I should have been more clear, when I said it had been run frequently, I actually meant that it had been FLOWN frequently. Just starting one up to say it ran is not good business. The effects of storage vary with type storage as well. If you allow the engine to warm up in the day, and cool in the evening, it will sweat moisture if there is much moisture in the air, inside and out. There is an Ercoupe nearby that has sat for some time, the corrosion on the OUTSIDE has nearly eaten off the fins! Imagine what it looks like inside.
--- In [email protected], "Donald" <dongen...@...> wrote: > > > > I think that information is important to us coupe owners. When looking to > buy, I found many "low time" engines, that had been majored decades ago! > Someplace there is a "guess" as to how it was stored for those years. I > finally chose one that was fairly low hours (125 hrs SMOH) and 14 years since > overhaul! Fourteen years is a long time, but I satisfied myself that the > engine had been run frequently enough during that time to make it a good > gamble in my eyes. I think Continental time limits are 12 years regardless > of hours, so I took a chance on it. So far, so good, time will tell. > > --- In [email protected], "Roy Stubbs" <rdstubbs@> wrote: > > > > There have been some good comments and individual examples of good running > > engines with fatal flaws and engines that have run well past TBO. As an > > engineer I am well aware of âinfant-mortality,â and also the more > > common idea that if something is operating well âdonât fix it.â > > > > > > > > The EAA article on TBO is part of a longer running series on > > Reliability-Centered Maintenance, a program reportedly now used by the > > airline industry and the military. More specifically the EAA article on > > engine TBO drew on five years of data covering the years 2001-2005 for > > small piston airplane accidents attributed by the NTSB to engine failure. > > The data shows a steady and rapid decline in engine failure accidents both > > as Hours Since Overhaul and Years Since Overhaul. Only after 3,000 hours > > and/or 25 years does the accident rate begin to pick up. What the NTSB > > data cannot show is much about failures beyond TBO as most engines are > > overhauled at the point. > > > > > > > > Assuming that engines failures will begin to increase at and beyond TBO > > produces a bathtub shaped failure curve. To stay out of the presumptive > > wear out zone we overhaul our engines which puts us back into the > > infant-mortality zone. > > > > > > > > What to do? Maybe find an airplane with about 1,000 hours on the engine > > and operate it for 1,000 hours. That is what the data âsuggests.â > > > > > > > > J > > > > > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > > Behalf Of Donald > > Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 12:24 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [ercoupe-tech] Re: Engine TBO > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, to play the devils advocate, that crack did not just magically appear > > at some determined TBO. There are schools of thought that also show a good > > running engine should not be tampered with, you also run the risk of > > problems in the overhaul. One of the members of this group just had a > > catastrophic engine failure, with crank busted, at like 300 hours SMOH, but > > we would not want to therefore become believers that one should overhaul at > > 300 hrs. I am aware of MANY engines that have run to the neighborhood of > > twice TBO with no problems. > > > > --- In [email protected] <mailto:ercoupe-tech%40yahoogroups.com> > > , "Jerry Eichenberger" <JEichenberger@> wrote: > > > > > > Jerry - > > > > > > My story about TBO was that about 30 years ago I was in a group that > > > owned an Aztec and Bonanza. The Bonanza was at TBO. Against my wishes, > > > the group voted to go another 100 hours. The engine was running like a > > > Swiss watch, burned almost no oil, compressions were excellent; you get > > > the idea. > > > > > > After that 100 extra hours, most of the group wanted to go another 100. I > > > put my foot down and said to either overhaul it or buy me out. We > > > overhauled it. > > > > > > The crankshaft had a crack 270 degrees around the circumference. Who > > > knows how long the crack had been there, but it was likely to have > > > catastrophically failed within that next 100 hours had we not torn down > > > the engine. > > > > > > Hence, I'm a a believer in TBO. What little do you gain by assuming that > > > the innards of the engine are OK just because compression and oil burn > > > are good? > > > > > > Jerry E. > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [email protected] > > > <mailto:ercoupe-tech%40yahoogroups.com> > > > [mailto:[email protected] > > > <mailto:ercoupe-tech%40yahoogroups.com> ]On Behalf Of Jerry Ward > > > Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 5:14 PM > > > To: [email protected] <mailto:ercoupe-tech%40yahoogroups.com> > > > ; Roy Stubbs > > > Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] Engine TBO > > > > > > > > > I just read the