Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Oil and the M-14P

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

radiopicture

Joined: 23 Jun 2008
Posts: 263

Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 6:58 pm Post subject: Oil and the M-14P

I have a few remarks about the oil for M-14P topic:



Lots of good information posted recently. I would add this:



Certainly, you can't go wrong with Aeroshell W80/100/120 (AD) in the M-14P, unless you're breaking in, which would call for the straight mineral version (no "W").



Having said that, there are advantages to the Phillips XC 25-60 for radial engines (not to be confused with XC 20-50 for flat engines): It's not an AD type oil, so it can be used during break-in periods, and if you have to change one cylinder, you won't have to switch oil types back and forth. Also, appropriate for a wider temp range, of course. 



I noted the comments about corrosion protection in-between flights. It was definitely true in the past that multi-weight oils wouldn't cling to engine parts leaving them susceptible to this corrosion. Especially a problem on cam followers in Lycomings. However, modern multi-weight oils have addressed this problem, and have been shown to be even better than straight-weight oils in this respect. The Aeroshell multi-grade oil gets great reviews for flat engines, but it was found that one of the additives gums up the compressor pop-off valve on the M-14P. At any rate, neither that one nor the Phillips 20-50 should be used on radials. This is NOT a problem with the XC 25-60 for radials.



Another thing that has been mentioned by the Russians is this: The flop tube pivot in the oil tank has a seal that's formed by the oil itself. Of course, there's some leakage, but it's inside the tank, so as long as pressure can be maintained, no problem. In older planes where the pivot might have more wear, apparently the oil pressure can be reduced in some attitudes (prolonged up-lines, mostly). Rick Volker was sticking with the single-weight oil for this reason, but found himself changing a jug when the ambient temps were very changeable. For this reason, he went to the XC for the break-in. He observed no such problem and has now switched to that oil. He flies full-power unlimited aerobatics.



Regarding over-temping: Nikolay Timofeev reported that in the event of accidental or unpreventable CHT in the red for extended periods, the practice has been to immediately change the oil, which they feel would then be compromised. That fried oil post from a few days ago reminded me of that.



I would also point out that most of the radial engine shops seem to use and recommend the XC 25-60, including M-14P, Inc.. It seems that most of the vintage radials use it. I have used it in both of my 52s although I don't claim to put it to the test with respect to climate or flying style. Anyway, I wanted to stick up for this oil because it seems to be feature rich with few compromises.

CD 2.0

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Posts: 43

Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 11:05 pm Post subject: Re: Oil and the M-14P

radio.. good comment. 



In my experience, most of the top engine shops, radial and flat engines, recommend that mineral oil Aeroshell 100 (without the W) be utilized for the first 25-50 hours of engine operation or after an overhaul to brake in and later on single grade, ashless dispersant oils such as the Aeroshell w 100 should be utilized for the remainder of the engineâ€™s life.



I've heard numerous times from top engine shops, how their service history records are much less favorable for engines that have a history of being operated on "synthetic blends or semi-synthetic" oil products and they firmly encourage using Mineral Based (AD) Oils only... single or multi-viscosity as conditions require.



I remember someone, about a year and a half a go, who used Phillips XC 25-60 on a T-6's and said it was a good oil... then changed to Aeroshell w 100 and report it as a good oil as well... however when using the Phillips XC 25-60 it leaked and spit oil more frequently, then after switching back to Aeroshell it considerably reduced the leaking...  Phillips XC 25-60 oil remains thinner and more easily pourable at room temperature than single grade oil even with the latest improvements. Certainly it's a good oil and has its advantages for cold weather starting... but Multi vis oil would not be my preferred choice during periods of disuse as I believe it doesn't provide nearly as good corrosion protection as single grade oils like the Aeroshell w100 does. 

 

So Which Oil Should we Use?... It all depends on where you fly, and how often.



If your airplane flies at least once a week... or if you operate in a low corrosion environment such as the desert or the mountains... you probably don't have to worry too much about corrosion. This is especially true if the airplane is also hangared. In this case,  multi-weight oil types could be a good choice. 



On the other hand, if you are based in a corrosive environment... within 100 miles of the coast, the Gulf, the Great Lakes, or a major metropolitan area with its industrial pollution... and if your airplane sometimes goes for two weeks or more at a time without being flown, internal corrosion should be a major concern. This is especially true if the aircraft is not hangared. If you fall into this category, I would suggest that you use a single weight AD oil such as Aeroshell W 100 to provide the best possible protection against corrosion during periods of disuse.



If you operate in a temperate climate (such as is found in much of California), you can use single weight oil all year around. However, if you operate in sub freezing winter temperatures, then switching to a multi-weight oil during the cold weather months could be a good option, and then return to single-weight oil during the remainder of the year. If your A&P tells you that it's bad to switch from one type of oil to another... he may be misinformed. 



Carl



 	  radiopicture wrote: 	
		  I have a few remarks about the oil for M-14P topic:



Lots of good information posted recently. I would add this:



Certainly, you can't go wrong with Aeroshell W80/100/120 (AD) in the M-14P, unless you're breaking in, which would call for the straight mineral version (no "W").



Having said that, there are advantages to the Phillips XC 25-60 for radial engines (not to be confused with XC 20-50 for flat engines): It's not an AD type oil, so it can be used during break-in periods, and if you have to change one cylinder, you won't have to switch oil types back and forth. Also, appropriate for a wider temp range, of course. 



I noted the comments about corrosion protection in-between flights. It was definitely true in the past that multi-weight oils wouldn't cling to engine parts leaving them susceptible to this corrosion. Especially a problem on cam followers in Lycomings. However, modern multi-weight oils have addressed this problem, and have been shown to be even better than straight-weight oils in this respect. The Aeroshell multi-grade oil gets great reviews for flat engines, but it was found that one of the additives gums up the compressor pop-off valve on the M-14P. At any rate, neither that one nor the Phillips 20-50 should be used on radials. This is NOT a problem with the XC 25-60 for radials.



