Backcountry Pilot • Phillips vs. Aeroshell

Phillips vs. Aeroshell

Lycoming, Continental, Hartzell, McCauley, or any broad spectrum drive system component used on multiple type.
53 postsPage 3 of 31, 2, 3

Re: Phillips vs. Aeroshell

A1Skinner wrote:
G44 wrote:Most important thing is changing oil at specified tach time intervals AND calendar intervals. Lycoming states xx tach time or every 4 months, whichever comes first. Don't forget about the calendar time interval, you would be amazed how many “superbly maintained” airplanes are out there that only get once a year at annual time oil changes because they haven't flown the the 25 or 50 hours of tach time. CHANGE YOUR OIL!

Kurt
I've heard this before, and seen it in lycoming literature, but I'm curious what their reasoning is. Is it strictly to get moisture out of the engine? The oil doesn't go bad just sitting in there. Can you shed some light on this?


My understanding is that oil tends to oxidize and form corrosive byproducts when it is used and sitting in an engine. The oil change flushes that out and you start anew with fresh oil.

Ross
pipeliner offline
Supporter
User avatar
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2017 10:20 am
Location: Eagle River, AK
Aircraft: '57 C-182A floats/wheels

Re: Phillips vs. Aeroshell

pipeliner wrote:
A1Skinner wrote:
G44 wrote:Most important thing is changing oil at specified tach time intervals AND calendar intervals. Lycoming states xx tach time or every 4 months, whichever comes first. Don't forget about the calendar time interval, you would be amazed how many “superbly maintained” airplanes are out there that only get once a year at annual time oil changes because they haven't flown the the 25 or 50 hours of tach time. CHANGE YOUR OIL!

Kurt
I've heard this before, and seen it in lycoming literature, but I'm curious what their reasoning is. Is it strictly to get moisture out of the engine? The oil doesn't go bad just sitting in there. Can you shed some light on this?


My understanding is that oil tends to oxidize and form corrosive byproducts when it is used and sitting in an engine. The oil change flushes that out and you start anew with fresh oil.

Ross
Thanks for the explanation Ross. Wonder why continental doesn't have the same recommendation? Cam placement?
A1Skinner offline
Supporter
User avatar
Posts: 5186
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 11:38 am
Location: Eaglesham
FindMeSpot URL: [url:1vzmrq4a]http://share.findmespot.com/shared/faces/viewspots.jsp?glId=0az97SSJm2Ky58iEMJLqgaAQvVxMnGp6G[/url:1vzmrq4a]
Aircraft: Cessna P206A, AT402/502/602

Re: Phillips vs. Aeroshell

What Ross said above.

Kurt
G44 offline
Supporter
User avatar
Posts: 2093
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:46 am
Location: Michigan

Re: Phillips vs. Aeroshell

asa wrote:I was about to making a comment about the victory oil actually being cheaper than normal XC, but decided to verify before posting. To my surprise, spruce has the victory 20w50 for $102/case and the XC 20w50 for $75 a case. Big difference. So I checked my spruce order history and back in march I got a case of Victory for $72, which I got because it was cheaper than XC AND good for lycs. Wonder what changed since then or if that was some introductory price to get people hooked?

Anytime I order enough to get free shipping from spruce, I automatically throw a case of oil onto the order.


I think there is a glitch on Spruce’s website. I saw the $101 price tag and added a case through another path and got the $74.75 price.
Scolopax offline
Supporter
User avatar
Posts: 1696
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 5:02 pm
Location: Nottingham
FindMeSpot URL: http://share.findmespot.com/shared/face ... 4aYqSexnZC

Re: Phillips vs. Aeroshell

pipeliner wrote:I would recommend against using Aeroshell 15W-50, Aeroshell W80 Plus, Aeroshell W100 Plus or the new Phillips Victory 20W50 in a big bore Continental, as they all contain the “Lycoming additive.” This additive is required in the infamous Lycoming O320-H2AD and a small handful of other Lycomings due to rust causing extreme valve train wear. This additive contains triphenyl phosphate (TPP). TPP can create phosphoric acid, which can attack seals and magneto cushions. In the big Continentals with the starter adapter, the phosphate can form on the spring in the starter adapter, causing it to slip. As long as the starter adapter is in good shape and you have a well-charged, high capacity battery, this shouldn’t be a problem, but otherwise it could be an issue for your starter adapter. For these reasons I have switched to the regular Phillips multi-vis 20W-50 without the Lycoming additive (I made the switch after reading a recent Aviation Consumer article written by Paul Millner, a retired oil company technical expert, who provided the above info).