article and it appears to me that they are on to > > > something smart. I would hope that the FAA would read this and change the > > > way engines are overhauled. I would hate to have to overhaul a perfectly > > > good running engine that is strong and has good compression and seems to > > > not burn too much oil. It appears that the fresh engines are the ones to > > > worry about. Jerry in the Great Northwest. > > > > > > --- On Mon, 2/15/10, Roy Stubbs <rdstubbs@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > From: Roy Stubbs <rdstubbs@> > > > Subject: [ercoupe-tech] Engine TBO > > > To: [email protected] <mailto:ercoupe-tech%40yahoogroups.com> > > > Date: Monday, February 15, 2010, 1:02 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Has anyone on the list read this monthââ¬â¢s EAA Sport > > > Aviationââ¬â¢s article ââ¬Å"Is Engine TBO a Myth?ââ¬Â? > > > > > > > > > > > > Wonder what your thoughts might be? > > > > > > > > > > > > From: ercoupe-tech@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:ercoupe- t...@yahoogroups > > > .com] On Behalf Of Roy Stubbs > > > Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 8:55 AM > > > To: 'Jack Burwell'; 'Ronald Hynes'; 'earl johnson' > > > Cc: ercoupe-tech@ yahoogroups. com > > > Subject: RE: Fw: RE: [ercoupe-tech] Floor board removal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mine are also made up of two pieces and have the rudder pedal assembly > > > which needs to be removed before the floor boards can be removed. The > > > only way it is accomplished is my 5ââ¬â¢6ââ¬Â 125# son and pilot > > > buddy. > > > > > > > > > > > > From: ercoupe-tech@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:ercoupe- t...@yahoogroups > > > .com] On Behalf Of Jack Burwell > > > Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2010 3:08 PM > > > To: 'Ronald Hynes'; 'earl johnson' > > > Cc: ercoupe-tech@ yahoogroups. com > > > Subject: RE: Fw: RE: [ercoupe-tech] Floor board removal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mine are made up of 2 pieces but they are still an absolute nightmare to > > > remove and reinstall. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: ercoupe-tech@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:ercoupe- t...@yahoogroups > > > .com] On Behalf Of Ronald Hynes > > > Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2010 12:54 AM > > > To: earl johnson > > > Cc: ercoupe-tech@ yahoogroups. com > > > Subject: Re: Fw: RE: [ercoupe-tech] Floor board removal > > > > > > > > > > > > I will always admire old Henry Ford and his way of thinking. When he > > > would have a difficult problem with manufacturing his autos, he was said > > > to assign the problem to the lazyest of his employees because if they > > > could not find a better way to fix the problem then there wasn't a better > > > way. After 40 years of owning and driving Fords, I follow Henry's idea > > > and I simply ask my sons. Never fails me. > > > > > > Ron Hynes, Alberta Canada > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 2/13/10, earl johnson <johnsonec2000@ yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > From: earl johnson <johnsonec2000@ yahoo.com> > > > Subject: Fw: RE: [ercoupe-tech] Floor board removal > > > To: "Tech-Ercoupe Group" <ercoupe-tech@ yahoogroups. com> > > > Received: Saturday, February 13, 2010, 2:00 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i have seen a Ercoupe with Floor Board made up of two pieces,not sure if > > > it legal > > > > > > however i have been thinking about doing that sure would make under the > > > floor board > > > > > > service easier. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 2/13/10, jackburwell2619@ comcast.net <jackburwell2619@ > > > comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > From: jackburwell2619@ comcast.net <jackburwell2619@ comcast.net> > > > Subject: RE: [ercoupe-tech] Floor board removal > > > To: "'rurndum'" <rurln...@smith- valley.com>, ercoupe-tech@ yahoogroups. > > > com > > > Date: Saturday, February 13, 2010, 2:00 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > I just went through the process assisting with the annual and it's a real > > > pain having to remove the brake pedal and an even bigger pain > > > reinstalling it and the boards. > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: ercoupe-tech@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:ercoupe- t...@yahoogroups > > > .com] On Behalf Of rurndum > > > Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 12:37 PM > > > To: ercoupe-tech@ yahoogroups. com > > > Subject: [ercoupe-tech] Floor board removal > > > > > > > > > > > > I helped with an annual inspection yesterday on a '46 C Model. Removing > > > the floor board was a pain because of the brake pedal being attached to > > > it. Is there a modification to make the floor removal easier? > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > Jack > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > Yahoo! Canada Toolbar : Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your > > > favourite sites. Download it now! > > > > > >
