[LettersFromFlyoverCountry]

My engine uses so little oil that I'm not sure it's NOT broken in already given it's relatively short flight time (about 10 hours).

But, anyway, I'm not finding information regarding when the first oil change should be made. The Op manual only says change oil every 25 hours, which seems like a long time to wait on an initial oil change.

Also, how long should mineral oil be used before switching to an oil with additives?

 

[Buggsy2]

Where did you get your engine? They should have provided breakin instructions.

Anyway this PDF from ECI might help. The table on p. 13 suggest first oil and filter change at 10 hours.

 

[pauldan181]

Bob
I did my first oil change at about 5 hours mostly to check the filter and finger screen for any metal. My engine builder (Bart at Aerosport) said a small amount of metal is normal for a new engine and that's what I saw and none since. This is also a good time to really check everything under the cowl.

The second oil change was at 25 hours when I switched from type M oil to the Phillips AD blue bottle.

Paul Danclovic
Jamestown NC
RV-8A N181SB

 

[LettersFromFlyoverCountry]

Engine is from Mattituck. They provide instructions -- which, oddly enough, I've actually read several times.

 

[Ironflight]

I like to do a change at 10 hours to check for metal, then go to 50 and (if broken in) check for metal again and go with regular oil. Why? Old Wives Tales..... but doesn't seem to do any harm.

 

[GLPalinkas]

Ditto

I like to do a change at 10 hours to check for metal, then go to 50 and (if broken in) check for metal again and go with regular oil. Why? Old Wives Tales..... but doesn't seem to do any harm.

What Paul says..... I did the exact same thing.

 

[cubdriver]

Oil Change

My Lycoming instructions say change the oil at 5 hours for the first oil change.

 

[AltonD]

My first oil change was @ 5 hours. after that, I target 50 hours. However, If the cowl comes off between 35 and 50 hours, the oil is getting change. It is just easier that way. If you are doing metal check kits, don't even bother with the first oil change.

 

[RV10inOz]

PD

To be frank about it, if there is a problem in 5 or 10 hours, not only will you be surprised, and damned unlucky, you would see an oil temp or some other warning sign.

Checking for debris is a good thing, but if you do one at 5-10 hours and one at 25-50 who cares. Despite what manuals and OWT's exist.

Most break in happens in the first hour and certainly by 5.

The trick to breakin in do not idle much, do not ground run much if you can avoid it, GO FLY and fly it like you stole it. Just keep the IAS up for maximum airflow.

Best way is 1500-2000' WOT 2500 RPM and leaned to about 60-70 LOP.
Second best way, maybe a bit higher but where you get say 29-27" and 2500 and full rich.

The RPM values are not hard values at all, anywhere that is smooth.

Keep the power above 75% is the key. And doing a few circuits won't hurt either, High power followed by a cooling and back into it again.

Good for the engine and your skills.

 

[Walt]

I'd do the first oil/filter between 5 and 10hrs.
I would switch to additive oil at about 40-50hrs.
I do reg oil changes at 25, then oil and filter at 50hrs.

 

[AlexPeterson]

PD

To be frank about it, if there is a problem in 5 or 10 hours, not only will you be surprised, and damned unlucky, you would see an oil temp or some other warning sign.

Checking for debris is a good thing, but if you do one at 5-10 hours and one at 25-50 who cares. Despite what manuals and OWT's exist.

Most break in happens in the first hour and certainly by 5.

The trick to breakin in do not idle much, do not ground run much if you can avoid it, GO FLY and fly it like you stole it. Just keep the IAS up for maximum airflow.

Best way is 1500-2000' WOT 2500 RPM and leaned to about 60-70 LOP.
Second best way, maybe a bit higher but where you get say 29-27" and 2500 and full rich.

The RPM values are not hard values at all, anywhere that is smooth.

Keep the power above 75% is the key. And doing a few circuits won't hurt either, High power followed by a cooling and back into it again.

Good for the engine and your skills.

1500-2000' WOT would be about 27" MAP. I don't think LOP in that area is a good idea, which would be something like 90% power.

 

[RV7Guy]

Same as Walt

Hey Bob,

10 hours new with oil filter
25 after that
50 on oil filter

I add 8 ounces of Marvel Mystery Oil every oil change and 6 ounce to each tank every other fill up. Does it help? Don't know. Does it hurt? Don't know. But, it makes me feel good and oil analysis reports show less than average wear.

FYI Bob, I usually buy a couple of cases of oil, Philips XC at Oshkosh. Quite a bit cheaper than at the FBO.

 

[Buggsy2]

Best way is 1500-2000' WOT 2500 RPM and leaned to about 60-70 LOP...Keep the power above 75% is the key.

