What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Spruce vs Summit Racing

f14av8r

f14av8r

Well Known Member
I'm installing some oil system products on my -4. I'm putting in an accumulator and a Half-Raven inverted system. I'm quickly becoming intimately familiar with the various types of hoses and their associated fittings. I'm also shocked at the prices some of our vendors are getting for these products. I put together a list of the piece-parts I needed from Aircraft Spruce and was horrified at the price. So, I went looking elsewhere. I found the car racing world.

Is there something so incredibly special about the types of hoses and fittings that are sold for the aircraft market that they can command such an amazing price premium? Or, or we in the experimental world just paying a premium to buy products that satisfy the requirements of the certificated world without getting any additional quality or value. I think, at least in the world of hoses and fittings, the later is true. Here's an example.

I needed somewhere between 4-6 six feet of hose, end fittings and some other adapter type pieces to hook up my accumulator. I priced those parts at ACS and then, as I said, horrified by the price, I also priced it at Summit Racing. Here's the comparison.

Summit
- #10 stainless hose price per foot - FRA-710010- $10.80 (aeroquip 601 equiv)
- #10 fittings - FRA-220110 $11 (Aeroquip 816 equiv)
ACS
- #10 stainless price per foot - Aeroquip 601 - $19
- #10 816-10D fittings - $40 each.

And, if you buy the Canton Racing Accusump Install Kit (CTR-24-800), you get six feet 601 type hose, two 816 type fittings, and a couple of aluminum adapter fittings for just $88 dollars.

The ACS hose is twice the price of the Summit hose. The ACS fittings are FOUR TIMES as expensive as the Summit hose. This is rubber and machined aluminum we are talking about here so there's no special, proprietary technology at work that I can discern.

So, what did I do? I bought the Canton Install Kit. I received it today. The hose looks exactly like another piece of Aeroquip 601 hose I already had and the fittings look just like the other 816 fittings on my plane.

What am I missing? Is there something so special about the Aircraft Spruce products / aviation specific products that would justify such a price premium?
 
Randy, I've been flying hoses built with AN stuff from our local race shop for nearly twenty years. They have an entire wall of fittings from which to choose. Most of them actually have AN numbers on them but I have no issues with using AN-equivalent fittings. Our applications are low pressure compared to the ratings on the fittings and hose.

I've used 48" race car AN-3 teflon stainless-braided brake hoses to plumb mechanical oil pressure gauges. The assembled hose cost a fraction of buying "aircraft" bits-n-pieces. Used the same source to build my braided teflon AN brake hoses that go from the firewall to the caliper. I've also used Summit, Jegs, and Speedway inventory.

Having an Experimental Airworthiness Certificate gives us the freedom to use common sense in choosing components for our aircraft.
 
Last edited:
Missing?

"What are you missing"? Well, nothing NOW. You just broke the code.

As a racer for 15 years, I was familiar with Summit, Pegasus, and others. Believe me, racers are just as concerned with the quality of their components as are aviators.

Jim
RV4 N444JT (For sale)
RV8 N37PK
 
I've used some of these fittings. Be careful using them on fuel suction lines. If you measure the hose fitting ID, I found them to be smaller than the aircraft parts. I've had some issues with my AFP fuel injection. When I changed them all out, it improved. It's not the whole problem, but it helped. The non aircraft AN adapter components have nuts with pins to retain them. They will leak if you pressure test them? Just my experience. Bob
 
I used summit for all of my rubber and teflon hoses and fittings as I have done on several high performance automotive engines. Aeroquip is a high-end brand with good quality (also sold as the higher price leader in automotive HP market). However, brands like Russell and others from Summit are just fine. I used summit brand fittings for many of my AN fittings as well as a few others that were on sale. These fittings are proven in 1,000 of high performance engines that typically have harsher environments than any Lycoming. An aviation hose is a hose used on an airplane, that's all. No special magic requiring "aviation grade" or should I say "Aviation pricing."

