Return-Path: Received: from imo16.mx.aol.com ([198.81.17.6]) by truman.olsusa.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.1 release 219 ID# 0-52269U2500L250S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Mon, 14 Dec 1998 07:40:04 -0500 Received: from CKohler312@aol.com by imo16.mx.aol.com (IMOv18.1) id 6HZIa22793 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 1998 07:40:51 -0500 (EST) From: CKohler312@aol.com Message-ID: <41ec1acf.36750753@aol.com> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 07:40:51 EST To: lancair.list@olsusa.com Subject: Continental X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com Mime-Version: 1.0 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> << Lancair Builders' Mail List >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> The problem with early Continental cylinders is related to oil control ring tension. Too little oil is allowed to lubricate the upper cylinder. This can be confirmed by Low oil consumption and increasingly high nickel and iron oil analysis in the initial stages of use. Later, oil consumption rises, compression goes down. My last two flights on the old cylinders were /3 hours -1 quart / 2:45 -10 quarts. Compensating for this by running full rich seems to be a method of choice by some. Excess fuel will provide some lubrication. Another method might be to use Marvel Mystery Oil in the fuel. Or perhaps, the extreme measure of pulling the cylinders, and changing the oil control ring. Continental has redesigned its cylinder manufacture. It is a much better cylinder than the original for several reasons. Including a lowered oil control ring tension! My "old design" cylinders operated 532 hours. The cylinders were worn out/past service limits. My "Top Care" cylinders are going past 500 hours, and having good oil analysis/compression readings. I fully expect them to make TB0. Charlie Kohler