VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

  #31  
Old 08-01-2018, 03:11 PM
Canadian_JOY Canadian_JOY is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,291
Default

Dan - to answer your question, the engine that ran to TBO (and actually quite a bit beyond, being flown "on condition") was a flight school O-200 from a C-150. Mine was a C85. The Aeroshell that was used in mine was 15W50, but previously it had run with W100. The O-200 reportedly had been run with Phillips XC 20W50 since break in.

To be fair, my engine bottom end was in need of overhaul but I purchased the airplane without any logbooks so I had no real history on the engine, thus no idea how many hours were on that bottom end when inability to maintain oil pressure caused the engine to be removed for overhaul.

Comments from the overhaul shop indicated the gold colouration likely wasn't harmful, however they did say they have had better luck with the longevity of oil pump gears with Phillips. Of course there was no data shared to quantify or otherwise support this sentiment. They did say the gold residue made it much more difficult to detect cracks and that bead blasting or other techniques were required to remove the gold stuff to reveal the true nature of the metal beneath. Perhaps this is a word in favor of the AeroShell as that gold coating might also have helped in plugging up potential leakage paths!
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-01-2018, 03:29 PM
FasGlas's Avatar
FasGlas FasGlas is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Prescott, AZ
Posts: 739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by skylor View Post
I don't recall seeing this before, but those considering using MMO might want to at least read this NTSB report:

https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.a...16X01610&key=1

Skylor
You can't regulate stupid. If the fuel was pink and oily the guy must of had a 50/50 ratio of fuel and MMO... And again, the report doesn't say which tank the plane was on or any info on how the long the engine was in service or log entries. MMO is not a fuel, I think we can all agree to that. I'm sure the FAA prohibits the use of water as a fuel, too.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-01-2018, 05:08 PM
MED MED is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Aiken, SC
Posts: 620
Default

FWIW - I spoke with the Aeroshell folks at Oshkosh about using Camguard. They said not to use it with Aeroshell 15W50 as it already has the Lycoming protective ingredients. Same for Aeroshell 100W. They said Camguard is fine with Aeroshell 100, and I understand from Mike Busch and others it should be used with Phillips 20-W50.
__________________
MED
140236
N435MD
Miss March 2020
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 08-01-2018, 06:08 PM
F1Boss's Avatar
F1Boss F1Boss is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Taylor Texas
Posts: 811
Default Reluctant post here:

I do NOT want to start a war here, but a dear friend of mine (now passed) actually got a Phillips oil engineer to talk to him about this subject. After swearing to not tell anyone, the fella said to MIX 25% Phillips 20W-50 with Phillips X-CY 20W-50. If I can recall, the synth was better for preventing rust, and kept things cleaner.

My preference is to use 25% Amsoil 20W-50 as it is a known ashless-dispersant oil, so that product is what I mix in with X-CY.

I do not know if the Phillips auto 20W-50 is ashless-dispersant.
__________________
Best,
Mark

"Not everyone needs a Rocket. Some folks, however, shouldn't live life without one.
You know who you are."
Budd Davisson, 1997
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 08-01-2018, 07:31 PM
f14av8r's Avatar
f14av8r f14av8r is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Tampa (Wimauma actually)
Posts: 421
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MED View Post
FWIW - I spoke with the Aeroshell folks at Oshkosh about using Camguard. They said not to use it with Aeroshell 15W50 as it already has the Lycoming protective ingredients. Same for Aeroshell 100W. They said Camguard is fine with Aeroshell 100, and I understand from Mike Busch and others it should be used with Phillips 20-W50.
I think the designations might be a off a bit here. Aeroshell 100 is a single weight straight mineral oil, not ashless and with no dispersants. It shouldn't be run regularly in an engine using leaded fuel like 100LL. Aeroshell 100W is a straight weight ashless dispersant oil. The W signifies Ashless / Dispersent when used in a straight weight commercial designation. Aeroshell 100W Plus is also a straight weight ashless dispersant and additionally has the Lycoming additive package. The 100 oils are all SAE 50 equivalents. Confusing I know!

Aeroshell 100W can, and from what I've learned, should be operated with an additive like CamGuard. IF you use Aeroshell 100W Plus, using Camguard would be redundant.
__________________
Randy King
Tampa (Wimauma), Florida
RV-4 N212CS (sold)
RV-8 N184RK (flying)
Flying an A320 to pay the bills
Exempt and gladly donating anyway - Current through March 2021
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 08-01-2018, 07:56 PM
FasGlas's Avatar
FasGlas FasGlas is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Prescott, AZ
Posts: 739
Default

Synthetic oils will not suspend the lead in our AV fuel, that's why you can't use 100% synthetic. Works just great for cars and unleaded. Some time back Mobile 1 was tried to market aviation Mobile 1 and failed. A few companies attempted to produce 100% synthetic and failed. I see no reason to run any amount of synthetic on engines that were designed decades before synthetic oil was ever marketed. For most of us that change our oil every 25 ~ 50 hours synthetic just makes your wallet lighter with no benefits.

