mobilepolice
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2013
- Messages
- 1,048
- Reaction score
- 101
I've got my Cherokee in a maintenance shop nearby and everything is going decently well, however I swung by today to drop off some parts and grab my books and had a chat with the owner (not an A&P)
This conversation has come up before because I've expressed interest in buying a Seneca II and I'm aware of the cylinder problems that potentially entails in the TSIO-360-EB engines continental made.
There was a Piper Lance sitting there with a Lycoming TIO-540 being worked on with the exhaust apart and the guy tells me the turbocharger is shot. I can't feel any shaft play whatsoever, but maybe this is a different bearing design that I'm not used to. I've owned turbocharged vehicles all my life and I can tell when the bearings are getting ready to go, because the impeller or turbine tend to rub the housing and that's usually to shaft play you can easily detect.
But I don't argue about it too much, it's not my plane and not my business. The guy tells me "well, the turbocharger may have another 20-100 hours in it, but it is going bad".
Take that for what you will.
We get into a discussion about the make of the engine itself and his argument is that the engines weren't made for turbochargers, they got "slapped on" due to customer demand, and that's why they're so finnicky. My argument is that it is all about the care in operation and routine maintenance that get you to the TBO numbers and beyond.
Yet he insists that the engines just aren't up to the task, "they weren't designed for turbochargers"
I'm not going to say the manufacturers are infallible, but somehow I doubt manufacturers would produce unreliable engines as that's a large insurance liability. Furthermore, I'm curious as to how widely held this guy's viewpoint is with others.
I hear about people like Mike Busch and his carefully cared-for T310R's with nearly 3000 hours on the TIO-470's, and I hear about people like this guy in the shop, with barely a thousand hours on his TIO-540 that's needing a new turbocharger (and probably other work too)
Discuss?
This conversation has come up before because I've expressed interest in buying a Seneca II and I'm aware of the cylinder problems that potentially entails in the TSIO-360-EB engines continental made.
There was a Piper Lance sitting there with a Lycoming TIO-540 being worked on with the exhaust apart and the guy tells me the turbocharger is shot. I can't feel any shaft play whatsoever, but maybe this is a different bearing design that I'm not used to. I've owned turbocharged vehicles all my life and I can tell when the bearings are getting ready to go, because the impeller or turbine tend to rub the housing and that's usually to shaft play you can easily detect.
But I don't argue about it too much, it's not my plane and not my business. The guy tells me "well, the turbocharger may have another 20-100 hours in it, but it is going bad".
Take that for what you will.
We get into a discussion about the make of the engine itself and his argument is that the engines weren't made for turbochargers, they got "slapped on" due to customer demand, and that's why they're so finnicky. My argument is that it is all about the care in operation and routine maintenance that get you to the TBO numbers and beyond.
Yet he insists that the engines just aren't up to the task, "they weren't designed for turbochargers"
I'm not going to say the manufacturers are infallible, but somehow I doubt manufacturers would produce unreliable engines as that's a large insurance liability. Furthermore, I'm curious as to how widely held this guy's viewpoint is with others.
I hear about people like Mike Busch and his carefully cared-for T310R's with nearly 3000 hours on the TIO-470's, and I hear about people like this guy in the shop, with barely a thousand hours on his TIO-540 that's needing a new turbocharger (and probably other work too)
Discuss?
