X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from [64.4.51.74] (HELO hotmail.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.4) with ESMTP id 986368 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 06 Jun 2005 15:10:07 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.4.51.74; envelope-from=lors01@msn.com Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 6 Jun 2005 12:09:21 -0700 Message-ID: Received: from 64.4.51.220 by BAY107-DAV2.phx.gbl with DAV; Mon, 06 Jun 2005 19:09:20 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [64.4.51.220] X-Originating-Email: [lors01@msn.com] X-Sender: lors01@msn.com From: "Tracy Crook" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Un-touched engine (was: EC2 problems - solved / rotary risks) Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 15:09:16 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_009D_01C56AA9.B4C19550" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: MSN 9 X-MimeOLE: Produced By MSN MimeOLE V9.10.0011.1703 Seal-Send-Time: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 15:09:16 -0400 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jun 2005 19:09:21.0301 (UTC) FILETIME=[3EB6F450:01C56ACB] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_009D_01C56AA9.B4C19550 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Bill Dube=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 > > >I'm reading between the lines of Al's posts but it seems that he is=20 >emphasizing the importance of leaving the engine as un-touched as=20 >possible. I once wrote an article for Light Plane World (EAA's = ultralight=20 >magazine back in the late 80's) and advocated the same thing after = noting=20 >that many Rotax failures occurred soon after the owner opened up the = >engine for maintenance. Decarboning the piston ring grooves was = important=20 >but many builders were causing more problems than they fixed when = they=20 >went inside so I recommended some products and procedures that would = do=20 >the job without opening the engine. > This is the exact reason that I would prefer to not open up = my=20 RX-8 engine. I plan to borescope it and compression test it and inspect it = in=20 every way I can without taking it apart. If I don't find anything = wrong (or=20 suspect) during these inspections, I plan to run it "un-touched" = internally. There seems to always be something that goes amiss when you=20 disassemble and reassemble an engine. A prime example is the thick = front=20 cover gasket versus o-ring problem. There is a lot to be said for, "If it ain't broke, don't fix = it." Bill Dube' In this case, I would agree. It is the case where the builder buys a 2nd gen 13B (now at least 15 = years old) that I think an internal inspection or overhaul is called for = unless you REALLY know the history of that particular engine . It also = goes without saying (Ahh! there is a silly assumption!) that you either = have, get, or borrow the required expertise in order to do this = successfully. Tracy ------=_NextPart_000_009D_01C56AA9.B4C19550 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Dube
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft
>
>
>I'm reading between the lines of Al's posts = but it=20 seems that he is
>emphasizing the importance of leaving the = engine as=20 un-touched as
>possible.  I once wrote an article for = Light Plane=20 World (EAA's ultralight
>magazine back in the late 80's) and = advocated=20 the same thing after noting
>that many Rotax failures  = occurred=20 soon after the owner opened up the
>engine for = maintenance. =20 Decarboning the piston ring grooves was important
>but many = builders=20 were causing more problems than they fixed when they
>went = inside so I=20 recommended some products and procedures that would do
>the job = without=20 opening the=20 = engine.
>

         = This=20 is the exact reason that I would prefer to not open up my
RX-8=20 engine.

         I plan = to=20 borescope it and compression test it and inspect it in
every way I = can=20 without taking it apart. If I don't find anything wrong (or =
suspect)=20 during these inspections, I plan to run it "un-touched"=20 internally.

         = There=20 seems to always be something that goes amiss when you
disassemble = and=20 reassemble an engine. A prime example is the thick front
cover = gasket=20 versus o-ring = problem.

        =20 There is a lot to be said for, "If it ain't broke, don't fix=20 it."

         Bill=20 Dube'

In this case, I would agree.
 
It is the case where the builder buys a 2nd gen 13B  = (now at=20 least 15 years old) that I think an internal inspection or overhaul is = called=20 for unless you REALLY know the history of that particular = engine . =20 It also goes without saying (Ahh! there is a silly assumption!) that = you=20 either have, get, or borrow the required expertise in order to do this = successfully.
 
Tracy
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_009D_01C56AA9.B4C19550--