I also swear by Camguard, as I (like most people) don’t quite fly often enough. As noted above by others, Ed Kollin, who developed it when working for Exxon, is a very knowledgeable lubrication engineer. He is also very helpful if you have a question. I think when he developed the Camguard additive, it proved too expensive for Exxon to add it to their aviation oil, so he struck out on his own to market it.

If you don't need the "Lycoming additive," use the money you save by buying Phillips XC and to buy the Camguard additive.

Like Kurt, I also say change the oil at 4 months if you don't have the hours on the oil.

Ross


I agree with most of this, EXCEPT that TPP is an anti-scuffing additive, NOT an anti corrosion additive. Cam Guard is, in fact, an anti corrosion additive. That was Ed's point in his discussion of the "Lycoming additive": "Lycoming engines don't need an anti scuffing additive, they need an anti corrosion additive.". The exception, of course, being that (now quite rare) H model engine.

Lycoming does suggest using the TPP in all Lycoming engines now, though.

As others have said, best thing you can do is fly often, change oil frequently.

MTV
mtv offline
Knowledge Base Author
User avatar
Posts: 10514
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 1:47 am
Location: Bozeman

Re: Phillips vs. Aeroshell

mtv wrote:
I agree with most of this, EXCEPT that TPP is an anti-scuffing additive, NOT an anti corrosion additive. Cam Guard is, in fact, an anti corrosion additive. That was Ed's point in his discussion of the "Lycoming additive": "Lycoming engines don't need an anti scuffing additive, they need an anti corrosion additive.". The exception, of course, being that (now quite rare) H model engine.

Lycoming does suggest using the TPP in all Lycoming engines now, though.

As others have said, best thing you can do is fly often, change oil frequently.

MTV


Thanks for the clarification, Mike, as the Lycoming additive is intended to prevent scuffing between the cam & lifters. I believe, however, that the scuffing results from minor rust forming on the cam/lifters. Any rust increases the contact pressures in an H2AD engine beyond what is tolerable. When the H2AD engines were relatively new, I don't believe flight schools that piled the hours up had any problems because the engines never had the opportunity to develop any rust. You are correct, however, in that most engines don't need the Lycoming additive while they do need anti-corrosion additives, which is the key point that I failed to articulate. I appreciate you pointing that out.

Ross
pipeliner offline
Supporter
User avatar
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2017 10:20 am
Location: Eagle River, AK
Aircraft: '57 C-182A floats/wheels

Re: Phillips vs. Aeroshell

Scolopax wrote:
asa wrote:I was about to making a comment about the victory oil actually being cheaper than normal XC, but decided to verify before posting. To my surprise, spruce has the victory 20w50 for $102/case and the XC 20w50 for $75 a case. Big difference. So I checked my spruce order history and back in march I got a case of Victory for $72, which I got because it was cheaper than XC AND good for lycs. Wonder what changed since then or if that was some introductory price to get people hooked?

Anytime I order enough to get free shipping from spruce, I automatically throw a case of oil onto the order.


I think there is a glitch on Spruce’s website. I saw the $101 price tag and added a case through another path and got the $74.75 price.


FYI
I just ordered a bunch of X/C 20W50 oil from Spruce for a few of us at the airport so we got free shipping. One thing to note, Aircraft Spruce does price match. If you put in the special instructions box "PLEASE PRICE MATCH THE PHILLIPS X/C 20W50 (PART# 08-05301 ) WITH $58.95/CASE AT WWW.PILOTSHQ.COM" or whatever better deal you find, they have always matched the price in my experience. I just got delivery of 5 cases yesterday at $58.95.

DS
IL_170A offline
User avatar
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue May 26, 2020 1:07 pm
Location: Geneseo
Aircraft: Cessna 170A

Re: Phillips vs. Aeroshell

IL_170A wrote:
Scolopax wrote:
asa wrote:I was about to making a comment about the victory oil actually being cheaper than normal XC, but decided to verify before posting. To my surprise, spruce has the victory 20w50 for $102/case and the XC 20w50 for $75 a case. Big difference. So I checked my spruce order history and back in march I got a case of Victory for $72, which I got because it was cheaper than XC AND good for lycs. Wonder what changed since then or if that was some introductory price to get people hooked?

