New Cessna panel

"Jay Honeck" wrote:
What I SHOULD have said is "it doesn't burn a drop of oil beyond
'normal' consumption"...

Whew!

Our O-540 uses around one quart every 12 - 15 hours. More
if I fill the sump beyond 8.5 quarts.

That sounds ok. How did you find out what "normal" is? My O-360 burns a qt
every 7.5 hours. I thought that was too much, but Lycoming said the rate
could go as low as 3hrs/qt and still be within spec! I've had the cylinders
rehoned and new rings installed twice (due to the rocker arm fiasco, not
because of high oil consumption) and both times the rate went back to 7.5
hrs/qt after breakin.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

That sounds ok. How did you find out what "normal" is? My O-360 burns a qt
every 7.5 hours. I thought that was too much, but Lycoming said the rate
could go as low as 3hrs/qt and still be within spec!

Normal is what "feels" right, to me. If I was putting in a quart every 3
hours, I'd be bitching at my engine rebuilder!

Right now, thoroughly broken in at 125 or so hours, the engine is so sweet.
Using the JPI engine analyzer, we can see how each cylinder is performing --
and they are all pulling together like tractors. At altitude I can now lean
so that they are all within 90 degrees of each other, which is excellent for
a normally aspirated engine.

Best of all, it starts easily, runs really smooth, leaks very little (just a
drip or two around the stupid cylinder head covers -- I've GOT to get those
neoprene gaskets one of these days), and runs wonderfully on that cheap car
gas!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Dan Luke c172rgATbellsouthDOTnet wrote:
: That sounds ok. How did you find out what "normal" is? My O-360 burns a qt
: every 7.5 hours. I thought that was too much, but Lycoming said the rate
: could go as low as 3hrs/qt and still be within spec! I've had the cylinders
: rehoned and new rings installed twice (due to the rocker arm fiasco, not
: because of high oil consumption) and both times the rate went back to 7.5
: hrs/qt after breakin.

My Cherokee 180 just had a top job last winter from sticking
valves (sat for a long time on a fresh rebuild). New rings and rehoned
chrome jugs broke in for compression of 80/79/78/80 50 hours later. It
burns right at about 1 qt in 8 hours... supposedly just like chrome jugs
are supposed to. At least that's what I've heard. Hrm.. a bit of quick
math turns that into about 30 mL/jug/hour. For an O-540 that would be
about a quart in 6 hours.

Hrm... 1/2 cup of oil per hour... starts to sound like a lot then.
Oh well, from what I hear, it's better to burn a bit too much oil than not
enough.

The spec is a CYA for Lycoming so that it's not possible to run
out of oil before you run out of gas and need to land and check.

-Cory



--
************************************************** ***********************
* The prime directive of Linux: *
* - learn what you don't know, *
* - teach what you do. *
* (Just my 20 USm$) *
************************************************** ***********************

I am getting about 13hrs/qt on my factory overhauled O-360-A1A. I now
have about 200 hours on it. It is installed in a C-172.

Dan Luke wrote:

"Jay Honeck" wrote:
What I SHOULD have said is "it doesn't burn a drop of oil beyond
'normal' consumption"...

Whew!

Our O-540 uses around one quart every 12 - 15 hours. More
if I fill the sump beyond 8.5 quarts.

That sounds ok. How did you find out what "normal" is? My O-360 burns a qt
every 7.5 hours. I thought that was too much, but Lycoming said the rate
could go as low as 3hrs/qt and still be within spec! I've had the cylinders
rehoned and new rings installed twice (due to the rocker arm fiasco, not
because of high oil consumption) and both times the rate went back to 7.5
hrs/qt after breakin.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Ross Richardson wrote:
: I am getting about 13hrs/qt on my factory overhauled O-360-A1A. I now
: have about 200 hours on it. It is installed in a C-172.

What flavor of jugs? Chrome, Nitride, Steel, etc?
-Cory
--
************************************************** ***********************
* The prime directive of Linux: *
* - learn what you don't know, *
* - teach what you do. *
* (Just my 20 USm$) *
************************************************** ***********************

"Jay Honeck" wrote:
Using the JPI engine analyzer, we can see how each cylinder is:
performing -- and they are all pulling together like tractors.
At altitude I can now lean so that they are all within 90 degrees
of each other, which is excellent for a normally aspirated engine.

Gotta love the JPI. I especially love the fuel flow option. Mine always has
the fuel used correct to within half a gallon when I top off.
Having it hooked to the GPS is really great. On the KLN 90B I can display my
fuel used, fuel required to destination, reserve required, excess fuel
beyond reserve, GPH, etc. so I can leave the JPI switched to CHT/EGT.

Best of all, it runs wonderfully on that cheap car
gas!

Yer killin' me, Honeck! :^)
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

"Craig Prouse" wrote in message
...
"Tom S." wrote:

I'd love a 182RG with an IO-540 instead of the O-470. Does anyone do a
conversion?

The 182RG always had a Lycoming O-540 vice the Continental O-470. All
you're missing is the fuel injection.

Huh!! Memory isn't what it used to be :~(

I wish Cessna would bring back the RG in it's current line.

Regular factory steel, I believe. The engine has been running great. Now
if I can get problems with the C/S prop fixed that'll be great.

Ross


wrote:

Ross Richardson wrote:
: I am getting about 13hrs/qt on my factory overhauled O-360-A1A. I now
: have about 200 hours on it. It is installed in a C-172.

What flavor of jugs? Chrome, Nitride, Steel, etc?
-Cory
--
************************************************** ***********************
* The prime directive of Linux: *
* - learn what you don't know, *
* - teach what you do. *
* (Just my 20 USm$) *
************************************************** ***********************

Get any 182RG and you will have your Lyc.

Tom S. wrote:
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:hzDib.753715$YN5.705721@sccrnsc01...

In conclusion, I think it's a mistake to dismiss the IO-540 on the new
Cessnas as an insignificant update to the type. The O-470 was a good
engine, but the IO-540 rocks. It's easier to manage and more efficient.

I agree -- the injected O-540 is a terrific engine.

Heck, we absolutely LOVE our carbureted version. It's powerful,

relatively

smooth, can be throttled back to burn 10 gph all day long, or honked all

the

way forward to burn 23 gph -- and when you do that our Pathfinder will

climb

like a homesick angel!


I'd love a 182RG with an IO-540 instead of the O-470. Does anyone do a
conversion?

"Newps" wrote in message
news:0J2jb.772488$Ho3.205780@sccrnsc03...
Get any 182RG and you will have your Lyc.


It's not necessarily a lycoming I want as I'd like to get rid of the
carburator.

Also, I'd like to have a three blade prop instead of the two blader. I know
that sacrifices a bit of cruise speed and costs more to OH, but I've been in
both (have most of my early flying career in a three blade T182RG) and found
it MUCH smoother. Psychosomatic (sp?)???


Tom S. wrote:
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:hzDib.753715$YN5.705721@sccrnsc01...

In conclusion, I think it's a mistake to dismiss the IO-540 on the new
Cessnas as an insignificant update to the type. The O-470 was a good
engine, but the IO-540 rocks. It's easier to manage and more
efficient.

I agree -- the injected O-540 is a terrific engine.

Heck, we absolutely LOVE our carbureted version. It's powerful,

relatively

smooth, can be throttled back to burn 10 gph all day long, or honked all

the

way forward to burn 23 gph -- and when you do that our Pathfinder will

climb

like a homesick angel!


I'd love a 182RG with an IO-540 instead of the O-470. Does anyone do a
conversion?