[CATPart]

I am very interested in an RV4 that has this old engine. I called lycoming and the serial number is from a 1965 IO-320-B1A.

The logs start in 1996 at the SMOH time of zero. Then there is a 3 year gap (correction..7 year gap). Then it was run for 240 hrs in an RV6 when it was transplanted into an RV4 in 2010. At that time the fuel injection was removed and the sump changed. The latest owner added a pair of Pmags and has flown about 80 hours.

I am telling myself I should probably avoid this one, but I am not experienced enough to know if I am being silly. I don't know the story of the first 30 years of this engine's life. Still, it seems to have been thoroughly inspected and rebuilt to lycoming tolerances in 1996, so it should be good right?

I attached the log below. The images are in page order. The first 2 images are the top and then bottom half of page 1. On the second to last page I covered the N numbers of the aircraft. Neither have been in a reported incident (no noseover / no prop strike).

I figured this is the best place I can get some tallented opinions to help me decide.

Thanks! This should be fun!

 

[rwtalbot]

Bulk Strip

Ok, I'll bite. No one can tell you what to do here. Someone who flies over flat farmland, may not care if the engine quits. Someone who flies over trees or at night may have a totally different attitude. You?re obviously concerned enough to post the logs here for opinions so I will assume you are somewhat conservative.

The general problem with any second hand engine is you cannot know how it has been treated. That said engines can be inspected by people who know what they are doing and some of the unknown can be taken out of the equation. Even so the only real way to be 100% sure what you have is to tear it down and inspect it.

If it were me I would consider something built in 1996 to be ready for a bulk strip. 300 hours usage is really is not a lot over 16 years and I would consider that problems with corrosion / camshaft down the road were a distinct possibility. I would definitely prefer an engine with a lot more hours on it, running 100+ hours per year to something like this if I intended to keep on flying it as is.

According to the logs a considerable number of parts were replaced with new at overhaul including cylinders so that would be in its favour. The next question is what do you think of the shop that did the work? An overhaul by a reputable shop would be one thing. An A&P you didn't know, working in his garage after hours may well be another. Who?s been doing the maintenance on it?

Do you know why it was put on another aircraft? Engines don't get removed from aircraft for no reason. Don't just assume the reason given is the truth.
Ultimately these things are a judgement call. Does the owner take care of the plane? Do you feel comfortable? Does your A&P (doing the pre-buy) feel good about it after a reasonable inspection? The owner may have oil analysis logs on file. This might go some way to making you more comfortable.

Personally, I feel that an aircraft like this could still be a good opportunity. If you want a newly overhauled/bulk stripped engine and the condition of the engine is factored into the price - why wouldn't you buy it? You may get it apart and back together for $4-6k and know exactly what you have.

If you are looking at it because you can't afford anything else and you really need the engine to last the rest of the 1,700 hours left on it, you are probably looking at an expensive overhaul sometime in your future.

Depending upon the owner?s view of the world they might not be too keen to accept this sort of argument. It may well be that someone else is not nearly so concerned and prepared to pay more and they will sell it. For me though it?s a bulk strip.

Richard - RV-7A Flying

 

[jrs14855]

engine

If the engine has been around the coast since 96 there should be rust considerations. This is a wide deck engine, probably Twin Commanche. It appears the case was converted to standard dynafocal. The cylinders are almost certainly nitride, which is another rust consideration. If most of the time since 96 has been in a dry climate I would be ok with it if compressions check ok.

 

[Gerald Loyd]

Old Twin Comanche engine

I assume the engine was originally on a Twin Comanche. I have had one on my RV-4 for 21 years. It may be the only engine made for a type II dynofocal mount. The original sump & assessory housing won't work with Van's engine mount. That's why they are usually converted to a carburated engine when used on an RV. If it passes inspection, I would buy it. Mine was removed from a Twin Comanche by a salvage yard in 1981 after 5 years of flying less than 10 hrs per year. They sold it to a guy in Dallas that was building an RV, but he never finished the project. When I bought it in 1989 it had 1550 hours SMOH and had been sitting on a hangar floor for 8 years. I planned to overhaul it, but as the project moved along I started wondering if the engine would run, so I checked the compression & oil screen. It had good compression so I painted it and hung it on the plane. I put another 600 hours on it before overhauling it because the oil pump went bad. Be sure the oil pump ad was complied with. I flew it for 25 miles to the nearest airport at 1,500 RPM without oil pressure. Even then the crank and cam shafts were still good. I overhauled it in 2003 and it has 650 more hours on it now. I got lucky with my used engine. If I were you I would buy it cheap so you can't get hurt too bad & hope for a good out come.

