X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 10:32:05 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [216.215.54.194] (HELO smwireless.net) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.1) with ESMTP id 5096093 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 08:47:58 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.215.54.194; envelope-from=reddog@smwireless.net Received: from VALUEDE91AB895 ([208.90.165.71]) by smwireless.net (smwireless.net) (MDaemon PRO v9.6.6) with ESMTP id md50010130192.msg for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 05:47:19 -0700 X-Spam-Processed: smwireless.net, Thu, 18 Aug 2011 05:47:19 -0700 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 208.90.165.71 X-Return-Path: reddog@smwireless.net X-Envelope-From: reddog@smwireless.net X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: lml@lancaironline.net From: "Bill Maddox" X-Original-To: Subject: lean of peak ? X-Original-Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 05:47:23 -0700 X-Original-Message-ID: <7773BEF8D046455CBC3F1F8AFE27EA20@VALUEDE91AB895> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0000_01CC5D6A.4D817CB0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: AcxdpPk+HbFMli8iR+Cot0jaUd6OKg== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109 X-MDAV-Processed: smwireless.net, Thu, 18 Aug 2011 05:47:21 -0700 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01CC5D6A.4D817CB0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Well way back when I used to fly these similar engines on a cert planes. We never ran them lean of peak gami or not Actually gami wasn't around then I don't believe and the fuel was 4 grades ranging from 80 through 145 oct g-a-r-b [ green amber red blue ] do you remember those colors well the lead helped lub the engine as well .I think the heat is destroying these engines through several issues Lean of peak, poor induction air cooling and no lead additive I really think the best way to tell if you are going to far into lean of peak is look at all the blue parts that are in the engine at break down . Everyone seems to want the lean of peak and I don't understand that other than the fuel cost. I guess do what you think is best fuel cost or engine brake down at half tbo the real question is are you making the tbo and I have heard of only a few that can say they are These engines were certified back when fuel was leaded and the numbers represent cert not 100ll My best guess on total times is 2500 hrs in c 206/ c 210 and 7500 hrs in other cessna 150 through 421 all this time was in the late 60's and 70's My thoughts are only mine so when you brake down at less than 500 hr maybe you are running to lean also maybe we should get a chart of actually who is running lean of peak with gami and cert and the actual hrs it ran before brake down on the whole fleet Bill Maddox ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01CC5D6A.4D817CB0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Well way back when =

I used to fly these similar engines on a cert = planes. We never ran them lean of peak gami or not

Actually gami wasn’t around then I = don’t believe and the fuel was 4 grades ranging from 80 through 145 = oct g-a-r-b [ green amber red blue ] do you remember those colors well = the lead helped lub the engine as well .I think the heat is destroying these = engines through several issues

Lean of peak, poor induction air cooling and no lead additive I really think the best way to tell if = you are going to far into lean of peak is look at all the blue parts that are in = the engine at break down . Everyone seems to want the lean of peak and = I don’t understand that other than the fuel cost. I guess do what you think is = best fuel cost or engine brake down at half tbo the real question is = are you making the tbo and I have heard of only a few that can say they = are These engines were certified back when fuel was leaded and the numbers represent cert not 100ll

My best guess on total times is 2500 hrs in c = 206/ c 210 and 7500 hrs in other cessna 150 through 421 all this = time was in the late 60’s and 70’s

My thoughts are only mine so when you brake = down at less than 500 hr maybe you are running to lean also maybe we should get = a chart of actually who is running lean of peak with gami and cert and the = actual hrs it ran before brake down on the whole fleet Bill Maddox =

------=_NextPart_000_0000_01CC5D6A.4D817CB0--