One unique requirement that we have that is not found in the racing world is 100LL. An article in the RVator talked about aeroquip rubber hoses breaking down prematurely due to either the lead or a unique additive in 100LL. Aeroquip reformulated the rubber and issued a notice. Half of my lines are teflon (no concerns here) and the others are Summit brand rubber. I don't trust this to last more than a few years in the fuel circuit and will replace it then (likely will replace it with teflon). Fittings are re-usable and it only takes a few minutes to build a hose once you've done it a couple of times.

I have limited experiential data on Summit hoses. However, over the last 10 years, I have seen significant diffences in US produced, quality rubber and "cheap" from China. Certainly not all house brands or even inexpensive rubber, but I have learned to steer clear of much of it. On the other hand, SUmmit has sold so much of this stuff that I can't imagine it is low end. I have experience no noticeable break down on the three hot rods that I have built using it.

Larry
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Robertc said:
I've used some of these fittings. Be careful using them on fuel suction lines. If you measure the hose fitting ID, I found them to be smaller than the aircraft parts. I've had some issues with my AFP fuel injection. When I changed them all out, it improved. It's not the whole problem, but it helped. The non aircraft AN adapter components have nuts with pins to retain them. They will leak if you pressure test them? Just my experience. Bob
Click to expand...

I have had a different experience. I have 70 hours on my O-320. Summit fittings for most oil and fuel lines. I have not noticed a single drip yet. I can't see how the retainer pin used on these fittings could cause a leak. It is nowhere near the seating area. It is just a different method of retaining the nut on the fitting when not assembled.

Larry
 
I bought summit fittings for my O320 oil system. The straight fittings were fine but the 90 deg npt fittings would only go about one turn into the accessory case. It really doesn't need to be much out of tolerance for a taper fitting to not fit.

I know lots of guys use the summit stuff. Their fittings are mfg'd in China. If the spruce ones are US made then the price difference is understandable, but if they are also made in china then it is a huge ripoff.
 
Summit

I buy lots of stuff from Summit and the best thing is FREE shipping on orders over $100.
Bob
 
I made my hoses from Summit Teflon hose and end fittings. They are 15 years old and are holding up well. When I made them, I tested them to several times their normal operating pressure and experienced no problems.
 
I'm not advocating alternative sources one way or another. Do what you are comfortable with. However, we had a Rocket crash here where the fitting from the oil cooler to the engine were from the auto parts world. The fitting to the cooler broke, the engine dumped all the oil overboard, and the engine seized. Just saying.
 
I am fortnunate to have a local location for a small chain named Calliflower. They specialize in hydraulic hoses and fittings for industrial applications which use 37.5deg fittings. The shop is like a candy store of Parker hoses and fittings. They have an industrial crimping machine and can do line testing. All for a fraction of any aviation or racing shop sells this stuff for. The fitting might not be the prettiest, they are basic AN looking fittings, but the products are all high quality. This chain is local in the MD,VA, PA & GA markets but I'm sure there are shops like this around the country.
 
Just be well informed, and careful.

The only product to stay away from is fuel hose. The high velocities we have will create static charge in the fuel and can pinhole the walls. Fuel can easily generate 30,000 volts in 4 inches of length at our velocity in a 3/8" ID. It is a fact. If there is conductive hose available, then OK, but good luck with finding documentation.

Oil velocities are not high enough to be an issue. Vans sells many parts way less expensive than ACS. Shipping is reasonable too.

edit:Fuel hose comparison may be a good article for Kit Planes!
 
We're careful about the fittings we sell for fuel systems and buy only Earls and Aeroquip brands, both made in the USA to my knowledge. While the lure of the cheap Chinese stuff is strong price-wise, there is a definite quality of materials difference used in some cases as I've destruct tested them.

I also feel strongly to buy from North American sources whenever possible to support jobs and industry in my own back yard where I sell to rather than exporting any more jobs/ industry outside where the competition is heavily subsidized. Support your friends is my motto here.

Might cost a bit more but the piece of mind on both fronts is worth it IMO.

Now if both Summit and ACS sell the same US made fittings and hose and Summit is cheaper, then ACS might have to move their price point downwards to get my business back. I buy from both places and get good service.

