|
-
POSTING RULES

-
Donate yearly (please).
-
Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
|

03-29-2010, 07:24 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: SC & CA
Posts: 907
|
|
ECI vs Me Venting!
 [/url][/IMG]
Shipping the cylinders off to ECI for exchange today. All four of the cylinders appeared to be in excellent condition. Looking beyond the frustration, time, and expense, of complying with the AD, there are some positives in having the engine open for inspection.
Having the cylinders off, you have an excellent opportunity to inspect the innards for corrosion. You also can see how effective the anti-dispersant qualities the engine oil was in keeping sludge out of the crankcase.
My aircraft is 3 years old and is low time. It sat idle for 18 months while we did a number of mods. I was pleased to discover that the camshaft, crank, and connecting rods all look like new. However, I did find light corrosion of the sides of the push rods. Since I’ve elected to replace the cylinders with new, I am going to order new push rods.
On a “venting” note, I have a bone to pick with ECI. They have been highly responsive to my calls…no problem there. However, in my opinion, I am being raped by the cylinder exchange deal they offered me.
In exchange for my cylinders, which they will repair, and re-sell, they initially offered me a 25% discount off the new cylinders. I asked them to reconsider the offered discount, my cylinders are very low time, they will also make a return on the re-sale, and the inconvenience, time, and labor on my behalf, was all the result of ECI’s faulty cylinder head to barrel bonding technique. ECI countered, after consulting with the PRESIDENT of the company, to extend me a 27% discount. What a rip-off!!!! Anyhow…”vent” terminated.
Regards,
__________________
Tom Valenzia
RV8 (Sold)
RV12 Jabiru 2200 Powered (Sold)
Dues contributor since 2007
Learn from the mistakes of others. You won't live long enough to make all of them yourself...Anonymous
Last edited by TomVal : 03-29-2010 at 07:26 AM.
|

03-29-2010, 08:45 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 365
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAGO
On a ?venting? note, I have a bone to pick with ECI. They have been highly responsive to my calls?no problem there. However, in my opinion, I am being raped by the cylinder exchange deal they offered me.
|
Tom, any chance you'd like to share with us the cost of the new cylinders (minus the hassle and labor)?
__________________
Jeff Atkinson
RV-8 #82594 Flying since May 2012
Barrett XP-360, Catto 3-Blade, Dual G3X Touch, GTN-650, VP-X
|

03-29-2010, 09:18 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: SC & CA
Posts: 907
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff A
Tom, any chance you'd like to share with us the cost of the new cylinders (minus the hassle and labor)?
|
Jeff,
$825/cyl.
Regards,
__________________
Tom Valenzia
RV8 (Sold)
RV12 Jabiru 2200 Powered (Sold)
Dues contributor since 2007
Learn from the mistakes of others. You won't live long enough to make all of them yourself...Anonymous
|

03-30-2010, 10:27 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 33
|
|
Please see letter I sent via e-mail to FAA today. I will post reply when and if I recieve.
Mr. Peter W. Hakala:
I have the following questions/comments regarding AD 2009-26-12:
I have been in contact with ECI regarding AD compliance on two Group "B" cylinders installed on a Van's RV-4 experimental aircraft I own.
ECI stated to me that on experimental aircrafts they are only offering to rework the cylinders and return them to the owner.
I am questioning the legality of this based on the following:
1. AD 2009-26-12 Section (N)Prohibition of Group "B" ECI Cylinder Assemblies Affected by this AD cleary states: "not to attempt to repair or reuse Group "B" cylinders."
2. AC 39-7C Section 8 Applicability of AD's clearly states that: "Unless specifically stated, AD's apply to the make and model set forth in the applicability statement regardless of the classification or category of the airworthiness certificate issued for the aircraft."(Case in point Experimental Aircraft)
3. AC 39-7C Section 8, paragraph E. clearly states: "In no case, does the presence of any alteration, modification, or repair remove any product from the applicability of this AD."
4. AC 39-7C Section 12clearly states: "Any alternative method of compliance or adjustment of compliance time other than that listed in the AD must be substantiated and approved by the FAA before it may be used.
I look forward to hearing your opinion on the legality of the rework ECI is offering. And your opinion as to whether the rework ECI is offering would constitute compliance with the above referenced AD.
In the event there is someone else I should be comunicating my questions to, would you please forward to the same?
Thank You
Regards
Logan Walker
|

03-30-2010, 02:53 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 33
|
|
important memorandum
In response to my e-mail to Peter Hakala at the FAA, he forwarded to me a memorandum from FAA acting regonal counsel Christopher Poreda to the manager of the technical standards branch.
This memorandum clearly backs up, and makes many references to AC 39-7C.
Anyone with a Lyoming engine with affected cylinders would be well advised to obtain and read this memorandum, and decied for yourself if ECI's unapproved AMOC is actually legal, and if it puts you in compliance with the AD 2009-26-12. I for one will not be putting reworked cylinders on my plane.
If anyone would like a copy, I could e-mail you one, or fax may be preferred.
logan@ramseysheetmetal.com
Last edited by RV4 N21471 : 03-30-2010 at 02:54 PM.
Reason: need to add
|

03-31-2010, 06:40 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bay Village, OH
Posts: 886
|
|
Good work
Nicely, and well done Logan. Rick 90432
|

03-31-2010, 08:31 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Paradise,Pa S37
Posts: 735
|
|
I completely understand your choice but I will also say having your cylinders looked at may be very well worth it. Like I said in a earlier post I had 2 of my 4 group A cylinders with the starts of cracks in them, again I respect your choice but if I understand the issue the cause of the AD was a machining issue and having the AMOC done does make me feel much better about my cylinders
__________________
All the Best ;-)
RV-8
RV-9 once the kids are older
|

04-01-2010, 11:01 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pasadena CA
Posts: 2,484
|
|
There is no requirement to comply with AD's on experimental aircraft at all. If you have a certified lycoming... that is kinda a gray area, but if you have an experimental lycoming or a clone... well, it just doesn't apply at all.
__________________
Stephen Samuelian, CFII, A&P IA, CTO
RV4 wing in Jig @ KPOC
RV7 emp built
|

04-02-2010, 05:50 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: va.
Posts: 523
|
|
Doesn't a certified Lycoming automatically become an expermental engine when installed in an expermental airplane? I think it can only retain the certified status if it is used in an aircraft approved for it. I've never seen the regs that support this, so if some one knows please say.
|

04-02-2010, 06:10 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Newport, TN
Posts: 7,496
|
|
This is another one of those never ending debates... Tons of threads on this subject.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:24 AM.
|