|
The Southern Aviator
Here is something I came across which caught my
attention since I normally use 100LL av gas and may interest some of the rest of
you.
I am looking for other sources to see if there is a
general consensus about use of 100% synthetic oil and 100LL or rather against
it.
I am currently using Mobile 1 as my break in
oil
Ed
|
|
 |

News
|
Synthetic oils
and leaded fuel: Not a good combination
Ben Visser
4/8/2005
I
received an interesting letter from Karl Sieg concerning my
article on synthetic oil in the March 11 issue (Synthetic oil:
Is it right for your plane?). Several years ago, Karl's cousin
had run synthetic oil in his 1946 T-craft and "the engine ran
so well he had to retune it." Karl then tried some synthetic
oil in his car and the mileage improved. He then went on to
ask about the problems, litigation and FAA rulings regarding
the use of full synthetic oils in aircraft
engines.
Lubricants made with synthetic base oils are
excellent lubricants. The problem is that synthetics are so
pure that they are very poor solvents. The automotive industry
has developed additive chemistry that works with the synthetic
base oil to provide the cleanliness characteristics needed to
maintain a clean engine. This means that if you use
synthetic-based oil in your car and change it at the proper
intervals, your engine should remain relatively clean and
offer excellent service and life. Major problems can occur if
an owner decides that since the synthetic oil is more
expensive, it should last longer and they then extend their
oil change intervals significantly. In these cases the oil
does not wear out, but can become completely saturated with
contaminates like carbon, and then excess deposits can build
up.
The problem with the use of synthetics in aircraft
is the leaded fuel. Synthetic-base oils are so pure that they
do not absorb the lead byproducts of combustion as the mineral
base oils do. In addition, because of the necessary
limitations on additive chemistry in the piston engine oil
specifications, many of the additives used in automotive oils
can not be used in aircraft oils.
The problem is not
universal. When Shell Oil started to test synthetic piston
engine oils back in the 1960s, many engines performed very
well on the product. Unfortunately, numerous engines, usually
the larger turbocharged opposed engines, started to show signs
of increased oil consumption as early as 600 hours. When these
engines were disassembled, the pistons looked like someone had
taken a gray epoxy and coated the entire piston ring belt and
glued the rings into the piston. In addition, the props were
full of the same gray sludge, which was found to be lead
byproducts of combustion. Shell never marketed a full
synthetic oil, however, several companies did and found out
the hard way that synthetic oils do not absorb the lead
byproducts of combustion.
Aviation piston engine oils
are approved against a SAE/Mil specification. The full
synthetic oils that were marketed met that specification. When
field problems occurred, the oil companies worked with the FAA
to solve the problems. However, the FAA did not rule against
synthetic oils, the oil companies removed them from the
market.
In real estate, the three most important
features for any piece of property are location, location and
location. In aviation products, the three most important
features of any product are no problems, no problems and no
problems.
Ben Visser is an aviation fuels and
lubricants expert who spent 33 years with Shell Oil. He has
been a private pilot since 1985. You can contact him at
Visser@GeneralAviationNews.com.
| |
 | |









|
The Southern Aviator - 800-426-8538 P.O. Box 39099 Lakewood, WA
98439 editors@southern-aviator.com
lgo_soav.gif
1.gif
dot_clear.gif
dot_clear.gif
tcm.jpg
sportys.jpg
eagleSmall.jpg
LakeAndAir.jpg
aopa.jpg
ezheat.jpg
desser.jpg
directories.gif
|