Be aware that some cheaper hose brands do not have conductive inner lining materials which can cause static induced failures when carrying certain fluids like gasoline. The "real" brands have this covered.
 
Gents, you can't depend on any source to do your quality control.

A particular hose or fitting from Summit may be excellent, while another very similar product may be junk. The auto sources are full of cheap knock-offs and "budget line" parts. A blanket claim that "Racing hardware from XYZ is just as good" is an invitation for trouble.

And it's not just Summit, or Jegs, or the Earl's brand, or the Parker line....it's ANY source. Heck, not very many years ago, Aircraft Spruce got caught selling non-AN fittings as "AN".

Fact is, they're big outfits, and somewhere in purchasing there's a kid with three months of experience, or a supervisor who believed the new hardware salesman with the lower price. You get the idea. Bad stuff can get in the door, and all too often it goes out the door to us.

So, please, don't make blanket assumptions. Inspect every part as it comes out of every box...surface finish, thread fit, material, markings, whatever. And do your homework. Advertising copy is not a technical reference.
 
And don't forget to check with Tom at TSFlightLines for a comparison. He is a sponsor here and and building an RV-7.

Cheap plug for a friend! :D
 
(NOTE: this post is NOT intended as a selling ad for our products or products that we or our partners may endorse. Its intended to help builders understand some differences in 'similar' products. Tom)


Differences. Several. When you buy Aeroquip 701 from ACS, you are getting a Mil-Spec, Aerospace Certified hose, that can be use on experimentals, AND certified aircraft that it is approved for. Other manufacturers, Earl's, Russell, Summit, Jegs, etc have a look a like 701 hose, that is NOT Mil-Spec approved for use on any 'Certified' aircraft. They generally also have a disclaimer about using their hose on any aircraft ---period. Hose end fittings are higher in cost, due to materials, machining, AND inspections they must undergo to be accepted as Aerospace hose ends.

Second difference in the '701' hose is the liner. Automotive hose may look the same, but the liners may have some differences in materials, so they may not necessarily meet the same criteria as aviation hose. Their may be some differences in the stainless braid also.

AN fittings are in the same situation. IF the fitting has 'AN' stamped on it, then it is a true AN quality fitting, meeting the same specs as aviation fittings. Earl's fittings, for example are aviation spec fittings. Others, that are not stamped, may look correct, but may not be made from the proper materials, or have the proper thread machining of true aviation fittings.

Teflon hose is a slightly different situation. All conductive teflon liners must meet the same specifications for static conductivity, whether its industrial, or aviation. The non-conductive (white) lined teflon should not be used in aircraft where higher velocity fluid flows could generate static electricity. (Remember the old 'soaker garden hoses we had as kids? Not a good deal.) There are some minor differences, but generally quality industrial conductive teflon is a very acceptable hose for experimental aircraft use.

Being in Experimental Aviation, we are in a gray area here. My suggestion is to check the manufacturer of the hose and see what their specs are. Yes, builders have used 'other' hose products for years with no issues. In the end, its up the the builder to make that determination. If you are assembling your own hoses, and alot of you do, make sure the type of hose will meet the criteria for the intended use. (Clear nylon hose for oil coolers is NOT correct. Dont laugh---I saw a plane being plumbed with this. Didnt last long.) I would find a way to pressure test them before installation. Just because the hose end fits tight on the hose doesnt mean it will pass a pressure test.
Tom
 
DanH said:
Gents, you can't depend on any source to do your quality control.

A particular hose or fitting from Summit may be excellent, while another very similar product may be junk. The auto sources are full of cheap knock-offs and "budget line" parts. A blanket claim that "Racing hardware from XYZ is just as good" is an invitation for trouble.

And it's not just Summit, or Jegs, or the Earl's brand, or the Parker line....it's ANY source. Heck, not very many years ago, Aircraft Spruce got caught selling non-AN fittings as "AN".