Another thing that has been mentioned by the Russians is this: The flop tube pivot in the oil tank has a seal that's formed by the oil itself. Of course, there's some leakage, but it's inside the tank, so as long as pressure can be maintained, no problem. In older planes where the pivot might have more wear, apparently the oil pressure can be reduced in some attitudes (prolonged up-lines, mostly). Rick Volker was sticking with the single-weight oil for this reason, but found himself changing a jug when the ambient temps were very changeable. For this reason, he went to the XC for the break-in. He observed no such problem and has now switched to that oil. He flies full-power unlimited aerobatics.



Regarding over-temping: Nikolay Timofeev reported that in the event of accidental or unpreventable CHT in the red for extended periods, the practice has been to immediately change the oil, which they feel would then be compromised. That fried oil post from a few days ago reminded me of that.



I would also point out that most of the radial engine shops seem to use and recommend the XC 25-60, including M-14P, Inc.. It seems that most of the vintage radials use it. I have used it in both of my 52s although I don't claim to put it to the test with respect to climate or flying style. Anyway, I wanted to stick up for this oil because it seems to be feature rich with few compromises.

radiopicture

Joined: 23 Jun 2008
Posts: 263

Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 11:42 pm Post subject: Oil and the M-14P

Carl:

No, I didn't think switching oil types is a bad idea.... just inconvenient. 

Actually, many top engine shops have been won over by the XC 25-60. Air Repair, for example along with several other major ones. 

The XC 25-60 is mineral based.... just not AD. It's not synthetic... but it has additives. I'm not sure if you were saying otherwise.

I'm sure these anecdotes are true, although it's hard to know all of the circumstances. There are many theories, procedures and rituals. I have participated in a lot of airshows, and I would say that the XC 25-60 is used about 75% of the time on radials. 

I also forgot to mention that radial engines seem to be much less vulnerable to these corrosion issues than flat engines. Also, there was an article in Aviation Consumer where they tested the more recent versions on multi-grade oils, and they were great at staying on the engine parts. 

-Eric

On Jul 30, 2011, at 3:05 AM, CD 2.0 wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

 radio.. good comment. 

 In my experience, most of the top engine shops, radial and flat engines, recommend that mineral oil Aeroshell 100 (without the W) be utilized for the first 25-50 hours of engine operation or after an overhaul to brake in and later on single grade, ashless dispersant oils such as the Aeroshell w 100 should be utilized for the remainder of the engineâ€™s life.

 I've heard numerous times from top engine shops, how their service history records are much less favorable for engines that have a history of being operated on "synthetic blends or semi-synthetic" oil products and they firmly encourage using Mineral Based (AD) Oils only... single or multi-viscosity as conditions require.

 I remember someone, about a year and a half a go, who used Phillips XC 25-60 on a T-6's and said it was a good oil... then changed to Aeroshell w 100 and report it as a good oil as well... however when using the Phillips XC 25-60 it leaked and spit oil more frequently, then after switching back to Aeroshell it considerably reduced the leaking...  Phillips XC 25-60 oil remains thinner and more easily pourable at room temperature than single grade oil even with the latest improvements. Certainly it's a good oil and has its advantages for cold weather starting... but Multi vis oil would not be my preferred choice during periods of disuse as I believe it doesn't provide nearly as good corrosion protection as single grade oils like the Aeroshell w100 does. 

 So Which Oil Should we Use?... It all depends on where you fly, and how often.

 If your airplane flies at least once a week... or if you operate in a low corrosion environment such as the desert or the mountains... you probably don't have to worry too much about corrosion. This is especially true if the airplane is also hangared. In this case,  multi-weight oil types could be a good choice. 

 On the other hand, if you are based in a corrosive environment... within 100 miles of the coast, the Gulf, the Great Lakes, or a major metropolitan area with its industrial pollution... and if your airplane sometimes goes for two weeks or more at a time without being flown, internal corrosion should be a major concern. This is especially true if the aircraft is not hangared. If you fall into this category, I would suggest that you use a single weight AD oil such as Aeroshell W 100 to provide the best possible protection against corrosion during periods of disuse.

 If you operate in a temperate climate (such as is found in much of California), you can use single weight oil all year around. However, if you operate in sub freezing winter temperatures, then switching to a multi-weight oil during the cold weather months could be a good option, and then return to single-weight oil during the remainder of the year. If your A&P tells you that it's bad to switch from one type of oil to another... he may be misinformed. 

 Carl

 radiopicture wrote:

> I have a few remarks about the oil for M-14P topic:

> 

> Lots of good information posted recently. I would add this:

> 

> Certainly, you can't go wrong with Aeroshell W80/100/120 (AD) in the M-14P, unless you're breaking in, which would call for the straight mineral version (no "W").

> 

> Having said that, there are advantages to the Phillips XC 25-60 for radial engines (not to be confused with XC 20-50 for flat engines): It's not an AD type oil, so it can be used during break-in periods, and if you have to change one cylinder, you won't have to switch oil types back and forth. Also, appropriate for a wider temp range, of course. 

> 

> I noted the comments about corrosion protection in-between flights. It was definitely true in the past that multi-weight oils wouldn't cling to engine parts leaving them susceptible to this corrosion. Especially a problem on cam followers in Lycomings. However, modern multi-weight oils have addressed this problem, and have been shown to be even better than straight-weight oils in this respect. The Aeroshell multi-grade oil gets great reviews for flat engines, but it was found that one of the additives gums up the compressor pop-off valve on the M-14P. At any rate, neither that one nor the Phillips 20-50 should be used on radials. This is NOT a problem with the XC 25-60 for radials.

