Jump to content

Carb rebuild


Rich

Recommended Posts

Good afternoon,

 

How many out there rebuild at the 200 hour mark?

How many take it futher?

How many do it themselves?

 

The carb rebuild kit looks like it only consists of gaskets and O-rings. No needles, neddle valves or Viton tip.

When needed I'd rather rebuild myself. I've had a terrible experience with a shop in Lancaster PA.. I found out that the mechanic didn't do the work but only signed off. Clamps were missing or laid loose on the hose. Enricher circuit attach point at carb was completly loose, screws broken or stripped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I overhauled two virtually identical carbs on an airhead BMW motorcycle.

 

Not terribly difficult if you take your time. Photos as you go along help.

 

Still, when it came time to do my Sky Arrow's, I pulled them and sent them to Roger. Since he does so many I figured it would be done right, and so far so good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off according to the FAA rebuilding is a privilege that is only given to the manufacturer. If I am to believe what has been said at some of my IA renewal seminars there have been mechanics who have lost their certificates over making an entry in the logbooks stating that they had rebuilt something. What Rotax calls for at 200 hours is an inspection.

 

The carb inspection is not hard to do. I'm sure you could figure it out, but it is not something that the FAA sees as an owner maintenance item.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off according to the FAA rebuilding is a privilege that is only given to the manufacturer. If I am to believe what has been said at some of my IA renewal seminars there have been mechanics who have lost their certificates over making an entry in the logbooks stating that they had rebuilt something. What Rotax calls for at 200 hours is an inspection.

 

The carb inspection is not hard to do. I'm sure you could figure it out, but it is not something that the FAA sees as an owner maintenance item.

1) That's why I used the term "overhauled" and not "rebuilt".

 

2) I'm Experimental, so it would have been kosher. Beyond that, well outside of what an owner could do, unless supervised by an A&P or LSRM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have watched the Rotax videos and I don't believe I'd have a problem inspecting or replacing parts as needed.

Yes, mine is an S-LSA and it wouldn't be legal without the proper supervision. I'd really like to go to E-LSA so I can legally do the work.

 

What percentage of resale value could one figure to loose going E-LSA? I sure would like to do my own work, with the exception of heavy maint. I guess I was spoiled by building my Challenger 11 LSS and obtaining a repairmans cirtificate which allowed me to do my own work.

 

Thanks Jacques. The parts shown there are much more than shown on the Lockwood site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

. . . "What percentage of resale value could one figure to loose going E-LSA? I sure would like to do my own work, with the exception of heavy maint." . . .

That is an excellent question. Something that I have been trying to find out for some time.

Some good feedback from well EXPERIENCED owners would be appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) That's why I used the term "overhauled" and not "rebuilt".

2) I'm Experimental, so it would have been kosher. Beyond that, well outside of what an owner could do, unless supervised by an A&P or LSRM.

Unless something has changed since I got my LSRM, they cannot supervise the work of others. Legally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What percentage of resale value could one figure to lose going E-LSA?

Big unknown.

 

My insurance company lowered the hull amount I could insure my Sky Arrow for from $60k to $50k, albeit with a slightly reduced premium.

 

The fact that the plane cannot be used for instruction or rental limits the demand and so could reduce the value.

 

Then again, there may be a small subset for whom the Experimental status could be a plus.

 

Again, I think it's too small a market to make any concrete predictions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 200 hr. is only an inspection and few people do it. Rotax has no rebuild time in writing anywhere in any manual. Some rebuild at  the 5 year rubber replacement some wait to 1000 hrs. and some do it at 5, 8 or 10 years. Rebuild time is up to you and how the carbs are performing and that is why Rotax has the 200 hr. inspection. If you start inspecting and pulling apart "O" rings then they should get replaced.

 

Overhaul and rebuild terms for many are synonymous with many Rotax people.

Depends on who you talk to. Is it precipitation or rain?

 

I get lots of carbs every year to rebuild. I have this weekend that are 10 years old. It's certainly time for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 200 hr. is only an inspection and few people do it. Rotax has no rebuild time in writing anywhere in any manual. Some rebuild at  the 5 year rubber replacement some wait to 1000 hrs. and some do it at 5, 8 or 10 years. Rebuild time is up to you and how the carbs are performing and that is why Rotax has the 200 hr. inspection. If you start inspecting and pulling apart "O" rings then they should get replaced.

 

Overhaul and rebuild terms for many are synonymous with many Rotax people.

Depends on who you talk to. Is it precipitation or rain?

 

I get lots of carbs every year to rebuild. I have this weekend that are 10 years old. It's certainly time for them.

Regardless of what terms Rotax people use we are living and working in the FAA world. The FAA is who asigns privileges, and provides definitions. If you wind up with a hard nosed FAA inspector who decides he doesn't like you, they will hang you out to dry for making an entry in the aircraft records stating "rebuilt".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What percentage of resale value could one figure to loose going E-LSA? 

 

It seems Eddie's insurance company wrote his plane down nearly 20%.  However, the insurance company's view may not be indicative of the real market.

 

......there may be a small subset for whom the Experimental status could be a plus.

 

Here in Europe this is no longer a small subset, and it's growing fast.  Increasingly, private owners are moving to Experimental and Microlight aircraft to avoid the high costs of the certified world.

 

I think it's reasonable to suggest that the USA market will go in the same direction.

 

The major concern of poor workmanship is offset by the availability of detailed information on the internet to assist diy maintenance, so standards will also have improved.   

