Come and join our community. Expand your network and get to know new people!
Painters tape isn't sticky or strong enough. Been using Duct tape 20 plus years. No issues.
You're correct--the more airplanes out in the field, the better chances there are of finding FAA approved replacement parts and used serviceable parts.
If a needed part can't be found, there is a provision for an owner to make that part under a set of guidelines.
And there are many airplane "salvage" yards that sell used serviceable parts.
Many modifiers have taken the Hawk XP and upped the engine HP--there's a simple STC to increase the power to 210 hp, and taken off the nose wheel to convert the XP into a conventional gear airplane.
As with all airplane purchases, a very thorough due diligence pre-sale inspection and records search is urged.
Let me know if you have other questions.
I'm having a little trouble with these numbers.
When you say "the fuel pressure to well above the Riley 21 psi max spec. at takeoff power. "
I believe you're referring to the max unmetered fuel pressure.
The Continental spec (in both SID97-3G and Continental Manual M-0) for unmetered fuel pressure adjustment at full power is 35-39 psi at 2700 and 35.5 MAP. With the unmetered FP set to those values (and the unmetered FP set to 5.5-6.5 at 600 rpm you should get fuel flow of 180-186 pounds and 30.7- 31.7 gph.
If you're getting those fuel flows/gph readings the engine is set up correctly.
I don't have a copy of the Riley Intercooler temperature delta/manifold pressure adjustment tables of the installation instructions so don't really know where the 21 psi comes from.
When I was setting up the take off FP on turbo-charged Cessnas, I liked to set them up on the "fat" side, figuring that too little fuel flow can cause hotter than desired temperatures. It wasn't uncommon to see the FF needle go past the redline with this "fat" set up during the first take off of the day.
We would instruct the pilot to pull the mixture back to redline during the take off roll or after cleaning up on the climb.
You an always adjust down, but you can never adjust up above the maximum set up pressures.
If I've missed something, or didn't understand your post, please let me know,
That's great news.
I know Paul and his crew are very good at this type of repair.
Please keep me in the loop on this.
Let's see. How to answer.
The engine has been signed off for a top overhaul and a bottom overhaul within the last 300 hours,
If everything was done correctly you have an engine that's 300 TSMOH, and should run well for years to come.
I would still ask for a compression check, and if a local mechanic has a borescope, ask him to "scope" the cylinders. He/she will need to check the appearance of the exhaust valve to see if there's any evidence of burning or high heat along an edge, and to see if the cross hatch pattern is visible in the cylinder walls.
Let me know how it comes out.
Looking at a Cessna 150
The engine has 1600 SMOH
300 Since a TOP Overhaul
200 Since a Bottom Overhaul
I'd be interested in views on the SMOH vs TOP vs BOTTOM
Yes indeed, Paul was able to schedule me for the week of April 25 and I plan to fly the aircraft to him. I have a ways to go on the completion of the annual, new seat rails (pilot side) new glare shield, wt & balance and prop balance...so I should be back in the air in March and ready to ferry in April.
I really appreciate your effort on this matter and getting me in contact with Paul! I will let you know the outcome in April--
1981 P210 with TIO520P and Riley intercooler. Fuel flow was below min spec with 36.5 MP and 2700RPM takeoff power (around 27gal/hr). My mechanic checked the set up of the fuel injection by the service bulletin SID97-3E. Pressures were spec. In order to get the minimum fuel flow specified (31.7gal/hr ) he had to increase the fuel pressure to well above the Riley 21psi max spec. at takeoff power. I am monitoring fuel pressure and flow with my new MVP50 display. Engine seems to run great at both settings with lots of power. Does anybody have any suggestions as to why the fuel flow would be too low when the fuel pressure is at max spec at takeoff power? Should I be concerned that the fuel pressure is now well above spec for takeoff power?
This aircraft, that I am considering buying, is an 'in between' model called XP. Only about 1500 of this model are made. My question is parts in general from cosmetics to windows to the engine (that is 195HP). The Basis of my question is the assumption that finding parts for, say 172N is much easier -possibly cheaper- than parts for 177, am I wrong?
That's quite a question. Are you asking about engine overhaul parts? Airframe parts? Fuel system parts?
In general, most of the common wear parts on the airframe are available. A company named MacFarlane Aviation in Kansas makes and sell many of their parts as well as parts from other vendors for single engine Cessnas.
Parts that aren't as commonly needed can be manufactured locally under what's known as the "owner produced parts" rule enacted by the FAA about a decade ago.
Engine overhaul prices vary depending on what company does the overhaul. I've seen a price of around $22000 for an overhaul of your existing engine up to around $38000 for a factory overhaul of your engine.
When the engine has "timed out" or is exhibiting symptoms of too much wear and tear, it's always wise to send the propeller and engine accessories (mount, alternator, prop governor, etc.) for overhaul at the same time.
Tires, windows, windshields, carpets, interior refurb kits, new paint, new avionics are all readily available.
Please let me know when you have a more focused question.
I (first time buyer) am looking at a R172XP 1976. The engine TSMOH is close to 2000 hours. How difficult is it to find parts for it? I appreciate any and all information.
Sure, I would appreciate your help. Currently I don’t have a cell phone. Email is the best way for me; .
All previous issues are online at this site.
Thanks for sharing that. That sounds like an awesome setup.
We've been told that the GTN 750 takes over 6 months to get down to Australia because of supply issues, so I settled for the 650 instead. Now that you're telling us that with the autopilot control panel on top of the avionics stack (or anything else, for that matter), the viewing angle might become awkward, I feel somehow vindicated a bit, so thank you for that! I'll work with the 650 and learn how to swap things to the G3X display if the 650 gets too tiny for reviewing a flight plan, for instance.
We're putting in the ship's own completely overhauled Lycoming IO-360 L2A with Lycoming's own freshly certified electronic ignition system on both sides (with the backup battery on one of those sides), hoping for a smooth and economical ride -- and easy starts -- no more mags. Of course with the EIS, which also allowed us to leave off the ancient and tiny warning light panel that still was in the 1997 172R cockpit.
You have any pictures from the install? Would love to see them.
Thank you again!
I got the heli-coil installed today. I put everything back together and torqued the exhaust nuts to the specified torque, no problem
The stud hole was pretty worn. I was able to slide any of the "oversize studs" up into the hole and barely catch a thread. I was going to drill the hole out to 21/64 per the heli-coil installation instructions, but I thought I would try just the heli-coil tap first. It worked fine. I was able to tap the hole without drilling it out to the larger size. The helicoil threaded in fine and I installed my standard size stud. It was a good fit.
Thanks for your help.
I'm having the same issue w my factor rebuilt O-470R that has 30 hours on it. I have to work to get the oil-T up beyond 160F. The aluminum hi-vac tape is the answer. Thanks for trying the new vernatherm as it shows me that it is not the answer.