The definitive Van's Aircraft support community! Buying, building or flying an RV? Join our exclusive family of mentors and enthusiasts!
And much other feedback disagrees. I think the polls usually run about 60/40 in favor of B&C. (that's by no means a real average of the results of the countless threads on the topic, it's a rough approximation)
You decide but I'll summarize, failed in the first 250 hrs:
Save yourself some anguish... Go with B&C.
Thx. Bad at math!I think the B&C failure rate is actually TEN times higher than what you listed above (should be 2.3%)
Corrected above.Here’s the original poll thread:
B&C. One less thing to worry about……over water….at night, with 3 gals ledt in the tank, with your scared girlfriend in the seat next to you.
I did call today and they told me they will be shipping a new product line shortly that should work for me.
I use BOTH brands. With that said ...
) and vans pushed the PP (probably because it was cheaper)
You are correct, was using the numbers in the poll which were failed individual units divided by total unit failures. My mistake.
Can you include that poll that shows 60/40? The last poll I looked here on VAF indicated a much different result.
You are correct.I’ve been around a while and have installed 5 B&Cs over 20y with nil issues to speak of.
Seems like every week here someone has a PP issue of some description or another.
If you go back 10+ years then the argument was that the B&C was more expensive (and the regulator required extra wiring
Now a vans supplied PP 60A is almost 50% more expensive than a B&C 60A alt+reg combo.
So the question should be why would one consider installing a PP at all?
is designed around Bob's Z-14 and the B&C products. And I replaced a failed PP with a B&C. So, I am simply encouraging the poster to do the research that matters for them and make their decision based on that. Be that for alternators, engines, props, or even airframes.
No. In fact I specifically stated: (that's by no means a real average of the results of the countless threads on the topic, it's a rough approximation)
My PP voltage regulator recently failed at well under 300 hours. Not great. Although in my case the PP warranty claim process was fine. B&C all the way for me next time.
Was the failure mode mechanical or electronic/internal? Do you have the serial # handy?
External regulator, so an electronic failure. Started failing, apparently inducing an overvoltage trip, whenever it got warm. PP asked me to send it back to them so that they could test/inspect it, and about a month later they sent me a new replacement without further comment.
Can you share the model # of the alternator, internal regulator? Do you have the io390 210hp? Is it a big deal to mount where my pp alternator is supposed to go?
Another data point...I have a 9A with a Titan IO-370, Plane Power alternator, usual boss mount with blast tube. First failure was at 160 hours TT, second was on Dec 12 with 41 hours TT on a new replacement. During the first failure, I lost the EarthX battery, and b/u avionics battery. The engine shut down on the runway after landing (dual P mags).
Curious! Your P-mags should have continued to operate, if you were above about 900 rpm. Why did they fail?
I understand that, but I am surprised idle rpm was set so low, lower than mine. Part of the set-up for P-mags is to determine the rpm below which they will fail and set idle accordingly.
Fails in the airplane then works on the bench is not a robust design; blast tubes won't fix the design or increase your confidence. What do you think of the B&C alternator?
One automotive & one plane power alternator; both failed within 200 hours time in service. Now 500 hours on B&C 40 amp alternator & still running strong.
Did you have any EMS indications that the alternator was not producing 14+ volts or the main battery was going dead?
My idle rpm is about 850. My P-mags quit about 800. I have never seen such low rpms while flying, only at shutdown. Constant speed prop with a big chord.
The set-up that I have in my plane is a Garmin 3X system, Vertical Power electronic circuit breakers, EarthX battery, and TCW back-up battery. The panel was wired by Stein and well done, but there is little back-up once electrons are lost. The EarthX battery has advantages/disadvantages. One of the drawbacks (my opinion) is that it can be almost totally depleted prior to losing voltage and going offline. I have a battery warning light from the EarthX to the panel that alerted me to the problem. When the primary battery went offline, The TCW battery worked fine but only for about 30 minutes (I have since replaced it with a similar TCW of greater capacity). When the back-up battery went offline, I had no engine data, flight data, comms, or transponder. I only mention all this to emphasize that a single point of failure (alternator) resulted in a loss all useful flight/airplane information.
LX-60, not internally regulated. The 10's Showplanes cowling needed a re-clocked alternator. For the 14 with a Vans cowling the LX-60 does not need re-clocking, fits fine.
A properly operating alternator will output 14.2 - 14.6 volts (Voltage needed for an Earth X battery to charge, Earth X states down to 13.9 volts but I think that is too low, in my opinion) When you lose the alternator the bus will drop within almost secs to 13.4 to 13.6 volts (depending on where the sense wire is located) so set a yellow alarm for 13.9 volts and a red alarm and audio warning at 13.7 volts. (Turn off the alternator in flight and check exactly where the voltage drops to, it will drop.) Typically, Stein wires in for a shunt in your B-lead and that can detect the drop in amps and alarm. With today's EFIS systems you should know when you have an alternator issue within a minute or less. You are correct an Earth X battery stays fairly linear after the alternator goes offline but will drop off a noticeable amount when the alternator goes offline.
Thanks for the information. In my set-up, I'm not exactly sure where the voltage is measured. I assumed it was at the VPX unit since it has a graphical display of battery voltage, and cant say that I've seen it routinely greater than 13.5. There is a shunt coming off the B lead of the alternator, which I believe also goes back to the VPX. I have a question about alternator output: the day after the failure, I started the plane while monitoring the VPX and it had the usual amp surge after start (?40 amps). After a few minutes, I let the engine idle at a constant 1500 rpm. The amperage output varied between 0 and 20, with a constant load (EFIS, radios, etc) of about 7 amps. Is that normal or the sign of an alternator problem? In other words, should the produced amperage be linear function with RPM? I clearly don't know enough about airplane electrical systems.
Since you are using a Plane Power alternator with an internally regulated VR (?) I'm going to claim ignorance. (I use B&C with an externally regulated VR) I do know that EarthX like all batteries with this chemistry need 13.9 volts to 14.6 volts to charge the battery fully. Regardless, you should see a decent drop in voltage when the alternator goes off-line. (A minimum of 1/2 a volt). Download your logs from the G3X. Savy is an excellent tool to read them, or you can review inputting the raw data into Excel. Normally the VPX can read amps the VPX system is pulling not the output of the alternator. (This is set in the G3X configuration for the engine and airframe and can be set to VPX amps or a true shunt that is wired to the GEA24). That is read (At least in my 2 set-ups) on the GEA24. You should have an interconnect drawing from Stein, that will tell you where it is being read. RPM and amperage output can be "linear" but only if the battery needs topping off. That is determined by the state of the battery, the sense voltage and what voltage the VR is set at. I think what gasman was alluding to like me you should get all kinds of warnings when you lose your alternator if the system is set-up correctly.
SilverFlite SF601. Spoke with TJ at B&C today and they will be shipping this internally regulated alternator early in the new year. $595.00
When Arcline Investment Management bought Hartzell (including the PlanePower product line), they immediately jacked prices way up, and then bought Hartzell's only meaningful competition in the sport aviation CS prop market (Whirlwind). Bracing myself for the news that they are buying out B&C next...I'm sure they would love to monopolize the starter/alternator market as well, with additional 4x price markups to follow...
Hang in their B&C and MT!
Yes but it will take a long time to prove the new offering is better than current IR units out there.
