VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

  #11  
Old 08-06-2018, 08:16 AM
BillL BillL is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Central IL
Posts: 4,553
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walt View Post
The only reason vendors use the PM starter is because it the cheapest and the lightest which make the sales numbers look good.
Respectfully: There is more to the PM vs wire wound story. The torque per amp is much higher for the equivilant PM design. ref There is inefficiency and power required to energize that field. No free lunch. The engine required torque is what determines the starter output.

The XLT design sounds like it is inferior, just maybe for a different reason than being PM. The magnets could be weak (undersized or poor quality control), maybe it is just a bad design. A voltage test is in order, but if it won't turn it over, poor amps-to-torque conversion can still be the culprit even with a good voltage test. The proof is the stall at first compression. Do the test, test the battery, then hammer (ahh, errr, negotiate) the vendor with data. If the amps are drawn, and the voltage is in range, then the magnets are weak and should be warrantied.

BTW: The first full compression stroke is by far the highest torque demand and is based on the bore-stroke and compression ratio. For the same bore-stroke-compression, a 4 cylinder actually requires higher cycling torque (amps) than a 6. Friction causes the ultimate spinning RPM of a 6 to be lower. All just science, my motor-generator-starter guys had to learn this.
__________________
Bill

RV-7
1st Flight 1-27-18
Phase II 8-3-18
Repairman 11-15-18

Last edited by BillL : 08-08-2018 at 07:57 PM. Reason: tweaking to be sure the XLT was not being defended. - added reference link
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-06-2018, 09:04 AM
EXflyer EXflyer is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Chiloquin OR
Posts: 89
Default Starter Troubles

After reading all the comments will have to agree with Scott. One thing that none of the commenters mention is checking wiring from battery to starter and starter to ground for heat. That was one thing I would do in trouble shooting a problem like this for many electrical problems. The other thing is check for voltage drop at each wire where it connects to a terminal coming from or going to the starter. One bad wire connection to a connector can cause problems but check good if not done at the wire itself.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-06-2018, 07:47 PM
jakej jakej is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 84
Default

Alan,
One thing I forgot to mention in our discussion yesterday to do as well as the grounding cable (also mentioned by EXflyer) is to use internal star washers on all the ground & power connections ie cables & solenoids
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-07-2018, 01:45 AM
Yen Yen is offline
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Benaraby Queensland. Australia
Posts: 180
Default

What sort of a prop are you using.
I use the same battery in an RV4 with aluminium prop and a Corby starlet with a wooden prop and Jabiru 4 cylinder motor. It is far harder to crank the Jab than the Lycoming with a heavier prop.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-07-2018, 09:29 AM
Av8rRob's Avatar
Av8rRob Av8rRob is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 211
Default

Ok, dumb question. What is a NL starter? Is that a brand or type?
__________________
Rob Lasater
Rv-14 still workin
Paid nov 2018
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-07-2018, 10:06 AM
RV-14E's Avatar
RV-14E RV-14E is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Colorado
Posts: 154
Default

Sky-Tec (now part of Hartzell Engine Technologies) has a number of models:

http://skytec.aero/product/lycoming-aircraft-starters/

The "NL" series are in line (note the location of the solenoid).



Van's provisioned the RV-14 for the 149-12LS (right hand rotation, external mounted solenoid on the left side). 149 is for the number of ring gear teeth. 12 is for the voltage.

__________________
E
http://rv-14a.blogspot.com/
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-07-2018, 10:31 AM
M McGraw's Avatar
M McGraw M McGraw is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Greenback, TN
Posts: 425
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Av8rRob View Post
Ok, dumb question. What is a NL starter? Is that a brand or type?
Rob,
A Skytec 149NL is the middle option in the picture below, it is not a permanent magnet (PM) starter much like the B&C products. I think Skytec was sold a few years ago, but the NL below is the same unit.

Although I have an aversion to disagreeing with the more qualified poster in this thread. I believe the PM starters are marginal. A non PM starter requires less of your wiring and battery making them more tolerant over time.

