O 300C value?

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

Regarding the 337 form. It says an O-300-A was removed from N7408A and this O-300-C was installed. Bruce also found that an O-300-C with this serial number was removed from N7681X.

After making my initial statement, a day or so later I went back to confirm what I thought I saw in the N7681X data base. Rereading each document I realized there was no evidence that the original engine, presumed to be a C model as that is what a 172B was delivered with. had never been removed nor major alteration or rebuild done to it. Until the engine was removed for a Franklin conversion. None of the documents actually detail any engine by model or serial that was ever installed in N7681X. I corrected my initial statement in a post to Lhorn's inquiry how I determined it was a C model.

At this point, unless we can come up with casting numbers to cross reference with part numbers to determine what case halves where used to build this engine, or miraculously find all the logs from N7681X a deregistered airplane, there appears to be no concrete evidence what model this engine was or now is.

I think baring new evidence we've beat this horse so bad we can't tell it's a horse anymore.

[GAHorn]

It’s a pig…. in a poke…

[Lhorn]

I am pretty sure crank shafts have their own SN's. On hold at Continental now. Hopefully I can get some satisfaction out of them...

[Lhorn]

Okay, off the phone with Continental, and they say it left their factory as a C model, and according to the gentleman I spoke to they "have serial numbers going back to the beginning of time." I made mention of how much spray has been going on about their record keeping, and he grumbled "armchair warriors think they know more than we forgot." He sent me the info's page on how to get the tag corrected. So there we are. How it ever got an A stamp on the tag, he could not theorize. I sent him a photo of the tag, and waiting for a reply...

[GAHorn]

Okay, off the phone with Continental, and they say it left their factory as a C model, and according to the gentleman I spoke to they "have serial numbers going back to the beginning of time." I made mention of how much spray has been going on about their record keeping, and he grumbled "armchair warriors think they know more than we forgot." He sent me the info's page on how to get the tag corrected. So there we are. How it ever got an A stamp on the tag, he could not theorize. I sent him a photo of the tag, and waiting for a reply...

Yeah… Well HERE’s what THEY forgot …. the fact of how a datatag they supply is SUPPOSED to reflect the Identity of the Engine!

Give him a link to this thread and ask him to “clarify matters” for us armchair guys, please.

(and remind him that “armchair” guys are the CUSTOMERS who keep people like Him employed.)

Who did you talk to, if you don’t mind sharing.

[Lhorn]

I probably shouldn't name names, he was a friendly and helpful guy. It wasn't a hostile comment, more of a haha friendly jest. I emailed him a photo of the data tag, and the conversation is ongoing. We'll see what turns up, but with 100% certainty, he said this engine left their factory as an O-300-C4 engine. He did theorize the aircraft it was installed on may have changed the tag to fit their type certification, but it was a shoot from the hip idea. He also sent me a screen shot of their files, but with a legal binder at the bottom of the email saying anything shared was confidential and bla bla bla.

[GAHorn]

I probably shouldn't name names, he was a friendly and helpful guy. It wasn't a hostile comment, more of a haha friendly jest. I emailed him a photo of the data tag, and the conversation is ongoing. We'll see what turns up, but with 100% certainty, he said this engine left their factory as an O-300-C4 engine. He did theorize the aircraft it was installed on may have changed the tag to fit their type certification, but it was a shoot from the hip idea. He also sent me a screen shot of their files, but with a legal binder at the bottom of the email saying anything shared was confidential and bla bla bla.

From this information, I cannot respect the comments attributed to him. Those comments indicate HE is willing to “throw under the bus” someone else…. rather than take responsibility for Them possibly issuing an incorrect datatag. (I.E. they should be willing to admit they make mistakes…that This might be one…and offer to Correct the error….or At Least Assist the owner to achieve the correct result.)

The “aircraft it was installed on…” did not do this. A PERSON did this…if they “may have changed the tag to fit their type certificaiton”…which is a Blatant Accusation of someone else as being Dishonest…. If intentional, That’s a despicable accusation for a factory representative to make, IMO. …especially over a “legal binder” designed to keep the information TCM provides private in order to protect themselves. (I doubt TCM intended that disclaimer to protect an employee who accuses others of dishonesty or who misrepresents factual matters. It is most likely intended to protect proprietary engineering to technical data.)

I invite you to share this person’s contact info with me in a PM or email. I will attempt to explain Why this matter is important…. and not attempt any harm to the topic Or to anyone… I only wish to discuss this problem with him/her directly.

[DaveF]

I only wish to discuss this problem with him/her directly.

To what end? What if you're successful at convincing them that you're right? Then LHorn is screwed, but hey, George is right!

Sorry, but this isn't your business, it's between LHorn and Continental. If they say the engine is a C, then by definition it's a C, and that's the legal truth. You should let this go.

[GAHorn]

I only wish to discuss this problem with him/her directly.

To what end? What if you're successful at convincing them that you're right? Then LHorn is screwed, but hey, George is right!

Sorry, but this isn't your business, it's between LHorn and Continental. If they say the engine is a C, then by definition it's a C, and that's the legal truth. You should let this go.

So he can convince me I’m wrong, if that’s the case. However, the fact remains that engine has an”A” datatag..which by TCM’s claim is wrong…
And instead of blaming someone else for incorrect or illegal actions….
“To shat end?”….. TCM should offer a route to correcting the error.
However, if TCM is wrong…(because someone there doesn’t understand the difference between “Model” and “Serial”…then they should be directed toward correcting their comments to the public….. to whom TCM has a serious responsibility and obligation.