Last edited by FasGlas : 08-01-2018 at 07:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 08-02-2018, 04:38 AM
f14av8r's Avatar
f14av8r f14av8r is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Tampa (Wimauma actually)
Posts: 421
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FasGlas View Post
Synthetic oils will not suspend the lead in our AV fuel, that's why you can't use 100% synthetic. Works just great for cars and unleaded. Some time back Mobile 1 was tried to market aviation Mobile 1 and failed. A few companies attempted to produce 100% synthetic and failed. I see no reason to run any amount of synthetic on engines that were designed decades before synthetic oil was ever marketed. For most of us that change our oil every 25 ~ 50 hours synthetic just makes your wallet lighter with no benefits.
Well said. As I understand his writings on the subject, this is why Mike Busch definitively says AeroShell 15W50 is a poor choice. He doesn't like multi-weights either (for warm climate use) but disapproves of the use of any synthetic.
__________________
Randy King
Tampa (Wimauma), Florida
RV-4 N212CS (sold)
RV-8 N184RK (flying)
Flying an A320 to pay the bills
Exempt and gladly donating anyway - Current through March 2021
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08-02-2018, 06:31 AM
MED MED is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Aiken, SC
Posts: 620
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by f14av8r View Post
I think the designations might be a off a bit here. Aeroshell 100 is a single weight straight mineral oil, not ashless and with no dispersants. It shouldn't be run regularly in an engine using leaded fuel like 100LL. Aeroshell 100W is a straight weight ashless dispersant oil. The W signifies Ashless / Dispersent when used in a straight weight commercial designation. Aeroshell 100W Plus is also a straight weight ashless dispersant and additionally has the Lycoming additive package. The 100 oils are all SAE 50 equivalents. Confusing I know!

Aeroshell 100W can, and from what I've learned, should be operated with an additive like CamGuard. IF you use Aeroshell 100W Plus, using Camguard would be redundant.
Thanks for the clarification. I should have taken notes when I talked to Aeroshell. The important part to me was he said don't use Camguard with 15W50 and 100Plus.
__________________
MED
140236
N435MD
Miss March 2020
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 08-02-2018, 08:20 AM
F1Boss's Avatar
F1Boss F1Boss is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Taylor Texas
Posts: 811
Default Maybe!

Quote:
Originally Posted by FasGlas View Post
Synthetic oils will not suspend the lead in our AV fuel, that's why you can't use 100% synthetic.

snip
We all know about the Mobil 1 SNAFU, but keep in mind that Amsoil was developed as an ashless/dispersant aviation oil (or so I am told), and no known engine problems are blamed on that particular brand. The dispersant notation says that brand DOES suspend the lead.

I think the addition of some small percentage of an ashless/dispersant synth keeps the iron parts from rusting (well, more so than non-synth oils) but I have no proof of this, other than Exxon Elite semi-synth and their claims.

A peek inside of engines running some percentage of synth vs those not doing so could enlighten us, but danged if I know how to do that. I have one of those 'peek inside' cameras, but it surely does not produce pictures like we see in the ads...or it could be I'm not using it correctly?

The synth oils are not used on the round engines as they allow the cam roller followers to slide instead of rolling - bad juju there. I have also heard the main bearing does not like synth - I can't figure that one out. I always ran X-CY in my 985s and 2600s - no additives or synth added to the mix. Ever.
__________________
Best,
Mark

"Not everyone needs a Rocket. Some folks, however, shouldn't live life without one.
You know who you are."
Budd Davisson, 1997
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 08-03-2018, 06:18 AM
6 Gun 6 Gun is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 846
Cool Oil

Ok from this thread I learned that Mike says don't use synthetic oil.And synthetic oil wont support the lead in 100LL.Our aircraft engines run very hot and its a proven fact synthetic oil protects much better at those temps while mineral after a certain temp provides less.Aero shell 15-50 is a blend of mineral and synthetic which carries the lead in suspension.I will be running full synthetic when the lead goes away.I was told at OSH that the FAA (Folks Against Aviation) had suspended testing unleaded fuel for a year so its going to be further down the road.From what I remember running Phipps X/C oil from break in to TBO was started by Ram aircraft engines on engines with nickel-silicon carbide cylinders which most of us don't run. The poster said that the TBO clean engine was a flight school engine run every day also a big difference in our engines.My question for Mr. Bush is where's the Beef?
Bob
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:12 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.