what is this??

jrenwick · Post by **jrenwick** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:03 am

As noted in the Spruce catalog, "Decalin is not approved for use in the engines of certified aircraft." Too bad.

John

cessna170bdriver · Post by **cessna170bdriver** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 3:28 pm

N9149A wrote:Gar you've got 275 days till the Benton Harbor.St Joseph, MI Convention. Thats 6,600 hours or 396,000 minutes or 23,760,000 seconds. Should be plenty of time to get the "other problems" and "stuff" taken care off and have "the Queen" at the convention.

Unless the convention next year has been rescheduled for May 18, he has 336 days from Aug. 16. (Date math in Excel)

Miles

Post by **GAHorn** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 8:16 pm

jrenwick wrote:As noted in the Spruce catalog, "Decalin is not approved for use in the engines of certified aircraft." Too bad.

John

Neither is MMO. Nor is common compressed air instead of nitrogen for the tires. I don't know of any windshield cleaners that have FAA approval for aircraft. And ham sandwiches have no approval either but that didn't bother Lindbergh. <<<

devil's advocate

Not only is Decalin less expensive, it also is twice as concentrated as Alcor TCP and therefore requires half-as-much per gallon of 100LL. And it's safe to carry in the cockpit. And it's available on a dependable basis. I'll admit a certain curiosity about the exact nature of it's carrier-agent. The mfr'r assures me it is NOT alcohol and has no ill affects on engines or fuel systems.

hilltop170 · Post by **hilltop170** » Wed Aug 19, 2009 7:11 pm

Maybe someone can come up with 8.5:1 compression ratio pistons for the C-145/O-300 which would need 100LL (and hopefully not blow the jugs off the engine). Then we wouldn't need snake oil in the gas.

lowNslow · Post by **lowNslow** » Wed Aug 19, 2009 7:39 pm

hilltop170 wrote:Maybe someone can come up with 8.5:1 compression ratio pistons for the C-145/O-300 which would need 100LL (and hopefully not blow the jugs off the engine). Then we wouldn't need snake oil in the gas.

They are available, just not legal. (these are actually 9:1)
http://www.nfspistons.com/productcart/p ... product=51

markeg1964 · Post by **markeg1964** » Wed Aug 19, 2009 7:44 pm

I have a polished 170A and use Extreme Simple Green to clean my stains. It also works well to clean the oily belly. It is inexpensive when purchase by the gallon and mixed.

hilltop170 · Post by **hilltop170** » Wed Aug 19, 2009 8:03 pm

lowNslow wrote:
hilltop170 wrote:Maybe someone can come up with 8.5:1 compression ratio pistons for the C-145/O-300 which would need 100LL (and hopefully not blow the jugs off the engine). Then we wouldn't need snake oil in the gas.
They are available, just not legal. (these are actually 9:1)
http://www.nfspistons.com/productcart/p ... product=51

There you go--- What's the difference between using illegal snake oil or illegal pistons?

Does anyone have any actual experience with these pistons? Do they reduce the dependability of the engine or is it robust enough to take it? I've seen air racers doing unbelievable things to O-200 engines but have no idea what that does to engine life.

If the engine can take it, I think I would rather do one mod (ie. high compression pistons) and be done with it than pour snake oil into the gas at every fill-up. And a little more pep in the engine would not hurt either on a hot day.

cessna170bdriver · Post by **cessna170bdriver** » Wed Aug 19, 2009 9:12 pm

hilltop170 wrote:Maybe someone can come up with 8.5:1 compression ratio pistons for the C-145/O-300 which would need 100LL (and hopefully not blow the jugs off the engine). Then we wouldn't need snake oil in the gas.

I find myself squarely in the minority on this, but other than a dropped valve 4 years ago (most likely due to plain old age), I haven't had any cylinder problems (stuck valves and rings, and fouled plugs) since I QUIT using snake oil about a thousand hours ago. Agressive leaning seems to have done the trick.

Miles

Post by **Bruce Fenstermacher** » Wed Aug 19, 2009 9:42 pm

cessna170bdriver wrote:Unless the convention next year has been rescheduled for May 18, he has 336 days from Aug. 16. (Date math in Excel)

Miles

You should have realized by how precise I was being that I was giving Gar an early target figuring it would slip a bit.

Actually I did that in Excel. I wonder what I did wrong. Probably garbage in garbage out.

W.J.Langholz · Post by **W.J.Langholz** » Wed Aug 19, 2009 11:06 pm

Miles

In case you didn't know......nothing "bad" ever happens to guys with pocket protectors

W.

Brad Brady · Post by **Brad Brady** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 1:05 am

cessna170bdriver wrote: I find myself squarely in the minority on this, but other than a dropped valve 4 years ago (most likely due to plain old age), I haven't had any cylinder problems (stuck valves and rings, and fouled plugs) since I QUIT using snake oil about a thousand hours ago. Agressive leaning seems to have done the trick.

Miles

Miles,
Your not the only one that has found that AGRESSIVE leaning is needed....I wonder if most people understand the term AGRESSIVE.....It's what is needed. Also I CHECK carb heat on down wind....Turn it off....and if I think that it might be needed check it again on base and final....I don't keep it on.....It's just enriching the mixture at slow engine speeds and fowling the valves and plugs...Brad

cessna170bdriver · Post by **cessna170bdriver** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:19 am

W.J.Langholz wrote:Miles

In case you didn't know......nothing "bad" ever happens to guys with pocket protectors

W.

I'll keep that in mind, Willie! I guess I didn't have one with me the day she dropped that valve.

Miles

hilltop170 · Post by **hilltop170** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 7:58 pm

I agree with Miles and Brad, agressive leaning and mixture management probably keep most problems at bay. The new ECI cylinders with valve rotators don't hurt either. I have not used anything in the gas in the 100+ hours since overhaul and have not had any problems yet. I lean aggresively. I like the carb heat idea also.

W.J.Langholz · Post by **W.J.Langholz** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 2:52 am

Can you qualify your statement by stating what alt. you are at when you aggressive lean, along with what rpm you are at.

Never did believe in pulling out the carb heat and leaving it out. I 've done it because I've always wanted the extra power for a go around if needed but it does makes sense not to for your stated reason also.

W.

Brad Brady · Post by **Brad Brady** » Fri Aug 21, 2009 4:31 am

W.J.Langholz wrote:Can you qualify your statement by stating what alt. you are at when you aggressive lean, along with what rpm you are at.

Never did believe in pulling out the carb heat and leaving it out. I 've done it because I've always wanted the extra power for a go around if needed but it does makes sense not to for your stated reason also.

W.

W,
Depending on density altitude, you may want to start leaning on the ground (what ever gives you the best RPM) As for a go-around that is the second reason I CHECK carb heat......You should use a check list for everything.......But you don't have time to read any thing on a go-around (everything should be committed to memory) Not having to remember to cut carb heat is just another plus (because it's in the for front of your mind).....But you should run that in your memory on a go-around anyway........Brad

The International Cessna^® 170 Association

what is this??

Re: what is this??

Re: what is this??

Re: what is this??

Re: what is this??

Re: what is this??

Re: what is this??

Re: what is this??

Re: what is this??

Re: what is this??

Re: what is this??

Re: what is this??

Re: what is this??

Re: what is this??

Re: what is this??

Re: what is this??