NOTE: I did all the wire, solenoid, and load checks mentioned by many posters above and everything met and exceeded the requirements of the Skytec trouble shooting guide. Like I said above, a marginal product, it can work. The non PM units I have used, even those produced by the same company, have been flawless.

P.S. - B&C makes some really nice units also, I merely happen to know the 149NL will fit a -14 without modification.
__________________
Marvin McGraw, 5TN4
RV-14. #140039 Complete
Flight hours: 250+
2018 Dues Paid

Last edited by M McGraw : 08-07-2018 at 12:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-08-2018, 11:01 PM
TimO TimO is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 439
Default

I had a 149PM with an IO-540 on the RV10, and a 149LS I believe that came with the IO-390 on the RV-14. The IO-540 had often had a hard time getting the first blade to turn. The RV-14 actually was doing ok in stock config. BUT, I decided to swap both of them for the NL starter and couldn't be happier. It was a very easy swap, the starter fit both planes without issue (you grind a lug off for the RV-14 to clear the intake), and they both work perfectly for me. I figure it's better to have identical components on both airplanes, because you can swap parts if you ever need to. That happened to me as one of my NL starters had a bad internal connection and failed at 1.25 hours, and I needed that plane. I swapped starters, did the flight, and they sent me a brand new replacement free of charge which has been going strong.

I would say that likely there's a wiring or connection issue, because the stock system works fine with the stock battery and everything else. BUT, if you are going to tear into it, and you question the starter, swap out to the NL and you at least have one that you know will swing it fine.

I should note that the NL, by tech specs, actually spins slightly slower than the others, but not very noticeably.
__________________
Tim Olson - CFI
RV-10 N104CD - Flying 2/2006 - 1375+ hours http://www.MyRV10.com
RV-14 N14YT - Flying 6/2016 - 300+ hours http://www.MyRV14.com
RV-10/14 Transition Training: http://www.RVCFI.com
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-09-2018, 07:45 AM
olyolson's Avatar
olyolson olyolson is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: St Louis, MO
Posts: 766
Default Starter/battery/solenoids

I had similar issues when I bought my RV-4. It has an AEIO-360 and a Hartzell constant speed prop. It was woefully inadequate during start and sometimes it would barely go past a compression stroke. Had constant starting issues and troubleshooting didn't find any obvious issues. Replaced the master & starter solenoids and noticed a much better attitude toward starting but still not a robust start. The big jump was when I removed the Skytec lightweight starter and installed a 149NL starter. Now that was a huge difference and the engine was fairly easy to start with the standard Concord aircraft battery.

After lots of discussion with friends & a couple mechanics I switched the battery to an EarthX ETX 900. The new battery combined with the NL starter spins the prop so fast on start that I barely turn the key and the engine starts.

So the starter was the biggest culprit and the EarthX battery has contributed immensely to super easy starts- cold or hot. Those lightweight starters are probably OK for 320s & FP props but not for the bigger motors & C/S props. 'Mileage may vary' and each engine has it's own personality but those lightweight starters are just not very stout. I sent the lightweight starter to Skytec twice and they were great about rebuilding/replacing so kudos to them for great customer support. Just not a fan of the lightweight models.
__________________
RV-8, Flying
Previous airplanes: RV-4, RV-3, Cessna 140, Corby Starlet, Citabria
RV grin every flight
"Sure is nice to have smart friends"
2018 dues paid
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-10-2018, 06:23 PM
Discus2b Discus2b is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Willis Gliderport
Posts: 29
Default

FWIW

Skytec starter
Odyssey PC-680
Odyssey 12 amp ext charger for maintaining
All OEM from Vans or Lycoming

First flight May 2017

Always rapid cranking quick starting, including when I messed up a hot start flooding the engine requiring a 3 mins rest before start.

Built as per plans. I am curious why some have issues.

R
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:25 PM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.