It’s actually not between Lhorn and TCM. It’s between them And FAA and us, the public……. (unless You are “OK” with false documentation on aircraft equipment.)

Furthermore, there’s nothing I can …. (or would) …. do to jeopardize Lhorn’s position in this. It’s his engine to do as he wishes with it regardless of whatever incorrect actions TCM or I might take.

(Besides, it’s up to Lhorn if he wishes to share the contact or not, but it wouldn’t be difficult to find the person regardless. It’s not like I …or anyone else … such as a potential buyer…. it’s not like the same TCM person wouldn’t be drawn into conversation should anyone-at-all call there to discuss This particular engine.)

The Only outcome of this which Can occur is to Lhorn’s benefit.

[n2582d]

I think baring new evidence we've beat this horse so bad we can't tell it's a horse anymore.

I quite agree! But before you lock this thread and send this burger le cheval to France a couple of random observations as I come out of this rabbit hole.

1). This problem of proper documentation on our engines - especially when alterations are made - is at least as old as the C-170. Here’s a screenshot from the 1947 Continental Service Bulletin M47-16:

IMG_1741.jpeg

ContSB.M47-16.12-30-47rev9-25-68.pdf

A bit of understatement in that last sentence! This bulletin has been revised a couple of times since 1947, the last I find is in 1968. The same subject is picked up in M75-6:

1. Continental Engine Model Change M75-6R1 2.pdf

A PowerPoint slide in the Continental Factory Training Manual almost oozes with their frustration,

-Specification Numbers designate studding configuration, installed accessories, ship loose kit items.
-Engine serial number is tied to original engine specification number. Field overhaul shops often change engine specification, but rarely change specification number or make notation in log book.

2). I’d like to make a “Rosetta Stone” of the C-145/O-300 data plate like I did for the carb but haven’t found any Continental data to help decipher spec numbers.
3). Searching this website as well as a Google search for images of C-145 and O-300 dataplates seems to verify that the third suffix after the serial number matches the model variant of the engine. I.e. a C-145-2 will have a 2 as the third suffix and an O-300B will have a B for the third suffix. On some dataplates I see a “-R” following this third suffix. My guess is that signifies a rebuilt engine but I really don’t know.
4). SIL05-3A covered the topic of engine specification numbers. This has been incorporated into the M-0 manual and doesn’t seem to apply to our engines. For example, the third suffix, the B in TD300B1B indicates this engine was shipped in a wood crate.
5). Miles is unsure whether his dataplate is original here. My guess is that it is unless his dad attached a plate from another engine — highly unlikely. I think it’s original because there is a circular stamp on the right wing. My guess — a final inspector’s stamp. I doubt you’ll find that on a new dataplate which was installed after the engine left the factory.

IMG_1742.jpeg

[cessna170bdriver]

…

5). Miles is unsure whether his dataplate is original here. My guess is that it is unless his dad attached a plate from another engine — highly unlikely. I think it’s original because there is a circular stamp on the right wing. My guess — a final inspector’s stamp. I doubt you’ll find that on a new dataplate which was installed after the engine left the factory.IMG_1742.jpeg

A touch off topic, but to clarify: In that post, I said wasn’t 100% sure the tag is original. I only said it that way because the engine and airplane are around a year older than I am, and I didn’t know of either’s existence until they’d been around just short of 28 years, so I can’t 100% vouch for the tag’s originality. I have no reason to believe that the tag isn’t original. The model and serial number match both the original engine and airframe logbooks.

One other point a bit more off topic: This is not the first time someone implied that they thought my Dad once owned ‘98C. He didn’t. He did witness the previous owner put a for sale sign in the window, and let me know about it and performed a cursory prebuy inspection, but I bought her directly from the man who’d owned her around 2-1/2 decades. (A somewhat eerie coincidence: The original owner, Urban J Horst, is buried at Jefferson Barracks National Cemetery in Saint Louis, just 20 miles as the crow flies from Creve Coeur airport where’98C nearly met her end.)

[Lhorn]

I wrote the local FSDO and am waiting for a reply. Hopefully this is an easy one, and I can get the data tag replaced with c'est pas grave, since were resorting to French

[n2582d]

Sorry Miles, I don’t know why I assumed your dad previously owned your plane. I guess the fact that he was a pilot somehow in my mind morphed over the years to him having owned your 170. Your data plate is in remarkably nice condition. Often we see plates with only the stamped numbers remaining on a bare sheet of aluminum. Yours has all the numbers etched except for the “quote engine no.” line and venturi size. Do you think it originally had the etched areas painted black and red like this one from Fresno Air Parts? Any idea what the P.C. line (under the compression ratio line) means? Edit: A little research indicates it is a Production Certificate number. One source said Continental was the seventh engine manufacturer to have a production certificate.

IMG_1744.jpeg

[cessna170bdriver]

No problem Gary, like I said that wasn’t the first time someone thought my Dad owned the ‘98C before me. I’m guessing a lot of people think no sane person would have gone to that much trouble and expense to resurrect an airplane that far gone unless it was a family heirloom (they might be right about the sane part ).

I really don’t recall exactly what the tag looked like before Creve Coeur, but I don’t remember it looking that good; Mena Aircraft Engines may have polished it up some during their tear down inspection and reassembly. I don’t remember it ever having the red and black colors, but the logs show an overhaul quite a while before I bought it, so the colors could have disappeared then.

As far as the P.C., an internet search found a “Small continental engines” Facebook group that says it’s an FAA Production Certificate number. Makes sense to me but I wouldn’t take it to the bank without more research.