This is in direct contradiction to ECI's break-in instructions:

Slowly reduce engine speed to maximum continuous RPM (top of green) for fixed pitch propellers, reduce power to 75%...Level off at altitude and maintain 75% power for at least 30 minutes. During the first 50 hours of the break‐in period, piston rings will seat best if cruise is maintained at 65% to 75% power.

The ECI instructions do not mention running rich or lean, but repeatedly emphasize the dangers of high cylinder temperatures during break-in. Running rich will result in cooler cylinders.

 

[skylor]

This is in direct contradiction to ECI's break-in instructions:



The ECI instructions do not mention running rich or lean, but repeatedly emphasis the dangers of high cylinder temperatures during break-in. Running rich will result in cooler cylinders.

Simply not true! LOP ops will virtually always result in lower cylinder temps than the same power settings ROP.

Skylor

 

[RV10inOz]

Righto folks, none of us like being told that we are wrong, but now is a good time for anyone who is going to argue my above post to either go do some education first, or just be prepared to listen and learn now.

I make NO APOLOGIES for being harsh here, as it just drives me mad that Old Wives Tails keep getting portrayed as truth.

Alex Peterson

1500-2000' WOT would be about 27" MAP. I don't think LOP in that area is a good idea, which would be something like 90% power.

Absolutely FALSE!

You say "you think", well I can assure you I know it is a good idea. When you understand exactly what happens, you will realise what you think is not so.

Famous saying.....Boswell I believe, It is not what you don't know that hurts you, it is what you know that isn't so.

Anyone who thought Alex's comment was accurate need to go here : www.advancedpilot.com and register, it will change your life...I am serious!

I can assure you that when you get to the appropriate LOP setting I described, you will be at 75% power and not at 90% power. Your cylinder heads will be cooler and the whole process will be a lot cleaner, and cost you less money. There are ABSOLUTELY NO DOWNSIDES and I can assure you, this is fact.

Just in case you are not sure, here is a photo of 1000'AMSL, WOT 2400RPM and 29.6" of MP (high QNH and little bit of ram air effect) and when ROP the power was 90+% with a massive fuel flow, and have a look at the fuel flow, 52LPH or 13.75GPH and 78-79% power.

Look at the CHT's When ROP they were 50F warmer approximately. The fuel flow was around 95 LPH from memory. So which do you think is a better method?

Yesterday I flew around for 3 hours at nothing above 2500' and it was all WOT/2320-2380/ and about 45LPH. CHT was 297-312F

SCIENCE backed by data does not lie. But myths from old mates and instructors and engine manufacturers do.

Buggsy 2

This is in direct contradiction to ECI's break-in instructions:

The ECI instructions do not mention running rich or lean, but repeatedly emphasize the dangers of high cylinder temperatures during break-in. Running rich will result in cooler cylinders.

Wrong also!

Nothing I posted was in direct contradiction at all. You do quite correctly point out they do not make mention of doing it RICH or LEAN OF PEAK, however either is valid. LOP is just better. Doing it ROP is not wrong. Just do it carefully.

The next bone of contention is you have quoted from their instructions and quoted out of context as you failed to include the whole paragraph.

Start engine, run up normally, taxi, and take off immediately. (Minimize ground time.) Reduce manifold pressure as soon as practical. Slowly reduce engine speed to maximum continuous RPM (top of green) for fixed pitch propellers, reduce power to 75%.

Now if you want to reduce MP slightly and RPM and run ROP then fine, but if you are going to do it LOP leave the throttle WOT, pull the RPM back a bit (mainly for noise abatement) and go LOP.

What is the difference between running with a partially closed throttle and a dirty clogged air cleaner? And would you run a clogged air cleaner on a new engine? No, so why reduce MP?

the answer is if you do run in using a ROP method, you will need to reduce MP and RPM to reduce power from 95% down to 75% if that is what the aim is.

And seeing ECI is flavour of the month, read this for some good info. http://www.eci.aero/pages/Cool-Is-The-Rule.aspx

So here in closing, I acknowledge this post is blunt, and may sound abrasive to some, and mostly only to those who really need to learn and not just learn but understand. I do however mean this in in a caring way, but often I find if it is softly written and wrapped in cotton wool, it gets ignored. Blunt and to the point. If you have spent anything more than $20K on your aeroplane and have not spent $1K on your education, and the best source of that is APS, actually it is the only source, it might be time to invest. I say invest because the return on investment you get will be way better than any investment fund you have ever known. Fuel savings alone, maintenance bills in the future, and the cost of diagnosing problems slower vs faster will make the $1K look like a hand full of quarters.

Last Famous Quote....by David Brown
"It does everything it should, and nothing it shouldn't"

 

[Buggsy2]

Keep the power above 75% is the key.