> 

> Another thing that has been mentioned by the Russians is this: The flop tube pivot in the oil tank has a seal that's formed by the oil itself. Of course, there's some leakage, but it's inside the tank, so as long as pressure can be maintained, no problem. In older planes where the pivot might have more wear, apparently the oil pressure can be reduced in some attitudes (prolonged up-lines, mostly). Rick Volker was sticking with the single-weight oil for this reason, but found himself changing a jug when the ambient temps were very changeable. For this reason, he went to the XC for the break-in. He observed no such problem and has now switched to that oil. He flies full-power unlimited aerobatics.

> 

> Regarding over-temping: Nikolay Timofeev reported that in the event of accidental or unpreventable CHT in the red for extended periods, the practice has been to immediately change the oil, which they feel would then be compromised. That fried oil post from a few days ago reminded me of that.

> 

> I would also point out that most of the radial engine shops seem to use and recommend the XC 25-60, including M-14P, Inc.. It seems that most of the vintage radials use it. I have used it in both of my 52s although I don't claim to put it to the test with respect to climate or flying style. Anyway, I wanted to stick up for this oil because it seems to be feature rich with few compromises.

 Read this topic online here:

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348056#348056

Dale

Joined: 30 May 2007
Posts: 178

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 5:23 am Post subject: Re: Oil and the M-14P

I would like to add.. I talked to the Phillips people about this issue.



Quote: For a while we quite making single grade oil because of the superior properties of multi.  Phillips said the 25-60 had three times the ability to keep valves from sticking and the multi weight did a better job of lube in all conditions.  Phillips said the only reason they still make single weight oil is that some people refuse to change so they will just sell it to them even though there is no reason to use it.  Not what I said that is what Phillips said.

Phillip is going to do a report on the 25-60 oil and put it in the Red Star Magazine at my request.  You can still buy bias ply tires for your car also if you want them.

k7wx

Joined: 24 May 2010
Posts: 117

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 5:47 am Post subject: Oil and the M-14P

Carl,

Great post!

I wonder if you, or others with insights into this have any thoughts about using CamGuard with either straight weight or multi-viscosity oils for the M-14P. I have heard anecdotally that for those engines in which CamGuard has been used look better when inspected during an overhaul. 

Another simple question. I'm breaking in a zero-time M-14P. At about 20 hours, oil temps began to come down and oil consumption leveled off. What would you consider a reasonable endpoint for the break-in period before switching from AeroShell 100 mineral oil to AeroShell 120 AD? Oil temp? Oil consumption? Minimal number of hours?

Warren Hill

N464TW

On Jul 30, 2011, at 12:05 AM, CD 2.0 wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

 radio.. good comment. 

 In my experience, most of the top engine shops, radial and flat engines, recommend that mineral oil Aeroshell 100 (without the W) be utilized for the first 25-50 hours of engine operation or after an overhaul to brake in and later on single grade, ashless dispersant oils such as the Aeroshell w 100 should be utilized for the remainder of the engineâ€™s life.

 I've heard numerous times from top engine shops, how their service history records are much less favorable for engines that have a history of being operated on "synthetic blends or semi-synthetic" oil products and they firmly encourage using Mineral Based (AD) Oils only... single or multi-viscosity as conditions require.

 I remember someone, about a year and a half a go, who used Phillips XC 25-60 on a T-6's and said it was a good oil... then changed to Aeroshell w 100 and report it as a good oil as well... however when using the Phillips XC 25-60 it leaked and spit oil more frequently, then after switching back to Aeroshell it considerably reduced the leaking...  Phillips XC 25-60 oil remains thinner and more easily pourable at room temperature than single grade oil even with the latest improvements. Certainly it's a good oil and has its advantages for cold weather starting... but Multi vis oil would not be my preferred choice during periods of disuse as I believe it doesn't provide nearly as good corrosion protection as single grade oils like the Aeroshell w100 does. 

 So Which Oil Should we Use?... It all depends on where you fly, and how often.

 If your airplane flies at least once a week... or if you operate in a low corrosion environment such as the desert or the mountains... you probably don't have to worry too much about corrosion. This is especially true if the airplane is also hangared. In this case,  multi-weight oil types could be a good choice. 

 On the other hand, if you are based in a corrosive environment... within 100 miles of the coast, the Gulf, the Great Lakes, or a major metropolitan area with its industrial pollution... and if your airplane sometimes goes for two weeks or more at a time without being flown, internal corrosion should be a major concern. This is especially true if the aircraft is not hangared. If you fall into this category, I would suggest that you use a single weight AD oil such as Aeroshell W 100 to provide the best possible protection against corrosion during periods of disuse.

 If you operate in a temperate climate (such as is found in much of California), you can use single weight oil all year around. However, if you operate in sub freezing winter temperatures, then switching to a multi-weight oil during the cold weather months could be a good option, and then return to single-weight oil during the remainder of the year. If your A&P tells you that it's bad to switch from one type of oil to another... he may be misinformed. 

 Carl

 radiopicture wrote:

> I have a few remarks about the oil for M-14P topic:

> 

> Lots of good information posted recently. I would add this:

> 

> Certainly, you can't go wrong with Aeroshell W80/100/120 (AD) in the M-14P, unless you're breaking in, which would call for the straight mineral version (no "W").

> 

> Having said that, there are advantages to the Phillips XC 25-60 for radial engines (not to be confused with XC 20-50 for flat engines): It's not an AD type oil, so it can be used during break-in periods, and if you have to change one cylinder, you won't have to switch oil types back and forth. Also, appropriate for a wider temp range, of course. 