Anytime I order enough to get free shipping from spruce, I automatically throw a case of oil onto the order.


I think there is a glitch on Spruce’s website. I saw the $101 price tag and added a case through another path and got the $74.75 price.


FYI
I just ordered a bunch of X/C 20W50 oil from Spruce for a few of us at the airport so we got free shipping. One thing to note, Aircraft Spruce does price match. If you put in the special instructions box "PLEASE PRICE MATCH THE PHILLIPS X/C 20W50 (PART# 08-05301 ) WITH $58.95/CASE AT http://WWW.PILOTSHQ.COM" or whatever better deal you find, they have always matched the price in my experience. I just got delivery of 5 cases yesterday at $58.95.

DS


Great tip!
Scolopax offline
Supporter
User avatar
Posts: 1696
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 5:02 pm
Location: Nottingham
FindMeSpot URL: http://share.findmespot.com/shared/face ... 4aYqSexnZC

Re: Phillips vs. Aeroshell

A1Skinner wrote:Wonder why continental doesn't have the same recommendation? Cam placement?


The below slide is from a webinar on Continental Engines put on by the American Bonanza Society. Bradley Tirpak of Continental gave the presentation and it looks like they agree with Lycoming that 4 months between oil changes is the max.

Ross

Image
pipeliner offline
Supporter
User avatar
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2017 10:20 am
Location: Eagle River, AK
Aircraft: '57 C-182A floats/wheels

Re: Phillips vs. Aeroshell

pipeliner wrote:
A1Skinner wrote:Wonder why continental doesn't have the same recommendation? Cam placement?


The below slide is from a webinar on Continental Engines put on by the American Bonanza Society. Bradley Tirpak of Continental gave the presentation and it looks like they agree with Lycoming that 4 months between oil changes is the max.

Ross

Image
Awesome. Thanks!
A1Skinner offline
Supporter
User avatar
Posts: 5186
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 11:38 am
Location: Eaglesham
FindMeSpot URL: [url:1vzmrq4a]http://share.findmespot.com/shared/faces/viewspots.jsp?glId=0az97SSJm2Ky58iEMJLqgaAQvVxMnGp6G[/url:1vzmrq4a]
Aircraft: Cessna P206A, AT402/502/602

Re: Phillips vs. Aeroshell

At peak, a company I flew for and major overhauller of Lycoming powered devices (R44s and fixed wings) had a fleet of better than fifty Lycomings. They’d typically reach TBO in around three to four years, so I’m not sure how well this info applies to recreational / storage use.

After having wiped out too many cams and a few jugs, the oil that was settled upon and utterly resolved the issues was W80+. I’m a believer and it’s all I run as long as I’m in the appropriate temperature window, it’s what I’ll feed my freshly overhauled IO520 too after break in.
Ardent offline
Contributing author + Supporter
User avatar
Posts: 212
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2020 11:15 am
Location: White Rock
Aircraft: A185F

Re: Phillips vs. Aeroshell

The University of North Dakota operates a fleet of over 100 airplanes (125 last I heard), most of which are equipped with Lycoming engines.

When I was around there, they used nothing but Aeroshell 15 W 50 oil in all the piston engines. Not sure about the helicopters, but I'd bet they were using it in them as well.

Those engines are some of the most abused engines in GA, I'd bet, being almost all student flown. They are flown hard, and those engines, in my experience, almost all go to TBO with minimal issues.

The key to running engines with few problems is to fly them, a LOT, change oil regularly.

MTV
mtv offline
Knowledge Base Author
User avatar
Posts: 10514
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 1:47 am
Location: Bozeman

Re: Phillips vs. Aeroshell

That’s also because the mainstay of their fleet is fitted with one of the most robust lycoming/continental engines there is.

Try flying with same number of hours with a brand new O-200 from continental and I promise you the cylinder heads won’t make TBO and there is a fair chance the centre main bearing won’t either.

And philips or aeroshell will have no impact on the above.

The Rotax 912 on the other hand will do 4000 hours easily and that;s on oil from Walmart.
Bathman offline
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2019 2:43 am
Location: UK

DISPLAY OPTIONS

Previous
53 postsPage 3 of 31, 2, 3

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests

Latest Features

Latest Knowledge Base