Gerald

 

[659JR]

engine

According to the part numbers on the overhaul entry it has the newest style oil pump housing and gears. It looks like he replaced everything that Lycoming says.

Jesse

 

[mickdi68]

I'm a lame and have purchased a used Rv-4 which is in need of a bit of TLC it only has 240 hrs on engine (factory new) and airframe . It had a good maintenance history so I felt confident the engine would be ok. However after pulling no. 2 cylinder found corrosion on camshaft and followers as well as surface corrosion on the rod ends . Not so cheap now . Went against my own advice I give to others . Just be careful what you buy there is bargains to be had but buyer beware .

 

[MOJO]

This is a sport, yes? You have complete control of this situation. The market
just sucks as far as airplanes is concerned. Drive a stake in the ground and
determine just how much risk you want to take. It is not the money it is your
life and perhaps the life of one of your kids/grandkids or the poor hapless folks
on the ground.

I sold one of my trucks so Lycon could build us a KNOWN quantity motor. My
wife fly's our airplane, I will not hazard the love of my life.

I think RV-4 is the right airframe and when we complete ours if a fresh O/H
engine is out of reach then I will snatch this little ported 0-320 off the
Yankee and hang it.

Reading this message it looks a little strong. Probably because I just got
done with the FAA over a pilot error fuel starvation landing on the dirt road
next to the Tucson Gun Club. It is easy enough to goof up without help
from bad/unknown equipment. Im my case nobody got hurt (Praise God)
including the aircraft.

Tailwinds to ya.

Dave

 

[MOJO]

Not me.

This is a sport, yes? You have complete control of this situation. The market
just sucks as far as airplanes is concerned. Drive a stake in the ground and
determine just how much risk you want to take. It is not the money it is your
life and perhaps the life of one of your kids/grandkids or the poor hapless folks
on the ground.

Perhaps the seller would agree to have a coupla cylinders pulled for a closer
inspection as part of the sales contract. If all is well, every body happy.

I sold one of my trucks so Lycon could build us a KNOWN quantity motor. My
wife fly's our airplane, I will not hazard the love of my life.

I think RV-4 is the right airframe and when we complete ours, if a fresh O/H
engine is out of reach then I will snatch this little ported 0-320 off the
Yankee and hang it. Known quantity.

Reading this message it looks a little strong. Probably because I just got
done with the FAA over a pilot error fuel starvation landing on the dirt road
next to the Tucson Gun Club. It is easy enough to goof up without help
from bad/unknown equipment. In my case nobody got hurt (Praise God)
including the aircraft.

Tailwinds to ya.

Dave

 

[rrnixonjr]

Corrosion issues with O-320

I have an RV-4 with a wide deck 0-320 vintage 1960's which I believe was rebuilt when the plane was finished around 1995. I haven't looked at the engine logbooks in years as my brother currently has the plane and looks after it.

Eight years ago I was flying it low level down the Outer Banks. I popped up and the engine started running very rough and shuddering. I was at 1500 but I reduced the throttle setting to where the engine ran a bit smoother and eased up to 4000 feet. There were plenty of open fields around and a Navy field (Fentriss) to my right as I crossed my fingers and went back to Chesapeake airport.

My A&P inspected the engine and found 3 holes in the case. One of the lifters had disinegrated, hit the camshaft lobe which made the holes in the case and pieces dropped down and broke off part of one of the piston skirts, I can't remember which one now.

The point is, rather long-winded, corrosion in the camshaft and lifters can cause some serious issues and they are not always readily evident. Be careful out there.