> 

> I noted the comments about corrosion protection in-between flights. It was definitely true in the past that multi-weight oils wouldn't cling to engine parts leaving them susceptible to this corrosion. Especially a problem on cam followers in Lycomings. However, modern multi-weight oils have addressed this problem, and have been shown to be even better than straight-weight oils in this respect. The Aeroshell multi-grade oil gets great reviews for flat engines, but it was found that one of the additives gums up the compressor pop-off valve on the M-14P. At any rate, neither that one nor the Phillips 20-50 should be used on radials. This is NOT a problem with the XC 25-60 for radials.

> 

> Another thing that has been mentioned by the Russians is this: The flop tube pivot in the oil tank has a seal that's formed by the oil itself. Of course, there's some leakage, but it's inside the tank, so as long as pressure can be maintained, no problem. In older planes where the pivot might have more wear, apparently the oil pressure can be reduced in some attitudes (prolonged up-lines, mostly). Rick Volker was sticking with the single-weight oil for this reason, but found himself changing a jug when the ambient temps were very changeable. For this reason, he went to the XC for the break-in. He observed no such problem and has now switched to that oil. He flies full-power unlimited aerobatics.

> 

> Regarding over-temping: Nikolay Timofeev reported that in the event of accidental or unpreventable CHT in the red for extended periods, the practice has been to immediately change the oil, which they feel would then be compromised. That fried oil post from a few days ago reminded me of that.

> 

> I would also point out that most of the radial engine shops seem to use and recommend the XC 25-60, including M-14P, Inc.. It seems that most of the vintage radials use it. I have used it in both of my 52s although I don't claim to put it to the test with respect to climate or flying style. Anyway, I wanted to stick up for this oil because it seems to be feature rich with few compromises.

 Read this topic online here:

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348056#348056

radiopicture

Joined: 23 Jun 2008
Posts: 263

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 9:38 am Post subject: Oil and the M-14P

I would put a huge value on people like Jill who see a lot of engines. However, I think the letter she sited was pretty old, and when I investigated it a while back, the multi-grade oils referred to was one of the ones designed for flat engines, which I agree cause big problems (specifically the Aeroshell 15W50 multi-grade). I don't think there are the same problems with the XC 25-60, which is specifically for radial engines. My impression is that most of the issues are centered around the 15-50 Aeroshell. The 20-50 Phillips mentioned (as being OK for break-in on radials) is the special type M which I think is a mineral (non AD) multigrade, and not the commonly available XC 20-50 used in flat engines. No idea about that unusual product. 

On Jul 30, 2011, at 1:07 PM, Brian Lloyd wrote:

[quote]



On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 12:05 AM, CD 2.0 <dbowie2007(at)hotmail.com (dbowie2007(at)hotmail.com)> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   --> Yak-List message posted by: "CD 2.0" <dbowie2007(at)hotmail.com (dbowie2007(at)hotmail.com)>

 

 radio.. good comment.

 

 In my experience, most of the top engine shops, radial and flat engines, recommend that mineral oil Aeroshell 100 (without the W) be utilized for the first 25-50 hours of engine operation or after an overhaul to brake in and later on single grade, ashless dispersant oils such as the Aeroshell w 100 should be utilized for the remainder of the engine’s life.

 	




That is true but have you ever asked why? When I have the answer always seems to be a variation of, "that is the way we have always done it."

It is interesting to ask that question of the oil manufacturers. Since you pay them for the oil anyway, they don't have any reason to recommend one oil over another. OTOH, they test the performance of their oils in various engines and have a surprising amount of information on what their oils do under different circumstances. In fact, they usually have more information than the engine overhaullers do because they do controlled testing whereas the engine overhaullers mostly have only anecdotal evidence. (There may be an overhaul shop that runs A/B testing between oils but I haven't encountered it.) For them, having any engine fail early on is a warrantee issue and they don't really want to gain experience that way. 

 



FWIW, here is Shell's discussion sheet on their Aeroshell oils. They do address the issues of radial engines.

http://www-static.shell.com/static/aviation/downloads/publications/aeroshellbook/aeroshellpeos.pdf

 



Here are the recommendations of Phillips on their oils:

http://www.phillips66aviation.com/lub_matrix.aspx

 



I find it interesting that they recommend their ordinary 20W-50 or 25W-60 for both break-in and normal operation.

 	  Quote: 	
		   I've heard numerous times from top engine shops, how their service history records are much less favorable for engines that have a history of being operated on "synthetic blends or semi-synthetic" oil products and they firmly encourage using Mineral Based (AD) Oils only... single or multi-viscosity as conditions require.

  

 I remember someone, about a year and a half a go, who used Phillips XC 25-60 on a T-6's and said it was a good oil... then changed to Aeroshell w 100 and report it as a good oil as well... however when using the Phillips XC 25-60 it leaked and spit oil more frequently, then after switching back to Aeroshell it considerably reduced the leaking...  	
 



That is not surprising. The higher the viscosity the less of it will flow out through a small opening in a given period of time.

 

 	  Quote: 	
		   Phillips XC 25-60 oil remains thinner and more easily pourable at room temperature than single grade oil even with the latest improvements. Certainly it's a good oil and has its advantages for cold weather starting... but Multi vis oil would not be my preferred choice during periods of disuse as I believe it doesn't provide nearly as good corrosion protection as single grade oils like the Aeroshell w100 does. 	
 



See my comments below on drain-down testing.

 

 	  Quote: 	
		     

 So Which Oil Should we Use?... It all depends on where you fly, and how often.

 

 If your airplane flies at least once a week... or if you operate in a low corrosion environment such as the desert or the mountains... you probably don't have to worry too much about corrosion. This is especially true if the airplane is also hangared. In this case,  multi-weight oil types could be a good choice.

  

 On the other hand, if you are based in a corrosive environment... within 100 miles of the coast, the Gulf, the Great Lakes, or a major metropolitan area with its industrial pollution... and if your airplane sometimes goes for two weeks or more at a time without being flown, internal corrosion should be a major concern. This is especially true if the aircraft is not hangared. If you fall into this category, I would suggest that you use a single weight AD oil such as Aeroshell W 100 to provide the best possible protection against corrosion during periods of disuse.