This is in direct contradiction to ECI's break-in instructions:

Slowly reduce engine speed to maximum continuous RPM (top of green) for fixed pitch propellers, reduce power to 75%...Level off at altitude and maintain 75% power for at least 30 minutes. During the first 50 hours of the break‐in period, piston rings will seat best if cruise is maintained at 65% to 75% power.

(Italics mine)

I'm re-quoting this again to make this clear: RV10inOz says to keep power above 75%; ECI, a well-known engine maker, says to keep power below 75%. Who ya gonna believe? I know who I will, when the time comes for engine break-in. I don't much care about RV10inOz's feelings one way or another but posting information that directly contradicts the instructions from an engine maker is misleading and potentially very costly to all of us.

As for rich or lean, again, when it comes time to break-in my engine I shall have a plan for that issue, but it will be a plan based on the engine maker's instructions or equally authoritative source, not a single poster on VAF.

What is the difference between running with a partially closed throttle and a dirty clogged air cleaner? And would you run a clogged air cleaner on a new engine? No, so why reduce MP?

Why reduce MP? To follow the break-in advice of an engine maker. As for the analogy of PCT and a clogged air cleaner, it's silly...a red herring.

 

[RV10inOz]

A bit above, a bit below.....who are YOU going to believe? Lycoming TCM and others want 75 or so not 65%?

These are not hard fast Must be 75 +/-0.1% rules. Running in an engine between 70-75 is fine, but it is not a crime to be a bit above 75% and when done LOP the pressures are about the same, and you will have trouble as I said at 2000 feet you will have trouble being much past 75% when LOP. Thats just how it works, if you want to see what Lycoming say

Cruise power settings above 65%, and preferably in the 70% to 75% of rated power range, should be used to achieve a good engine break-in.

They want you in the 70-75% bracket.

Funny how if you follow my suggestion above that is exactly where you end up. To get 78-79% I had to have 1000' and a very high QNH day so please, before you start being funny about red herrings, study up a bit more first please.

When you understand a bit more about it you might have a slightly more open mind as to the realities.

Its your engine Do what you like.

No more OWT's please! Fact and data based science!

 

[RV10inOz]

Buggsy, your arrogant attitude towards a closed mind is the only thing surpassing mine, and I thought I was pretty strong willed. I will give you points here mate

I am not a single poster on VAF with this view, and even if I was, I would still say go talk to the people who really know better than anyone else.

Phone George Braly or Tim Roehl on 1-888-FLY-GAMI (888-359-4264)
Phone up John Deakin if you like too. If you want a harsh answer, phone Walter Atkinson as well. Suggest you do that while he and I are drinking rum from an exotic place in a couple of weeks The answers will make far more sense then!

These guys do more testing and have better data acquired than Lyc/TCM/ECI/Superior combined.

Seriously, regardless of what you may believe, these guys have the runs on the board.

Now While I am talking about APS, here is what John Deakin had to say about running in and my photo above.

David Brown wrote:
Sorry it is a bit blurry, but here is a photo of a really good way to break in cylinders and I am sure John, George and Walter would agree.

IO540 260HP, this is 1000' and WOT, 29.6"MP and 2430RPM and about 90% power (when ROP). High QNH day and I get some RAM AIR effect!

So we leaned to about 60-70F LOP and look at the result, 50 LPH, going fast and the CHT's are beautiful. Result was 79% power when LOP. Cop that flat earthers!


http://i849.photobucket.com/albums/ab58 ... oto2-3.jpg
(In case there's any doubt, that means approval from here.)

Best...
John Deakin
Advanced Pilot Seminars

Granted I was not running in an engine here, but this was an IDENTICAL thread running on a Beech forum.

So bury your head in the sand if you will, but please do it with a fully educated and open mind.

Now, thawing the white flag up for a minute, I clearly declared I might be harsh and as a result ruffle feathers. But if you want to challenge my comments and ask constructive questions, please do, but to sit on the sideline throwing rocks, you will get a rise out of me, because this is exactly why the OWT's are accepted by the under informed, and the problems continue.

Buggsy, you have made up your mind from an uninformed uneducated position, and while I was there once too, and seriously I understand, I do think it is worth your while asking questions to which you will get answers, that you can take to the bank, or challenge elsewhere if you like, rather than fire me up by throwing rocks.

You don't have to believe some "no name on VAF" of which you are one, it is your choice, but I have spent many many hours helping VAF members for free, and if you wanted to call me, or Skype me I would help you too. But it might take a fresh approach, but believe me I am happy to talk about it. If nothing else I might just open the mind of a fellow Vans operator.

So, I am not going to go too much further with petty point scoring, but I am more than happy to talk offline and we can sort it out there without clogging up this thread further.

