make TBO even though it has had major parts (such as a cylinder heads/
baarrels) replaced... If you know a few engines that have only ever
had plugs replaced in 2000 hours then that's great but I would still
like to know roughly what % that is. If you have the magazine you
refer to perhaps you could look up the relevant figure for me? Another
way of finding this out could be to look at how many cylinder heads
and barrels are sold compared to crankshaft service kits (if there is
such a thing). Even this would underestimate the true rate of engine
fails at annual as cylinders can be easily rehoned to raise
compression. Is 2000 hours is more of a myth than reality? Is there a
LAME here who could estimate how many plane engines he's had to strip
compared to ones he could just leave alone for 2000 hours?

Cheers


You keep moving the bar. YOu asked, "is there anyone here who has _ever_
seen one go to TBO without major working?" And the answer from myself
and others was yes, lots.

I' have know idea if the the percentage data you want is out there but
even if it is it isn't going to be very useful and it certainly isn't
going to be something you can comparable to the Thielert record unless
there is a huge amount statistical norming.

In fact it wouldn't even be fair to compare such a number to Thielert
because they would come out looking way worse than they really are
because they are new and even supports of Thielert admit they have had
teething problems.

You seem to be stuck on the idea that anybody that hasn't jumped on the
Thielert bandwagon and ripped the Lyc engine off their plane and
replaced it with a Thielert is in some way anti-diesel. That isn't the
case. Thielert has some problems that they haven't ironed out. Once they
do or somebody else comes along with a competing engine that doesn't
have the same problems or others then I have no doubt they will become
more popular.

It's my understanding that the biggest problem Thielert has doesn't have
anything to do with the engine itself it is the service system and the
company's failure to respond to owner issues.