 	




What you are talking about is a drain-down test. This is something that the oil companies actually perform. The magazine "Light Plane Maintenance" actually did this test in a slightly-less-controlled manner about 25 years ago and reported the results for the various oils. Even the highest-viscosity mineral oils drain down completely after about 24 hours leaving internal parts unprotected. The key to performance in this area is to chemically increase the affinity of the oil to bond with the metal surface, not viscosity. When last I looked at this problem, only the synthetics and semi-synthetics had the necessary additives to increase metal affinity and reduce drain-down for over a week. 

 



But even with that, nothing eliminates drain-down. Assume it is going to happen. The best thing you can do for your engine to eliminate the problem is to run the engine every day. There is no magic bullet you can put in the crankcase that will solve the problem.

 



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 If you operate in a temperate climate (such as is found in much of California), you can use single weight oil all year around. However, if you operate in sub freezing winter temperatures, then switching to a multi-weight oil during the cold weather months could be a good option, and then return to single-weight oil during the remainder of the year. If your A&P tells you that it's bad to switch from one type of oil to another... he may be misinformed.

 	




Also you probably don't even need to switch away from multi-vis oil. Yes, it will get through a tiny hole faster than will straight-weight oil but it provides the same level of lubrication. Personally I feel that a low-cold-viscosity oil is important in the radial engines as it flows through the oil galleys faster when cold ensuring that the bearings receive lubrication more quickly after start-up. Also there is less chance of the oil to congeal in the cooler, thus maintaining oil flow.

 



One other thing to consider that no-one seems to be talking about is the design operating temperature of the oil. The inlet oil temp limits on the Huosai and M14 engines are 80C (as I recall sitting here). Turns out that is the design (normal) operating temperature for most US oils. One of the things that the oil manufacturers tell us is that you want the oil to reach 100C on its way through the engine. The purpose of that is to boil any water that is contained in the oil and get it out the breather. (There is always water in the oil. It comes from condensation from blow-by.) Water left the oil provides a means whereby combustion products can remain and form acid which then slowly attacks the internal parts. Regular operation with the oil reaching 100C ensures that this process is minimized. This is why I feel that the outlet oil temperature indication in the CJ6A is far more useful than the inlet oil temperature indication. I use outlet oil temperature as my indication of choice and then operated the oil cooler door to maintain engine oil outlet temperature above 100C but below 120C. This ensures that the oil is hot enough to remove entrained water but never exceeds its maximum design operating temperature. In my opinion inlet oil temperature is not particularly useful except when there is no other indication and then only as a secondary indication of outlet oil temperature (assuming constant temperature rise going through the engine).

 



Nothing like a good controversial topic in the morning. 



-- 

Brian Lloyd, WB6RQN/J79BPL

3191 Western Dr.

Cameron Park, CA 95682

brian(at)lloyd.com (brian(at)lloyd.com)

 +1.767.617.1365 (Dominica)

+1.916.877.5067 (USA)



   	  Quote: 	
		  



href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List

href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com

href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution



	
[b]

brian(at)lloyd.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 2:18 pm Post subject: Oil and the M-14P

On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Eric Wobschall <eric(at)buffaloskyline.com (eric(at)buffaloskyline.com)> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   I would put a huge value on people like Jill who see a lot of engines. However, I think the letter she sited was pretty old, and when I investigated it a while back, the multi-grade oils referred to was one of the ones designed for flat engines, which I agree cause big problems (specifically the Aeroshell 15W50 multi-grade). I don't think there are the same problems with the XC 25-60, which is specifically for radial engines. My impression is that most of the issues are centered around the 15-50 Aeroshell. The 20-50 Phillips mentioned (as being OK for break-in on radials) is the special type M which I think is a mineral (non AD) multigrade, and not the commonly available XC 20-50 used in flat engines. No idea about that unusual product. 

 	




Did you look at the Phillips and Shell links I forwarded? They are definitely worth reading through. They make specific recommendations for radial engines. 



-- 

 Brian Lloyd, WB6RQN/J79BPL

3191 Western Dr.

Cameron Park, CA 95682

brian(at)lloyd.com (brian(at)lloyd.com)

+1.767.617.1365 (Dominica)

+1.916.877.5067 (USA)



  [quote][b]

radiopicture

Joined: 23 Jun 2008
Posts: 263

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 2:24 pm Post subject: Oil and the M-14P

Yes, and they make sense.

On Jul 30, 2011, at 6:15 PM, Brian Lloyd wrote:

[quote]



On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Eric Wobschall <eric(at)buffaloskyline.com (eric(at)buffaloskyline.com)> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   I would put a huge value on people like Jill who see a lot of engines. However, I think the letter she sited was pretty old, and when I investigated it a while back, the multi-grade oils referred to was one of the ones designed for flat engines, which I agree cause big problems (specifically the Aeroshell 15W50 multi-grade). I don't think there are the same problems with the XC 25-60, which is specifically for radial engines. My impression is that most of the issues are centered around the 15-50 Aeroshell. The 20-50 Phillips mentioned (as being OK for break-in on radials) is the special type M which I think is a mineral (non AD) multigrade, and not the commonly available XC 20-50 used in flat engines. No idea about that unusual product. 

 	




Did you look at the Phillips and Shell links I forwarded? They are definitely worth reading through. They make specific recommendations for radial engines. 



-- 

 Brian Lloyd, WB6RQN/J79BPL

3191 Western Dr.

Cameron Park, CA 95682

brian(at)lloyd.com (brian(at)lloyd.com)

+1.767.617.1365 (Dominica)

+1.916.877.5067 (USA)



   	  Quote: 	
		  

	
[b]

CD 2.0

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Posts: 43

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 8:26 pm Post subject: Re: Oil and the M-14P

Warren, 



CamGuard exceptional performance, beats the pants off any premium oils for corrosion protection and anti-wear properties... 



