Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 18:44:24 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mail.vineyard.net ([204.17.195.90] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.6) with ESMTP id 2705807 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 01 Nov 2003 11:12:51 -0500 Received: from localhost (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by mail.vineyard.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 892E892234; Sat, 1 Nov 2003 11:11:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail.vineyard.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (king1.vineyard.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 07576-05; Sat, 1 Nov 2003 11:11:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from direct (fsy19.vineyard.net [66.101.65.19]) by mail.vineyard.net (Postfix) with SMTP id D76999221A; Sat, 1 Nov 2003 11:11:12 -0500 (EST) X-Original-Message-ID: <002401c3a092$923322c0$13416542@direct> From: "Ted Stanley" X-Original-To: "Mail List Lancair" X-Original-Cc: Subject: Re: TSIO-550E Surprise at 215 hrs - compression testing X-Original-Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 11:09:33 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS at Vineyard.NET When it comes to performing a compression check on a TCM engine one would do well to carefully review their latest Service Bulletin (SB03-3) that covers this subject. You can view it at http://www.tcmlink.com/servicebulletins/index.cfm A critical part of the compression check is to do the check on the compression TESTER using the proper calibrated orifice tool. Without doing this the lower number (i.e. the "60" in 60/80) is meaningless. Read the bulletin for details. One might assume (meaning making an ASS out of U and ME) that just because a product is certificated that it in effect has the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval. Sadly not true. What it really means is that it meets the minimum standard. Take the GTSIO-520 engine found in the C-421. I've spoken with a variety of operators flying these birds and don't know of any that made it to TBO unscathed. My recommendation would be to take a representative cylinder and have it critically examined by a knowledgeable engine shop and ask them to make a determination of the wear and/or failure points. Then check the replacement cylinders for those same weaknesses and correct them as necessary. If the valve to guide fit, seat grinding, etc. isn't up to snuff it won't matter too much how nicely you treat your engine. I will be attending an engine operating seminar in a few weeks. http://www.advancedpilot.com/explore_001.htm If I learn something revealing I'll pass it along. One of the instructors will be John Deakin. He has written a few articles (some of which are pre-class assigned reading) that you all may find enlightening. http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182146-1.html Jim ..... Please keep us all informed as your saga continues. Ted Stanley - A&P-IA