 

Obviously, this route is not for everyone but many mechanically minded buyers who see a comprehensive maintenance log will not be too concerned about it all having an 'official' rubber stamp, especially in the light of Post 1.

 

I can only see that 'small subset' growing into a larger subset.

 

Plus, as the plane gets older, the value gap may narrow to nothing, or even go the other way.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Especially if you misspell it.  :)

 

 

Sorry Tom, I couldn't resist.

 

 

The problem with some words or phrases in the manuals is from the translation into English. This fix has been on going for 20+ years.

 

Misspelled what? :D

 

Score one for the tablet, because it doesn't put a red line under the misspelled words. Sometimes my brain and fingers don't quite sink up when typing, and it is worse when using the tablet instead of having a keyboard. Most of the FAA inspectors I know wouldn't have caught that anyway. ;)

 

The problem isn't the manuals and translation to English. The problem is using words for which the FAA provides a definition in a manner that you as a LSRM don't have the privilege of performing. Like I said before, if I am to believe what has been said in some of the FAA IA renewal clinics they have hung mechanics out to dry over such wording in a signoff. Maybe you should quiz Edsel about the wordings importance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems Eddie's insurance company wrote his plane down nearly 20%.  However, the insurance company's view may not be indicative of the real market.

 

 

Here in Europe this is no longer a small subset, and it's growing fast.  Increasingly, private owners are moving to Experimental and Microlight aircraft to avoid the high costs of the certified world.

 

I think it's reasonable to suggest that the USA market will go in the same direction.

 

The major concern of poor workmanship is offset by the availability of detailed information on the internet to assist diy maintenance, so standards will also have improved.   

 

Obviously, this route is not for everyone but many mechanically minded buyers who see a comprehensive maintenance log will not be too concerned about it all having an 'official' rubber stamp, especially in the light of Post 1.

 

I can only see that 'small subset' growing into a larger subset.

 

Plus, as the plane gets older, the value gap may narrow to nothing, or even go the other way.  

 

Eddie's lowered hull value is more about his aging aircraft than going from SLSA to experimental.  All aircraft can get lowered hull value over time.

 

SLSA to Experimental

 

The obvious answer is you will lose resale value because you are limiting your market to those able, willing and wanting to do mechanical maint on their own aircraft.  And you are telling potential buyers that your toy has not always been worked on by a professional.

 

In other words, you are limiting yourself to tinkerers and do-it-yourselfers in a niche market where those who are buying old gear expect DEEP discounts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eddie's lowered hull value is more about his aging aircraft than going from SLSA to experimental.  All aircraft can get lowered hull value over time.

 

 

SLSA to Experimental

 

The obvious answer is you will lose resale value because you are limiting your market to those able, willing and wanting to do mechanical maint on their own aircraft.  And you are telling potential buyers that your toy has not always been worked on by a professional.

 

In other words, you are limiting yourself to tinkerers and do-it-yourselfers in a niche market where those who are buying old gear expect DEEP discounts.

 

"Aging aircraft"...LOL.  I think of an aging aircraft as one 50 years old or more.  And actually hull values of most airplanes decrease for the first few years, then level off and retain value.  They only lose value in inflation-adjusted terms, not in nominal dollar terms, after the first 5-10 years, typically.

 

As for limiting an E-LSA to only tinkerers and do-it-yourself types?  Bullcrap.  There is NOTHING that prevents you from buying an E-LSA and letting an A&P do ALL your maintenance.  You can even pay him to check the oil for you on every pre-flight if you want.  An E-LSA gives you self maintenance as an *option*, not as a *requirement*.

 

To me and many others having more options rather than fewer options adds value, not the opposite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmm. So, my SLSA being maintained by me, makes me a professional. But, as soon as I go ELSA, I become what, unprofessional?

 

The reality is I am a tinkerer and do-it-yourselfer so my SLSA must be what, an unreliable piece of junk? On the other hand, maybe my LSRM-A makes me a professional, who knows his limits, regardless of if my plane is ELSA or SLSA?

 

So, I say the value of one vs. the other lies more in the quality of the plane, the documentation of any work performed in logbooks, and a good buyers inspection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To reiterate, Falcon made clear the drop in maximum insurable hull value was due to the change in registration status, not the aircraft's age.

 

Determining the value of any Sky Arrow, SLSA or ELSA, is difficult. Very thin market with I think less than 30 out there as Light Sports. On the one hand, $50k sounds reasonable considering it was $75.5 when new and it now is seven years old and has 400 hours. On the other hand, replacement value has soared to well over $100k, which could conceivably put upwards pressure on the used price.

 

Anyway, it's academic for me, since I'm in for the long haul regardless. But even if the value took a hit, the rewards are so great that there's no doubt in my mind that it was worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, it's academic for me, since I'm in for the long haul regardless. But even if the value took a hit, the rewards are so great that there's no doubt in my mind that it was worth it.

 

But it quickly ceases to be academic if something happens to the airplane and then you want to replace it from what you get from the insurance company.  Then it becomes very real.

 

Could you buy even a well-used Sky Arrow for $50k?  Sounds doubtful.

 

EDIT:  While this is obviously what we prefer, no insurance company ever promises you a complete replacement value.  They just put some value on what you have and you can decide to insure it or not.  Not saying the insurance companies should be forced into a 1:1 replacement value.  Just pointing out the realities. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...