Lots of owners are complaining about corrosion problems in engines. Part of this is because of reduced flight activity due to higher fuel prices and economic uncertainties.  CamGuard isnâ€™t a slam dunk solution to corrosion problems, but itâ€™s the best solution out there because it provides "marginally and measurably" better corrosion and anti-wear resistance than any oil out there.



Multi-weight versus mono-grades with CamGuard... in desert climates like AZ as well as temperate areas like California, the airplane won't see wide swings in temperature. Although corrosion is less of a problem in these areas and you could go with a multi-grade per se, I would stick with the Aeroshell W120 + the CamGuard. At lower temperatures, multi-grade offers definite advantages by reducing the strain on the pneumatic starter and battery and delivering oil pressure sooner... it's better to have full oil pressure and parts bathed in oil sooner rather than later... so during the coolest times of the year, you may opt to switch to multi-grade and of course keeping adding CamGuard. 



And how about specific "multi-grade" oil brands to use with CamGuard?.... you're looking for very small differences between similar oil products.  No one can produce convincing field data that one oil is hands down a better choice than another... but Phillips XC is a good choice to go with CamGuard because XC is a simple mineral-based oil with anti-oxidative and anti-foam additives that responds well to CamGuard.



Single grade Aeroshell W100/120 + CamGuard for temperate climates, without subfreezing temperatures, and multi-grade oil like Phillips XC 25W-60 + CamGuard for the coolest parts of the year. 

 

Of course the use of the Phillips XC, should be conditioned with the new findings from Jill (M14p engines shop in AZ) on M-14 engines that used this oil type.  Jill also mentioned that Phillips XC 25W-60 when used with CamGuard do not seem to be encountering the stuck valve problem.



Carl

 	  k7wx wrote: 	
		  Carl,



Great post!



I wonder if you, or others with insights into this have any thoughts about using CamGuard with either straight weight or multi-viscosity oils for the M-14P. I have heard anecdotally that for those engines in which CamGuard has been used look better when inspected during an overhaul. 



Another simple question. I'm breaking in a zero-time M-14P. At about 20 hours, oil temps began to come down and oil consumption leveled off. What would you consider a reasonable endpoint for the break-in period before switching from AeroShell 100 mineral oil to AeroShell 120 AD? Oil temp? Oil consumption? Minimal number of hours?



Warren Hill

N464TW

Last edited by CD 2.0 on Sat Jul 30, 2011 11:01 pm; edited 1 time in total

CD 2.0

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Posts: 43

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 10:58 pm Post subject: Re: Oil and the M-14P

from 25-50 hours for the break in process... the sooner the better.  The reason is because the new friction will produce wear metal particles during the break-in process and they tend to cause deposits to form in the engine. 



If straight mineral oils are used for more than 50 hours, then although the oil tends to appear relatively clean... the carbon and other particulates will deposit inside the engine on casings etc. This is not too much of a problem unless you later encourage these deposits to loosen by switching to "W" ashless dispersant oils, which contain an additive that is designed to keep particles separated so that they do not congregate to form a large mass.  Changing onto an ashless dispersant oil after a significant build up of this deposit has occurred can cause this to happen. The dispersant additive can act like a detergent and clean out the inside of the engine. This results in an abnormally high level of filter deposits after the period of change over.



The oil and filter should be changed within the first 10 hours operation after overhaul and be careful with engine cooling as the increased friction from the wear process will increase the cylinder wall and piston temperatures and so particular attention should be given to providing adequate engine cooling.



Maintain 65% - 75% power for all cruise operations during the break-in period and avoid long, low power descents.



Ground running should be kept to a minimum, particularly during hot weather. During break-in, it would be better to delay departure than to sit at the end of the runway for 15 minutes or so running in high ambient temperatures.



A good way to know if the engine is broken in is by oil consumption. The consumption is quite high initially, will reduce rapidly and then plateau at a certain value.  The amount of consumption is not as important... an indication of stabilization is more the key. Too high an oil consumption indicates that the engine has not broken in yet.  Remember to check your oil level frequently and top up with only the correct oil during the break-in period and observe the oil change periods. 



One reason that radial engine overhaul shops like Precision Engines recommend around 50 hours for break-in is because there is less risk in carrying on with a straight oil for more hours if youâ€™re unsure whether or not the break-in is complete, than there is from having the cylinders glaze from changing to an ashless dispersant oil too early.



Carl

 	  k7wx wrote: 	
		  Carl,



Great post!



I wonder if you, or others with insights into this have any thoughts about using CamGuard with either straight weight or multi-viscosity oils for the M-14P. I have heard anecdotally that for those engines in which CamGuard has been used look better when inspected during an overhaul. 



Another simple question. I'm breaking in a zero-time M-14P. At about 20 hours, oil temps began to come down and oil consumption leveled off. What would you consider a reasonable endpoint for the break-in period before switching from AeroShell 100 mineral oil to AeroShell 120 AD? Oil temp? Oil consumption? Minimal number of hours?



Warren Hill

N464TW

k7wx

Joined: 24 May 2010
Posts: 117

Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 5:52 am Post subject: Oil and the M-14P

Carl,

Many thanks. Much appreciated. Will stay with the AeroShell straight weight + CamGuard during our Arizona hot months and will consider Phillips XC 25W-60 + CamGuard from December through March. I also have a pre-heater on the CJ oil tank so that on those days here in central AZ when the temps are cool, the oil has the best chance of flowing properly at engine start. 

Jill continues to be a tremendous resource for all of us. 

