Lycoming vs. Cont engine?

[DannyDot]

Is there any issues on the 65HP Lycoming vs. the 65HP Cont engine I need to be aware of before I buy a T-Craft. I use to own a Lycoming powered Vagabond and it did OK. I guess my big consern is availability of parts. Is one better than the other in getting part?

Danny Deger

[Howard Wilson]

Re: Lycoming vs. Cont engine?

Hi Danny, Try a search on ' Lycoming engine' on this board. Lots of discussions. I have a BL65 on my '39., and it is becoming a real challenge to find some parts. There are a couple of people on this list that have a pile of engines in the corners of their barns or shops and are sometimes, kindly, willing to help. Cannabalism is probably about the only way to keep these things going in my opinion. The factory practically denies that they ever had anything to do with them. I have flown both the Continental and Lycoming versions and the Continental has more oomph. When all the right parts are together and working it's a nice little engine that barks like a couple of old motorcycles coming down the road. There is a cool factor with the cylinders hanging out in the breeze. But it is an antique and getting rarer. Howard

[Ragwing nut]

Re: Lycoming vs. Cont engine?

El Reno Aviation is about the only company that has a stock on O-145 parts and they are very proud of them. The Continental is twice the motor and part are plentiful. If you have a choice, avoid the Lyc unless you just have to have one for originality reasons.

Mike

[Pearson]

Re: Lycoming vs. Cont engine?

Danny,

I don't have any experience with the small Lycomings, but I agree with the other posts about the Continental being a sweet little engine when all is working well. I will admit that every single one of them I have ever seen leaks at least a few drops of oil here and there. (I bet that will get a new thread going) Old airplanes should leak oil. Just like they should also make a little noise and occasionally be cantakerous.

As someone else mentioned on your posting about the airplane, get documented proof of everything. An overhaul can be as little as rings and bearings. I would feel uncomfortable buying a plane with an "overhauled" engine unless I saw receipts/yellow tags showing inspection, machining, and/or overhaul of almost all of the internal parts.

A close look at a yellow tag will list what was done to the cylinders. There are check boxes in front of all the possible combinations of machine work. Note what has been checked off and then verify it on the receipt. No receipt? Get the work order number off the yellow tag and call the shop. Ask about what kind of exhaust valves they have. Stellitte is good. Are the cylinders oversize or standard? Standard is better. That way you can bore them oversize and put larger pistons in at the next rebuild. If they are already oversize you will have to either chrome them back to standard or get new cylinders at the next overhaul.

Has the carb been overhauled? Turn the fuel valve on, with fuel in the tank, and see if the carb drips after a few minutes. What kind of mags does it have? Have they had all ADs complied with. Sheilded or non shielded ignition? Knowledge is your ally.

Were the brakes relined? Are the tires new? How old is the tailwheel?

Hire an IA, A&P, or at the very least, someone who has been through this a couple of times. Have them sit down with the logs, receipts, AD list, and any other supporting documents to confirm that the overhaul was done without cutting corners.

Have an IA or A&P that is preferrably experienced with Taylorcraft do a thorough prebuy inspection. Check the lower tubes, the tail post, horiz stab attach points, everything. For 28K it should be like or better than brand new.


I could go on & on about is this part & that part. But the bottom line is you need someone with experience on Taylorcraft to review the logs and airplane.
With that said, there is nothing like the piece of mind when taking off in an airplane that you know each and every part is exactly as it should be.

[Pearson]

Re: Lycoming vs. Cont engine?

Danny,

Also, before you put your money down, spend $50 and get a search for liens. Trade-A-Plane is full of places that can do it. Or maybe someone here has a name and number for you. I would do the lien search before I even had a prebuy done.

[VictorBravo]

Re: Lycoming vs. Cont engine?

The Continental is regarded by most of the experienced (that means owned both) people I have spoken to as being somewhere between slightly more desirable and much more desirable.

Owning (finding parts) an airplane with a Continental is significantly easier.

The market value on a Continental powered airplane is somewhere around 10-20% higher because of these factors.

Both engines have reputations as being safe and of course FAA certified.

Most owners will tell you that the Lycoming engine produces less "usable" or "achievable" power, which is probably related to torque... but there is supposedly a difference in the amount of "seat of the pants oomph".

If you are buying an airplane to fly every day and have the least number of problems with it, then buy the Continental. If you own another airplane and are looking for an interesting and more rare "toy" or showplane, then the Lycoming T-crafts are more rare and more likely to suit your needs.

Many people feel that the slight loss of performance using the Lycoming can be offset very well by having a super-light airplane weighing less than 670 or 700 pounds by being extra careful with the restoration. 700 pounds is not easy to accomplish with modern covering and paint materials, a motorcycle battery, interior fabrics, two yokes, etc. etc. but it can be done.