All the best to you,

David Brown
A little gem.....
"Its not how hard you run your engine, its how you run your engine hard"...G Braly

 

[mahlon_r]

Bob,
The engine already had an oil change before you even started it up. This was done after the test cell run. So doing another before regular oil change interval shouldn't be necessary. It will not hurt anything to do one at 5,10 or15 hours premature to normal interval but it may not provide any real benefits either, other than mental benefits to say you did it and make you feel like you are doing all the right things.;-)
If it were mine I would change at 25 hours and I would run mineral oil again until at least 50 hours total time. If the oil consumption is stable and satisfactory at that point, I would switch over to AD oil.
From your post, it sounds as though the rings have seated already... if your oil consumption is negligible in the first 10 hours of use, but even if they have seated, running straight mineral until you get 50 hours will not hurt anything. If you haven't consumed a measurable amount of oil in these 10 hours then you can start to fly the aircraft normally and you don't have to adhere to the break in flight restrictions. However, if the oil consumption is actually measurable and or the rate of usage is unsatisfactory or still improving then continue with those restrictions and using mineral oil until such time as the consumption is stable and OK.

Good Luck,
Mahlon

"The opinions and information provided in this and all of my posts are hopefully helpful to you. Please use the information provided responsibly and at your own risk."

 

[David-aviator]

Bob,
The engine already had an oil change before you even started it up. This was done after the test cell run. So doing another before regular oil change interval shouldn't be necessary. It will not hurt anything to do one at 5,10 or15 hours premature to normal interval but it may not provide any real benefits either, other than mental benefits to say you did it and make you feel like you are doing all the right things.;-)
If it were mine I would change at 25 hours and I would run mineral oil again until at least 50 hours total time. If the oil consumption is stable and satisfactory at that point, I would switch over to AD oil.
From your post, it sounds as though the rings have seated already... if your oil consumption is negligible in the first 10 hours of use, but even if they have seated, running straight mineral until you get 50 hours will not hurt anything. If you haven't consumed a measurable amount of oil in these 10 hours then you can start to fly the aircraft normally and you don't have to adhere to the break in flight restrictions. However, if the oil consumption is actually measurable and or the rate of usage is unsatisfactory or still improving then continue with those restrictions and using mineral oil until such time as the consumption is stable and OK.

Good Luck,
Mahlon

"The opinions and information provided in this and all of my posts are hopefully helpful to you. Please use the information provided responsibly and at your own risk."

Thanks for the information, Mahlon.

I've broken in 2 engines in this business and wonder if perhaps the cylinder walls are smoother than many years ago when the break in procedures were established.

With both engines, there was very little oil consumption from the beginning which was somewhat confusing, you are lead to believe there will be a noticeable rate of consumption until the rings are seated. I could only conclude the rings were seated from the start.

Are cylinder walls smoother today with better technology that they were, say 50 years ago? I do remember "glazed" cylinder walls years ago that required a tear down and honing to fix, but that does not seem to be happening anymore.

 

[LettersFromFlyoverCountry]

Mahlon totally rescued a thread that was heading off in a bad direction.

The guy can do it all!

 

[mahlon_r]

The big problem years ago was with channel chrome barrels. They were used alot and are rarely used these days. It was very common to have to hone and re-ring them.
Steel, nitride steel and cermi nil/nickel carbide tend to let the rings seat very quickly. Sometimes in the test cell and sometimes not. but way easier and quicker than channel chrome. the type of honing used really depends on the guy doing the honing. In the past there were many just using ball hones which didn't work as well as actual honing machines. So, the finish could vary greatly depending on who was doing it and what they were using. Also in years past it was difficult to get and share information about what worked and what didn't. I think that the lack of information to some smaller shops and individuals, as well as techniques, equipment and cylinder bore material had a lot to do with break in difficulty back in the day.
Good Luck,
Mahlon
"The opinions and information provided in this and all of my posts are hopefully helpful to you. Please use the information provided responsibly and at your own risk."

 

[machineman]

until such time as the consumption is stable and OK.

Hi Mahlon,
What should "OK" oil consumption be (hrs/qt) on Nickel Carbide Cylinders at 110 hrs?

Also... is there any down-side to running straight mineral beyond the break in?

Thanks for your help!
Rich M

 

[mahlon_r]

A quart in 5-7 hrs is pretty average. Some will do better and some get as good a quart in 15-20 hours. Non synthetic AD oil is the same as straight mineral oil except there is no dispersant package in it. So, using straight mineral oil for the life of the engine would allow a buildup of ash deposits on the internals. Probably wouldn't hurt anything but not as clean as using AD oil. Obviously, any of the semi synthetics and synthetics would have a different chemical makeup then straight mineral oil and they wouldn't be the same as straight mineral without the dispersant package.
Good Luck,
Mahlon
"The opinions and information provided in this and all of my posts are hopefully helpful to you. Please use the information provided responsibly and at your own risk."