Fact is, they're big outfits, and somewhere in purchasing there's a kid with three months of experience, or a supervisor who believed the new hardware salesman with the lower price. You get the idea. Bad stuff can get in the door, and all too often it goes out the door to us.

So, please, don't make blanket assumptions. Inspect every part as it comes out of every box...surface finish, thread fit, material, markings, whatever. And do your homework. Advertising copy is not a technical reference.
Click to expand...

Good advice but you can't do metallurgical tests on each fitting going into your plane or even assume that all the fittings you just bought are from the same manufacturing lot.

Also, don't assume that AN stamping always means true AN specs/quality if the fitting came from outside known sources. Brand X foreign manufacturers have been known to stamp anything including OEM marks/brand names/ PNs on parts to get counterfeit products to the market. They don't care about anything but selling product.
 
Last edited:
Also, don't assume that AN stamping always means true AN specs/quality if the fitting came from outside known sources. Brand X foreign manufacturers have been known to stamp anything including OEM marks/brand names/ PNs on parts to get counterfeit products to the market. They don't care about anything but selling product.
__________________
Thats true Russ--
But knowing the manufacturer certainly helps.
Tom
 
A very interesting discussion. I may consider building new hoses with higher quality components to increase safety. Russ, have you found the Earl's fittings to be of good quality in your testing? Are there alternatives to the Aeroquip 701 or is that the "go to" hose for our application?

Larry
 
I did an annual on a 78 hawk XP, everything bueno so I signed it off. It was late in the season so the owner decided to cover it up and tie it down for the winter at my FBO (full tanks). Springtime rolled around and when he came to get it the tanks were dry, no fuel evidence on the asphalt. Big hubbub because everyone assumed the gas had been stolen...until I filled it up. The stainless hose to the spider just poured fuel out through the braid. Original "lifetime" hose with cessna tag. During inspection there was zero evidence of leakage. I always figured the minus 30 temps on the ramp must have been the last straw.
 
As another data point... there are several race supply places around us. The shop that makes some of our products makes fittings for a couple of them. They specifically ask for the parts to be cheaper and the quality to be inferior 'because these guys wreck the car on the weekend and replace the fittings anyway'. I know that the bulkhead fittings that are made here are not out of the right aluminum, or even of consistent dimensions to pass any kind of QC in the aviation world.

I agree that some are likely exactly the same, some are comparable, but some are certainly not.
 
As a former (35+ yrs) car owner/engine builder on the tough north east dirt modified circuit, I can tell you Sumit , Russell, others supplying hoses , fittings, etc. withstand more abuse than any aircraft...REMEMBER MOST faa requirements and rules date back to the 20s-30s....I have many friends who wish they could put a Dynon or similar panel in their 40+- year old certified airframe like we can use in our experimentals...Tom
 
I get my hoses from Tom because I trust what Im getting and I can't afford a failure of this item. I cant make them like him, I cant test them like him, I cant understand the nuances like him, and I cant know all that he knows to make it right like him. As I get older, my risk threshold lowers on critical items like this.
 
lr172 said:
A very interesting discussion. I may consider building new hoses with higher quality components to increase safety. Russ, have you found the Earl's fittings to be of good quality in your testing? Are there alternatives to the Aeroquip 701 or is that the "go to" hose for our application?

Larry
Click to expand...

Yes, the Earls fittings are the real deal in my limited vice testing. As someone else mentioned, we also see some brand X stuff with thicker walls (smaller ID) to make up for inferior material or heat treatment.

Earls originally came from the aviation world and has a rep for top quality stuff. Never had a failure of their fittings. They were acquired by the Holley group a few years back. I don't know if that changed anything about sourcing. Before, all of their stuff was made by them in the US. Aeroquip also states all their product is US made. These companies have been around decades, with reputations built on top quality products. They have not to my knowledge, offered any "offshore" el cheapo grade fittings to stem the tide from other manufacturers. They make good stuff from what I've seen and ask a commensurate price for it.

I just wouldn't try to save $300 on my airplane here by buying brand X.