Warren

On Jul 30, 2011, at 9:27 PM, CD 2.0 wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

 Warren, 

 CamGuard exceptional performance, beats the pants off any premium oils for corrosion protection and anti-wear properties... 

 Lots of owners are complaining about corrosion problems in engines. Part of this is because of reduced flight activity due to higher fuel prices and economic uncertainties.  CamGuard isnâ€™t a slam dunk solution to corrosion problems, but itâ€™s the best solution out there because it provides "marginally and measurably" better corrosion and anti-wear resistance than any oil out there.

 Multi-weight versus mono-grades with CamGuard... in desert climates like AZ as well as temperate areas like California, the airplane won't see wide swings in temperature. Although corrosion is less of a problem in these areas and you could go with a multi-grade per se, I would stick with the Aeroshell W100 + the CamGuard. At lower temperatures, multi-grade offers definite advantages by reducing the strain on the pneumatic starter and battery and delivering oil pressure sooner... it's better to have full oil pressure and parts bathed in oil sooner rather than later... so during the coolest times of the year, you may opt to switch to multi-grade and of course keeping adding CamGuard. 

 And how about specific "multi-grade" oil brands to use with CamGuard?.... you're looking for very small differences between similar oil products.  No one can produce convincing field data that one oil is hands down a better choice than another... but Phillips XC is a good choice to go with CamGuard because XC is a simple mineral-based oil with anti-oxidative and anti-foam additives that responds well to CamGuard.

 So I would stick to single grade Aeroshell W100 + CamGuard for temperate climates, without subfreezing temperatures, and multi-grade oil like Phillips XC 25W-60 + CamGuard for the coolest parts of the year. 

 Of course the use of the Phillips XC, should be conditioned with the new findings from Jill (M14p engines shop in AZ) on M-14 engines that used this oil type.  Jill also mentioned that Phillips XC 25W-60 when used with CamGuard do not seem to be encountering the stuck valve problem.

 Carl

 k7wx wrote:

> Carl,

> 

> Great post!

> 

> I wonder if you, or others with insights into this have any thoughts about using CamGuard with either straight weight or multi-viscosity oils for the M-14P. I have heard anecdotally that for those engines in which CamGuard has been used look better when inspected during an overhaul. 

> 

> Another simple question. I'm breaking in a zero-time M-14P. At about 20 hours, oil temps began to come down and oil consumption leveled off. What would you consider a reasonable endpoint for the break-in period before switching from AeroShell 100 mineral oil to AeroShell 120 AD? Oil temp? Oil consumption? Minimal number of hours?

> 

> Warren Hill

> N464TW

> 

> 

 Read this topic online here:

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348113#348113

KingCJ6(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:33 am Post subject: Oil and the M-14P

Warren - so are you talking lows of 75F?

 Dave

 those days here in central AZ when the temps are cool...

  In a message dated 7/31/2011 6:52:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  k7wx(at)earthlink.net writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  -->    Yak-List message posted by: Warren Hill    <k7wx(at)earthlink.net>

Carl,

Many thanks. Much appreciated.    Will stay with the AeroShell straight weight + CamGuard during our Arizona hot    months and will consider Phillips XC 25W-60 + CamGuard from December through    March. I also have a pre-heater on the CJ oil tank so that on those days here    in central AZ when the temps are cool, the oil has the best chance of flowing    properly at engine start. 

Jill continues to be a tremendous resource    for all of us. 

Warren

On Jul 30, 2011, at 9:27 PM, CD 2.0    wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   --> Yak-List message posted by: "CD 2.0"    <dbowie2007(at)hotmail.com>

 Warren, 

    CamGuard exceptional performance, beats the pants off any premium oils for    corrosion protection and anti-wear properties... 

 Lots of    owners are complaining about corrosion problems in engines. Part of this is    because of reduced flight activity due to higher fuel prices and economic    uncertainties.  CamGuard isnt a slam dunk solution to corrosion problems,    but its the best solution out there because it provides "marginally and    measurably" better corrosion and anti-wear resistance than any oil out    there.

 Multi-weight versus mono-grades with CamGuard... in    desert climates like AZ as well as temperate areas like California, the    airplane won't see wide swings in temperature. Although corrosion is less of a    problem in these areas and you could go with a multi-grade per se, I would    stick with the Aeroshell W100 + the CamGuard. At lower temperatures,    multi-grade offers definite advantages by reducing the strain on the pneumatic    starter and battery and delivering oil pressure sooner... it's better to have    full oil pressure and parts bathed in oil sooner rather than later... so    during the coolest times of the year, you may opt to switch to multi-grade and    of course keeping adding CamGuard. 

 And how about specific    "multi-grade" oil brands to use with CamGuard?.... you're looking for very    small differences between similar oil products.  No one can produce    convincing field data that one oil is hands down a better choice than    another... but Phillips XC is a good choice to go with CamGuard because XC is    a simple mineral-based oil with anti-oxidative and anti-foam additives that    responds well to CamGuard.

 So I would stick to single grade    Aeroshell W100 + CamGuard for temperate climates, without subfreezing    temperatures, and multi-grade oil like Phillips XC 25W-60 + CamGuard for the    coolest parts of the year. 

 Of course the use of the Phillips    XC, should be conditioned with the new findings from Jill (M14p engines shop    in AZ) on M-14 engines that used this oil type.  Jill also mentioned that    Phillips XC 25W-60 when used with CamGuard do not seem to be encountering the    stuck valve problem.

 Carl

 k7wx    wrote:

> Carl,

> 

> Great post!

>    

> I wonder if you, or others with insights into this have any    thoughts about using CamGuard with either straight weight or multi-viscosity    oils for the M-14P. I have heard anecdotally that for those engines in which    CamGuard has been used look better when inspected during an overhaul.    

