
Light Weight Starters
Moderators: GAHorn, Karl Towle, Bruce Fenstermacher
- lowNslow
- Posts: 1535
- Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 4:20 pm
Re: Light Weight Starters
It doesn't. For that matter you could remove the starter and just hand-prop the engine.170C wrote:But one thing I keep hearing is "they spin the engine faster". Provided you have a good Delco-Remy starter, a decent battery and the fuel/air mixture is where it needs to be, what difference does it make how fast the starter spins the engineInquiring minds want to know

Karl
'53 170B N3158B SN:25400
ASW-20BL
'53 170B N3158B SN:25400
ASW-20BL
-
- Posts: 652
- Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 12:33 am
Just for info. - I have sent my Skytech lightweight starter back to the manufacturer for warranty repair or replacement. This is the third time I have had to return the starter to Skytech - within 18 months. In the past Skytech has been very responsive and quick to replace the starter. This last time was different. Skytech is suggesting that the engine kicked back and destroyed the starter. The Skytech is advertised as "reliable and durable". I explained to Skytech that I have not experienced a kick back and my timing is correct. Skytech suggested that the kick back might have been so slight that I did not realize it. I asked if the kick back was so slight that I did not realize it and destroyed the starter - then how can the starter be described reliable and durable. The Skytech representative I had the discussion with agreed to repair and return the starter at no cost - until he can discuss it with the manager when he returns from Sun-N-Fun. I'll let you know what the outcome is and how long the replacement starter lasts.
- lowNslow
- Posts: 1535
- Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 4:20 pm
Robert, I picked up this quote from a Grumman Tiger discussion group while doing a search -Robert Eilers wrote:Just for info. - I have sent my Skytech lightweight starter back to the manufacturer for warranty repair or replacement. This is the third time I have had to return the starter to Skytech - within 18 months. In the past Skytech has been very responsive and quick to replace the starter. This last time was different. Skytech is suggesting that the engine kicked back and destroyed the starter. The Skytech is advertised as "reliable and durable". I explained to Skytech that I have not experienced a kick back and my timing is correct. Skytech suggested that the kick back might have been so slight that I did not realize it. I asked if the kick back was so slight that I did not realize it and destroyed the starter - then how can the starter be described reliable and durable. The Skytech representative I had the discussion with agreed to repair and return the starter at no cost - until he can discuss it with the manager when he returns from Sun-N-Fun. I'll let you know what the outcome is and how long the replacement starter lasts.
"SkyTech Starter.
It is very light weight, it turns the engine very fast. However, it does not disengaging very fast.
I called up SkyTech and they have admitted that there is a problem with back EMF keeping the solenoid energized for as much as 6 seconds too long. They say that 1 out of 100 had this problem.
They will fix the starter (and replace the motor if it has become burned out). I will send it to them next day air. They will send it back same day, next day air. They will not pay for the labor to switch the starter. Also, one new wire will have to be added."
There are also some comments on the Swift site about problems with the Sky Tech starter.
Karl
'53 170B N3158B SN:25400
ASW-20BL
'53 170B N3158B SN:25400
ASW-20BL
- GAHorn
- Posts: 21295
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm
The Sky Tec starter problem on the Swift occurs on the "D" engine (the angle-mount starter.) It relates to the "wound spring" machinery of the angle-drive on that engine not be accomodated by that starter. (The starter must allow for "unwinding" that spring, like the orginal starter.)
The engine most of us have with the 170 (the C-145/O-300-A thru C) does not have the angle-drive and should not suffer in this regard. -George (an originality-advocate for the right reason. in some cases. occasionally. wait-a-minute...lemmee go see what I've got...)
The engine most of us have with the 170 (the C-145/O-300-A thru C) does not have the angle-drive and should not suffer in this regard. -George (an originality-advocate for the right reason. in some cases. occasionally. wait-a-minute...lemmee go see what I've got...)
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.

- wa4jr
- Posts: 437
- Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:44 am
Whew! Hearing the feedback on the SkyTec starter makes me so glad I shelled out the additional $300 for the B&C starter last year. I had heard of the cast housing of the SkyTec being prone to failure and seen some really nasty photos. This is one area in which the B&C shines with its end housing being machined out of a solid block of aluminum.
John, 2734C in Summit Point, WV
- blueldr
- Posts: 4442
- Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 3:16 am
When I acquired my Continental IO-360, engine it did not have a starter or alternator as I planned on using my Cessna alternator off of the C-145 I was replacing. As you may know, the vast majority of IO-360 engines were on 24 volt installations and I didn't want to change my C-170 over.
Since I had to buy a starter, ifigured I might as well go with a light weight model. I ordered a Sky Tec. The early model of this starter would not release the spring on the starter drive of the IO-360 and would eat up the shaft resulting in a $1500 rebuild of the starter drive. Fortunately, I discovered this in time to save my drive and Sky Tec "Generously Replaced" this defectively designed (but FAA approved) starter for about 10% less than the cost of a brand new unit. I still tingle every time I sit down!
Needless to say, that's my last time to do business with Sky Tec. My friends have had numerous problems with their Lycoming starters too.`
Of course, they deserve it for fooling around with those Lycoming engines.
Since I had to buy a starter, ifigured I might as well go with a light weight model. I ordered a Sky Tec. The early model of this starter would not release the spring on the starter drive of the IO-360 and would eat up the shaft resulting in a $1500 rebuild of the starter drive. Fortunately, I discovered this in time to save my drive and Sky Tec "Generously Replaced" this defectively designed (but FAA approved) starter for about 10% less than the cost of a brand new unit. I still tingle every time I sit down!
Needless to say, that's my last time to do business with Sky Tec. My friends have had numerous problems with their Lycoming starters too.`
Of course, they deserve it for fooling around with those Lycoming engines.
BL
- GAHorn
- Posts: 21295
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm
-
- Posts: 652
- Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 12:33 am
I just got off the phone with Skyetch regarding the starter. Once again Skytech was responsive and responsible supporting their product. I will not be charged for the repair/replacement of the starter. I have my fingers crossed regarding the longevity of the replacement starter - I'll keep you informed.
-
- Posts: 652
- Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 12:33 am
Cessna® is a registered trademark of Textron Aviation, Inc. The International Cessna® 170 Association is an independent owners/operators association dedicated to C170 aircraft and early O-300-powered C172s. We are not affiliated with Cessna® or Textron Aviation, Inc. in any way.