Not all brand X stuff is bad but how do you know without testing? Saves some time to just to buy real stuff IMO from a trusted source. All the Earls hose has conductive inner liners to my knowledge if recommended for fuel.
 
lr172 said:
A very interesting discussion. I may consider building new hoses with higher quality components to increase safety. Russ, have you found the Earl's fittings to be of good quality in your testing? Are there alternatives to the Aeroquip 701 or is that the "go to" hose for our application?

Larry
Click to expand...

I had failures in 2 hoses made from Earls parts and used for fuel (only 6PSI). A real fire hazard.

That said, I can't attest to whether or not the failure was caused by parts or the assembly of the parts by the original builder.

I replaced with Aeroquip 666 lines which came pressure tested, like Tom sells.
 
RVDan said:
I had failures in 2 hoses made from Earls parts and used for fuel (only 6PSI). A real fire hazard.

That said, I can't attest to whether or not the failure was caused by parts or the assembly of the parts by the original builder.

I replaced with Aeroquip 666 lines which came pressure tested, like Tom sells.
Click to expand...

2 Earls medium pressure hose assemblies failing at 6 psi 99.9% must have been assembled incorrectly. Pressure tested is the best way to go by far no matter where the parts came from.
 
JEGS AN

fittings looked good and will probably be fine. The items I received were made in China. No markings on the fittings. Finish on the exterior was a little rough, but the sealing surfaces were well machined.

I will use them. I will also watch them closely during installation.
 
extending this old thread

I have the same questions as the OP. Doing research on just the Eaton/Aeroquip brands for the aero vs racing world. The application is attachment of an accumulator to the oil system. No continuous flow. -8 size. Also no pressure attachment of -10 from the Raven tank to the sump.

So the aero offerings are AE701 hose and 816 fittings, stainless outer braid and reusable fittings. For the racing side is the "AQP" offering from aeroquip. The hose is a stainless outer braid and reusable AQP fittings.

References - Aero products, Racing Products

Hoses - Both hoses have the same temperature range. The AE701 is 1250 psi max working pressure (-8) and the AQP racing is 1000psi. Burst pressures not listed for AQP hose. I assume the fittings do as well, although no documentation is available and Aeroquip won't discuss with a non affiliated individual. The inner and outer dimensions are NOT the same. NOT. NOT.

Fittings - the fittings look the same but since the hose dimensions are not, interchangeability is not considered. I have to believe that the fittings are matched to the hose and operating pressures. Different is different thus the 2X price premium for the 816 fittings.

BTW - there is an article in the latest Kitplanes by Ironflight. He talks about ACP fittings. I can find no reference to this name at all. Did I miss finding something?

I will be sourcing my parts locally through Hoerr Racing (HRP) as I can talk to them about their sources by dropping in. Great guys too!.

The finished hose assemblies will be pressure tested to 300 psi (as I don't have Geordi glasses), and the -10 will be thermocoupled as there is no flow there, and it runs close to the exhaust pipes enroute to the Raven separator. The exhaust will have radiation shields, but still.

I am going to save the money, but will report later if something is sour.

Thanks for a good thread.
 
Last edited:
If you measure the x-section diameter you will find the AQP is smaller than AE701 by about 15% of the x-section area. This may or may not be an issue for you. Bob
 
.... Quality and manufacturing issues aside, as that can vary widely from one chinaman to another. I think it is extremely important to for us to keep in mind the wonderful resource at our disposal with ACS. Allowing them to make a decent profit on the millions of dollars in products they stock for our convenience is A-OK with me. I look at it this way, yes I can shop around and save a few bucks on some easier to obtain, common items. The problem with this is simple and the end result is a certainty. They can't stay in business just selling us the weird or impossible to find elsewhere items, and we shouldn't expect them to. I would hope we never see ACS, forced to go the way of the local hardware store or many other businesses. Cheep, big corporate distributors will kill them if we don't support them. I can pretty much guarantee there will never be another "Aircraft Spruce"! Next time you find and buy some oddball thing that saves your day from ACS, think about how nice it is having them and their catalog/bible at your disposal! Thanks, Allan...:D
 