> 

> Another simple question. I'm breaking in a zero-time    M-14P. At about 20 hours, oil temps began to come down and oil consumption    leveled off. What would you consider a reasonable endpoint for the break-in    period before switching from AeroShell 100 mineral oil to AeroShell 120 AD?    Oil temp? Oil consumption? Minimal number of hours?

> 

>    Warren Hill

> N464TW

> 

> 

 Read this topic online here:

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348113#348113

  ========================e  ties  Day  ================================================               - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS  ================================================             - List Contribution Web Site  sp;                             ===================================================

  [quote][b]

radiopicture

Joined: 23 Jun 2008
Posts: 263

Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:34 am Post subject: Re: Oil and the M-14P

I realize that the "W" before the Aeroshell grades means it's an AD oil, but apparently, that's not what it means in the general oil parlance. Note that the 'M" version of  the Phillips (which is definitely a mineral oil) still refers to the grade as 20W50. Now, I'm not saying the XC 20W65 isn't AD, just that the "W" isn't indicative of that. To be honest, I always thought it just meant "weight" when generally used, and that Aeroshell decided to confuse things. However, here's what the Phillips FAQ section says: 



W (e.g. 20W-50):

Grade numbers followed by the letter "W" (i.e. 5W-, 10W-, etc.) identify oils suitable for winter service. Viscosities for those oils are determined at various cold temperatures on a laboratory Cold Cranking Simulator (CCS) and Mini Rotary Viscometer (MRV). Numbers without the W (i.e. 50, 60, etc.) identify oils which are tested at high temperature only. (See also "Multiviscosity")

k7wx

Joined: 24 May 2010
Posts: 117

Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:49 am Post subject: Oil and the M-14P

Hello Dave,

From November through March, the average high temps here in the Phoenix area are between 65 F and 75 F. During that time we may have a few days well below freezing. However, in the mornings when we fly it's often in the low 40s. Enough to need an oil heater. 

I know, compared to the rest of the country, these would be warm spring days!

Warren

On Jul 31, 2011, at 7:30 AM, KingCJ6(at)aol.com (KingCJ6(at)aol.com) wrote:

[quote]      Warren - so are you talking lows of 75F?

 Dave

 those days here in central AZ when the temps are cool...

  In a message dated 7/31/2011 6:52:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  k7wx(at)earthlink.net (k7wx(at)earthlink.net) writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  -->    Yak-List message posted by: Warren Hill    <k7wx(at)earthlink.net (k7wx(at)earthlink.net)>

Carl,

Many thanks. Much appreciated.    Will stay with the AeroShell straight weight + CamGuard during our Arizona hot    months and will consider Phillips XC 25W-60 + CamGuard from December through    March. I also have a pre-heater on the CJ oil tank so that on those days here    in central AZ when the temps are cool, the oil has the best chance of flowing    properly at engine start. 

Jill continues to be a tremendous resource    for all of us. 

Warren

On Jul 30, 2011, at 9:27 PM, CD 2.0    wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   --> Yak-List message posted by: "CD 2.0"    <dbowie2007(at)hotmail.com (dbowie2007(at)hotmail.com)>

 Warren, 

    CamGuard exceptional performance, beats the pants off any premium oils for    corrosion protection and anti-wear properties... 

 Lots of    owners are complaining about corrosion problems in engines. Part of this is    because of reduced flight activity due to higher fuel prices and economic    uncertainties.  CamGuard isnt a slam dunk solution to corrosion problems,    but its the best solution out there because it provides "marginally and    measurably" better corrosion and anti-wear resistance than any oil out    there.

 Multi-weight versus mono-grades with CamGuard... in    desert climates like AZ as well as temperate areas like California, the    airplane won't see wide swings in temperature. Although corrosion is less of a    problem in these areas and you could go with a multi-grade per se, I would    stick with the Aeroshell W100 + the CamGuard. At lower temperatures,    multi-grade offers definite advantages by reducing the strain on the pneumatic    starter and battery and delivering oil pressure sooner... it's better to have    full oil pressure and parts bathed in oil sooner rather than later... so    during the coolest times of the year, you may opt to switch to multi-grade and    of course keeping adding CamGuard. 

 And how about specific    "multi-grade" oil brands to use with CamGuard?.... you're looking for very    small differences between similar oil products.  No one can produce    convincing field data that one oil is hands down a better choice than    another... but Phillips XC is a good choice to go with CamGuard because XC is    a simple mineral-based oil with anti-oxidative and anti-foam additives that    responds well to CamGuard.

 So I would stick to single grade    Aeroshell W100 + CamGuard for temperate climates, without subfreezing    temperatures, and multi-grade oil like Phillips XC 25W-60 + CamGuard for the    coolest parts of the year. 

 Of course the use of the Phillips    XC, should be conditioned with the new findings from Jill (M14p engines shop    in AZ) on M-14 engines that used this oil type.  Jill also mentioned that    Phillips XC 25W-60 when used with CamGuard do not seem to be encountering the    stuck valve problem.

 Carl

 k7wx    wrote:

> Carl,

> 

> Great post!

>    

> I wonder if you, or others with insights into this have any    thoughts about using CamGuard with either straight weight or multi-viscosity    oils for the M-14P. I have heard anecdotally that for those engines in which    CamGuard has been used look better when inspected during an overhaul.    

> 

> Another simple question. I'm breaking in a zero-time    M-14P. At about 20 hours, oil temps began to come down and oil consumption    leveled off. What would you consider a reasonable endpoint for the break-in    period before switching from AeroShell 100 mineral oil to AeroShell 120 AD?    Oil temp? Oil consumption? Minimal number of hours?

> 

>    Warren Hill

> N464TW

> 

> 

 Read this topic online here:

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348113#348113

  ========================e  ties  Day  ================================================               - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS  ================================================             - List Contribution Web Site  sp;                             ===================================================

   	  Quote: 	

[b]

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum