Firewall Penetration Hardware

[fabricflyer]

What is the consensus out there? How are you routing your engine control cables through the firewall? Are you using the Vans method with the two snap bushings and Proseal, or are you using a firewall eyeball? Any and all thoughts are welcome.
Allen

[Flying Scotsman]

I used the eyeballs...look better, hold the cables securely at the correct angles, and are, I think (others will no doubt disagree) the right tool for the right job.

[roee]

Originally Posted by fabricflyer

What is the consensus out there? How are you routing your engine control cables through the firewall? Are you using the Vans method with the two snap bushings and Proseal, or are you using a firewall eyeball? Any and all thoughts are welcome.
Allen

There is no consensus. It tends to break down into two camps.

One camp is those who follow Van's methods unquestioningly, which in this case means a cheap and quick and dirty way of penetrating the firewall, but that's probably fairly ineffective in containing an actual fire should one ever occur.

The other camp is those of us (I count myself among this camp) who take the threat of engine fire more seriously, and want to give the firewall the best chance to do its job, should it ever be called upon. So in this case, a steel eyeball would be the better way to go, though admittedly it is more expensive and a little heavier.

Note that if you're serious about maintaining the integrity of your firewall, there is more to it than just using eyeball fittings for the control cables. Each and every penetration, from control cables to electrical to plumbing to cabin heat needs to be sealed properly, using effective methods and materials. Your firewall is only as good as its weakest link.

The topic of firewall integrity has been discussed in great detail in many threads on this forum. Use the search function and do some reading.

[ILikePike]

I am using an electrical fitting from the aviation section at Home Depot with a 4" section of fire sleeve. The fitting has a locknut on the back of the firewall and the fire sleeve is held on with 2 hose clamps.

[Rupester]

For some attention and a few bucks focused on FW penetrations, you get a ton of added safety.

[rzbill]

I am a proponent of the tube and firesleeve penetrations per Aeroelectric and elsewhere.

I also think the eyeballs are overused. They are not automatically fire resistant. Sealant must be added. In addition, the onlypass through that needs it is a prop control.

[Guyfly47]

Originally Posted by ILikePike

I am using an electrical fitting from the aviation section at Home Depot with a 4" section of fire sleeve. The fitting has a locknut on the back of the firewall and the fire sleeve is held on with 2 hose clamps.

What was the name or intended use of the Home Depot electrical fitting with a locknut? I like the idea and it sounds like it would work nicely on my firewall.
Thanks, Eric Schlanser

[crabandy]

I bet it was one of these, I saw them in the conduit section and for $1.50 I bought a couple of sizes to possibly use.

[Sig600]

I bought several of these. Haven't installed yet.

http://www.averytools.com/prodinfo.asp?number=SA-05

There seems to be a lot of talk about stainless (especially with the TG-10). Does anyone know of an actual fire in an RV fwd of the firewall?

[JonJay]

Originally Posted by Sig600

I bought several of these. Haven't installed yet.

http://www.averytools.com/prodinfo.asp?number=SA-05

There seems to be a lot of talk about stainless (especially with the TG-10). Does anyone know of an actual fire in an RV fwd of the firewall?

Similar thing as the DIY kit but stainless instead of plated steel and a lot more $. The fires I have been aware of, the bottom skin proved to be the weak point, not the firewall. There have been very few.
For what it Is worth I followed Van's Heyco method with firestop, not proseal.
Dan H has done exhaustive testing and his results and conversations can be searched out. Worth the read.