PerfTech said:
.... Quality and manufacturing issues aside, as that can vary widely from one chinaman to another. I think it is extremely important to for us to keep in mind the wonderful resource at our disposal with ACS. Allowing them to make a decent profit on the millions of dollars in products they stock for our convenience is A-OK with me. I look at it this way, yes I can shop around and save a few bucks on some easier to obtain, common items. The problem with this is simple and the end result is a certainty. They can't stay in business just selling us the weird or impossible to find elsewhere items, and we shouldn't expect them to. I would hope we never see ACS, forced to go the way of the local hardware store or many other businesses. Cheep, big corporate distributors will kill them if we don't support them. I can pretty much guarantee there will never be another "Aircraft Spruce"! Next time you find and buy some oddball thing that saves your day from ACS, think about how nice it is having them and their catalog/bible at your disposal! Thanks, Allan...:D
Click to expand...

Agree generally but ACS was selling some cheap Chinese fittings a few years back and that didn't turn out so well. I don't think they are now though, quickly learning that lesson.
 
Fittings Summit racing vs ACS

EARLES SUPPLY were manufacturing AN fittings in the United States before the Chinese market ever came into being. Their products are in the same price range as Summit racing they are handled by Jeg's supply they are built in the United States and are very good quality they might even manufacture for Summit Racing I don't know about that . Parts built to Army Navy specifications establishes the quality. I have use them personally both automotive and Aircraft applications for 30+ years. Just sayin'.
 
Robertc said:
If you measure the x-section diameter you will find the AQP is smaller than AE701 by about 15% of the x-section area. This may or may not be an issue for you. Bob
Click to expand...

Yes, Bob, good point, the specs do show the AQP -8 ID is a tad smaller, but the accumulator will not discharge its volume at the same rate as the oil flow in the primary circuit. It will augment the loss of flow (via pressure) to the bearings. Ron Schreck said he got ~7 seconds, so that indicates (to me) the flow drops, but does not disappear.

PerfTech said:
.... Quality and manufacturing issues aside, as that can vary widely from one chinaman to another. I think it is extremely important to for us to keep in mind the wonderful resource at our disposal with ACS. Allowing them to make a decent profit on the millions of dollars in products they stock for our convenience is A-OK with me. I look at it this way, yes I can shop around and save a few bucks on some easier to obtain, common items. The problem with this is simple and the end result is a certainty. They can't stay in business just selling us the weird or impossible to find elsewhere items, and we shouldn't expect them to. I would hope we never see ACS, forced to go the way of the local hardware store or many other businesses. Cheep, big corporate distributors will kill them if we don't support them. I can pretty much guarantee there will never be another "Aircraft Spruce"! Next time you find and buy some oddball thing that saves your day from ACS, think about how nice it is having them and their catalog/bible at your disposal! Thanks, Allan...:D
Click to expand...

Own stock? What does ACS have to do with this comparison? Do you source all your hoses and fittings for your shop full of race cars from ACS? Do I need 1250 psi rather than 1000 psi for a 300 PSI application? All the aeroquip parts are USA made (Earls & Russells, too like Ross said) . What exactly is your point?
 
Last edited:
As I said earlier in the thread, Earls, Russell and Aeroquip (Parker) still make their AN fittings in the US to my knowledge. The source should not matter IF they are genuine. Watch out for counterfeit ones though...
 
I used summit fittings and hose in my build and when I put in the FI this spring I chose to upgrade to Earls fittings, on Ross' recommendation, for the peace of mind. I also upgraded to Aeroquip hose.

When I pulled all of the old hose (rubber core), I was surprised how stiff the Summit hose had become in 6 months / 100 hours of use. While I think the fittings are probably good enough (I use them in my hot rods), I was not impressed with the rubber quality on the hose.

Larry
 
I often can get "new surplus" aviation fitting from some of the on line suppliers, B&B is one. Usually half the price of ACS. Not the price of Summit but a lot cheaper and Aircraft quality. I do not buy anything that has shelf life such as hoses, seals or rubber but metal fitting and hardware I do not have a problem with.
 
