X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao107.cox.net ([68.230.241.39] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.14) with ESMTP id 3736225 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 10:31:22 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.39; envelope-from=alventures@cox.net Received: from fed1rmimpo01.cox.net ([70.169.32.71]) by fed1rmmtao107.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20090629143044.DVWI18948.fed1rmmtao107.cox.net@fed1rmimpo01.cox.net> for ; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 10:30:44 -0400 Received: from BigAl ([72.192.133.78]) by fed1rmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id 9qWk1c00L1hf1Cg03qWk4w; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 10:30:45 -0400 X-VR-Score: 0.00 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=kviXuzpPAAAA:8 a=yV5rEg5fPDmUMhCOGa8A:9 a=5BWkKRcy-ltQfy-QGvYA:7 a=Qe056ggZgSMRr7jv7-nfPH2F3X8A:4 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 a=4vB-4DCPJfMA:10 a=Z1XfB6zXX8nPOai-2HUA:9 a=JzYKFAuYAVFQL-ak0koA:7 a=ealfEXwXdJFY1V9GZsR4aScnpwoA:4 X-CM-Score: 0.00 From: "Al Gietzen" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Startup Oil Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 07:31:10 -0800 Message-ID: <2C068A560FC442669FCF13AEBD66079F@BigAl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0011_01C9F88B.92BD9390" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6838 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: Acn4hhsOxvXwUO0qQX2yX8piQtt/eAARKfIg X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C9F88B.92BD9390 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable William; =20 I agree that a straight 40, or especially 50, would be heavy for = break-in. But there are a couple of considerations that are different for = aircraft. One is that you don't just get in and go. The other is the lubrication requirements of the geared re-drive. My guideline using the 20/50 (or = now 15/50 synthetic) is no high power operation until the oil temp is 140+F. = I don't find that restrictive. By the time I fire-up, check a few things, (talk to tower), taxi, do moderate power run-up checks, and get on the runway; it's higher than that. But then, so far I haven't flown with OAT less than about 40F. =20 And as in my case (and common) we're not starting with a new engine. =20 Al =20 -----Original Message----- From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of William Wilson Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 10:51 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Startup Oil =20 Straight 40 or 50 is WAY too thick for engine oil. Your engine will = have to get almost all the way to operating temperature before it would get any significant lubrication at all. Typical break in oils are thinner than usual, not thicker. When the parts are still seating in on a new engine = it is harder for the oil to get in there so you need a thinner oil to make = sure everything gets lubricated. When starting up, you always want the thinnest oil you can get, because = the most important . Even in hot weather, on startup, 10 weight is about as thick as you want. The only reason we don't use 0W50 for everything is because nobody can make it. There is nothing really wrong with 20W50 in hot weather, but in cool climates, it's just too thick. When I used mineral oil* I used 10W30 in spring and fall, 15W40 in summer, and 5W30 in winter. With synthetic = now I just use 5W40 all the time, and now I put zinc in it as well (despite my general opposition to oil additives, the zinc is just putting it back = the way it's supposed to be). * disclaimer: in cars, but a rotary engine is a rotary engine On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Al Gietzen wrote: =20 Earlier this weekend the recomendation for a startuo oil was for a = mineral oil, 40W minimum. Is a multi viscosity like a convetional 20W50 OK? or should it be a straight 40W or 50W? Thanks, Joe =20 Joe; =20 Are you pre-mixing 2-cycle oil? I think the only advantage of a = straight weight oil would be if you use the metering pump injection as a straight weight may burn a bit cleaner. =20 I used Castrol 20/50 for about the first 60 hours with the injection system; then converted to pre-mix and synthetic. The Castrol 20/50 is = an excellent lubricant and served well. It may be that the seals have = seated in more since going to premix as I seemed to have picked up over 100 rpm = static over the last 80 hours. But I think it's common to get a peak in power somewhere past the 100 hr mark. =20 Looking forward to hearing about your first runs. =20 Al =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C9F88B.92BD9390 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

William;

 

I agree that a straight 40, or = especially 50, would be heavy for break-in.  But there are a couple of = considerations that are different for aircraft.  One is that you don’t just = get in and go. The other is the lubrication requirements of the geared = re-drive.  My guideline using the 20/50 (or now 15/50 synthetic) is no high power = operation until the oil temp is 140+F.  I don’t find that restrictive. =  By the time I fire-up, check a few things, (talk to tower),  taxi, do = moderate power run-up checks, and get on the runway; it’s higher than that. = But then, so far I haven’t flown with OAT less than about 40F.

 

And as in my case (and common) = we’re not starting with a new engine.

 

Al

 

-----Original = Message-----
From: Rotary motors in = aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of William Wilson
Sent: Sunday, June 28, = 2009 10:51 PM
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = Startup Oil

 

Straight 40 or 50 is WAY too thick for engine oil.  Your engine will have to = get almost all the way to operating temperature before it would get any = significant lubrication at all.  Typical break in oils are thinner than usual, = not thicker.  When the parts are still seating in on a new engine it is = harder for the oil to get in there so you need a thinner oil to make sure = everything gets lubricated.

When starting up, you always want the thinnest oil you can get, because = the most important .  Even in hot weather, on startup, 10 weight is = about as thick as you want.  The only reason we don't use 0W50 for = everything is because nobody can make it.

There is nothing really wrong with 20W50 in hot weather, but in cool = climates, it's just too thick.  When I used mineral oil* I used 10W30 in = spring and fall, 15W40 in summer, and 5W30 in winter.  With synthetic now I = just use 5W40 all the time, and now I put zinc in it as well (despite my general opposition to oil additives, the zinc is just putting it back the way = it's supposed to be).

* disclaimer: in cars, but a rotary engine is a rotary = engine

On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Al Gietzen = <ALVentures@cox.net> = wrote:

 

Earlier this weekend the recomendation for a = startuo oil was for a mineral oil, 40W minimum.  Is a multi viscosity like = a convetional 20W50 OK?  or should it be a straight 40W or = 50W?

Thanks,

Joe

 

Joe;

 <= /font>

Are you = pre-mixing 2-cycle oil?  I think the only advantage of a straight weight oil = would be if you use the metering pump injection as a straight weight may burn a = bit cleaner.

 <= /font>

I used = Castrol 20/50  for about the first 60 hours with the injection system; then = converted to pre-mix and synthetic.  The Castrol 20/50 is an excellent lubricant = and served well. It may be that the seals have seated in more since going to = premix as I seemed to have picked up over 100 rpm static over the last 80 = hours.  But I think it’s common to get a peak in power somewhere = past the 100 hr mark.

 <= /font>

Looking = forward to hearing about your first runs.

 <= /font>

Al

 

------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C9F88B.92BD9390--