Fittings only

I use a local hose shop for most all my fittings. Mainly for the convenience.

I have my hoses made at either Varga Aviation (close by) or Precision Hose Technology. These are brown fire sleeved type. I know many make their own hoses and have had success, however I don't recommend it. When you add it all up, not factoring the time, the savings is just not worth the risk.
 
Own stock? What does ACS have to do with this comparison? Do you source all your hoses and fittings for [I said:
your [/I]shop full of race cars from ACS? Do I need 1250 psi rather than 1000 psi for a 300 PSI application? All the aeroquip parts are USA made (Earls & Russells, too like Ross said) . What exactly is your point?
Click to expand...

....We actually make our own hoses and many of our fittings as well. I wasn't trying to compare quality, but rather make a statement supporting ACS. What I was going for here, was their right to a fair profit as that is what keeps them in business. You can shop around and beat most anybody's prices on anything. I like the convenience of having ACS just one phone call away. Thanks, Allan:D
 
lr172 said:
I used summit fittings and hose in my build and when I put in the FI this spring I chose to upgrade to Earls fittings, on Ross' recommendation, for the peace of mind. I also upgraded to Aeroquip hose.

When I pulled all of the old hose (rubber core), I was surprised how stiff the Summit hose had become in 6 months / 100 hours of use. While I think the fittings are probably good enough (I use them in my hot rods), I was not impressed with the rubber quality on the hose.

Larry
Click to expand...

Same fittings, Larry? Aeroquip makes a hundred different hoses, did you mean the AQP hose for racing? - see my link above for their catalog. Did you pressure test your Summit brand hoses or just replace? If time/temperature was the cause, one might expect the oil supply hose to the cooler would be worse (stiffer) than the hose from the cooler.

BTW: I looked up MIL-H-83797 Rev. A ( on EverySpec) for the AE701 (aeroquip/eaton) hose. It states a test at 250F filled with oil for 168 hours then pressure tested. I can not find any mention that AQP meets a test like this. I wonder if testing each year (or 100 hrs) at 3X oil pressures would be prudent. Would it just cause an unseen failure and be worse than doing nothing?

PerfTech said:
....We actually make our own hoses and many of our fittings as well. I wasn't trying to compare quality, but rather make a statement supporting ACS. What I was going for here, was their right to a fair profit as that is what keeps them in business. You can shop around and beat most anybody's prices on anything. I like the convenience of having ACS just one phone call away. Thanks, Allan:D
Click to expand...
Alan, ACS does not sell the AQP product line, so the OP title is more about product lines than sources (as DanH has mentioned before). To me, ACS advantage has a broad product offering to concentrate the shipping costs, at least as an active builder with multiple projects.
 
Last edited:
Jim Irwin Email

I'm posting this because I'm incredibly impressed by the outreach efforts of Aircraft Spruce President, Jim Irwin. Jim saw this discussion on VAF and took the time to email me directly. We exchange a couple of emails and had a productive discussion about this topic.

I strongly believe that ACS provides the aviation market with high quality products. I am a BIG fan. My argument to Jim was that they might want to consider offering some products more tailored to the experimental market, especially hoses and fittings, that would still meet their high quality standards but might not have the same level of oversight, inspection, etc. that is necessary to get them into the certified market. Jim was receptive and said that ACS will look into this issue.

I hope Jim won't mind me posting this. I'm really just trying to say how amazed I am that a President of ANY company, would be so in tune to his marketplace that he would contact a lowly whiner like me on such a minor issue. While I may shop elsewhere for some of my supplies, I would much rather buy EVERYTHING from ACS. Jim seems to have heard that argument. Thanks Jim!

To close, I hope everybody knows that I'm a big, and now a bigger, ACS fan!
Best regard,
Randy
 
f14av8r said:
I'm posting this because I'm incredibly impressed by the outreach efforts of Aircraft Spruce President, Jim Irwin. Jim saw this discussion on VAF and took the time to email me directly. We exchange a couple of emails and had a productive discussion about this topic.

I strongly believe that ACS provides the aviation market with high quality products. I am a BIG fan. My argument to Jim was that they might want to consider offering some products more tailored to the experimental market, especially hoses and fittings, that would still meet their high quality standards but might not have the same level of oversight, inspection, etc. that is necessary to get them into the certified market. Jim was receptive and said that ACS will look into this issue.

I hope Jim won't mind me posting this. I'm really just trying to say how amazed I am that a President of ANY company, would be so in tune to his marketplace that he would contact a lowly whiner like me on such a minor issue. While I may shop elsewhere for some of my supplies, I would much rather buy EVERYTHING from ACS. Jim seems to have heard that argument. Thanks Jim!

To close, I hope everybody knows that I'm a big, and now a bigger, ACS fan!
Best regard,
Randy
Click to expand...

Jim Irwin always steps up and takes care of things in my experience. That's a real rarity today and one of the reasons ACS continues to do so well. Customer service is #1 if you want to be around in any business for more than a few years.
 
Randy---I just wanted to second that email that you received from Jim. As a hose assembly supplier to ACS, Jim and I have had the conversation about using 'reusables', or 'field installed' fittings as some call them.
Properly assembled, they are perfectly satisfactory for our experimental uses. Summit represents several hose and fitting vendors, and does have a variety of components to meet most every need. However, they are in a gray area where guys are making hoses for aircraft, much less experimentals. MOST hose and fitting manufacturers have expressed disclaimers against using their products in aircraft use. Use at your own risk, and dont tell anyone, and life is good. Have a catastrophic failure with injury, or worse, and all **** brakes loose.
ACS is an Aeroquip distributor, although on the aerospace side. ACS may be able to acquire non-certified components, like those of a Summit, Jegs, etc, and supply them to those of you that want to go that route. I dont know what that plan is.
But----I can tell you, and I'm sure Jim wont mind, he is very pro-active on this, and asked several questions on this subject. Jim is a businessman, but is also looking out for the well being of us AND his company. We are all looking to get the best product at the lowest cost. Some of those things are 'governed" by certain regulations, and some are not. I'm sure that Jim is addressing this and will make the best decision for all of us.
Tom
 
BillL said:
Same fittings, Larry? Aeroquip makes a hundred different hoses, did you mean the AQP hose for racing? - see my link above for their catalog. Did you pressure test your Summit brand hoses or just replace? If time/temperature was the cause, one might expect the oil supply hose to the cooler would be worse (stiffer) than the hose from the cooler.

BTW: I looked up MIL-H-83797 Rev. A ( on EverySpec) for the AE701 (aeroquip/eaton) hose. It states a test at 250F filled with oil for 168 hours then pressure tested. I can not find any mention that AQP meets a test like this. I wonder if testing each year (or 100 hrs) at 3X oil pressures would be prudent. Would it just cause an unseen failure and be worse than doing nothing?
Click to expand...

I replaced all of my hoses and fittings (oil and fuel). I used the Aeroquip AQP racing hose and all Earl's fittings. If I recall correctly, the oil lines did seem a bit less flexible than the fuel hose. It was not hard and brittle, but noticeably stiffer than the new AQP hose. It's possible they were just stiffer hose from the get go, but I have seen cheap rubber compounds go bad quickly and I was not impressed.

Larry
 
We use Parker hose at work (Washington State Ferries) on the diesel engines.
Lube oil hoses experience higher temps than the coolant hoses and fuel hoses, over 200 degrees in some cases. They do get stiff, even creak when you un-bend them. We have been upgrading to teflon lined hose in these cases.
Some stiffening of hot oil hose is to be expected, the question is 'how much?'
Also, I don't recall a stiffened Parker hose having ever failed in lube oil service, I just changed them because they were so stiff.
Not a very satisfactory answer?
Hoses have a limited service life. Changing them every 5 years is advisable, but who does that?
You should at least inspect them for external damage, leaks and check for flexibility. And snug up on the fittings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top