Has anyone bought the Skytec ST5 starter recently?

I’ve read lots of problems in the past, none recently.

Installing the 2 blade MT fixed my forward CG. I’m toying with the idea of the firewall battery and I hate to screw with my CG has its close to being perfect.

I’m a C182B, MT prop, stock O-470L, powerflow exhaust ordered.

I’d like to pponk someday.

Running Continental Energizer. No lightweights here. Not worth risking the starter adapter to save a few pounds. In order to lose a few pounds in that neck of the woods plan on removing the vacuum system one of these days.

I have the energizer now that has been great but very heavy. I read the skytec has had issues in the past. I haven’t read anything recent about them. The hope is they got it figured out now.

Skytech has a newer PM starter available now, which I believe may be OEM on new SR-22s. It's direct drive instead of geared and according to their website has equal or better cranking performance compared to an Energizer starter. It's only .5 lbs more than the ST5.

Disclaimer: this is not an endorsement since I have no experience with it. I previously had a ST5, but the cranking performance was lackluster so I replaced it with a Tempest (night and day difference in starting RPM). If I were to consider a lightweight starter again, I would look more seriously at their PM starter and pass on the ST5.

Energizer starter here with a freshly overhauled starter early style adapter. Some adapter overhaul companies won’t honor the warranty if a lightweight geared starter is used. Oh and the biggest surprise is that Hartzell bought Skytec is that they require a core when buying a new starter! It’s 200 more dollars if you don’t send in the same style as a core, so if you are changing to the energizer style they won’t accept the Skytec geared style and vice versa. I swapped to the energizer style after overhauling the early style adapter after only 800 hours of service. Pretty expensive lesson, but it should last more than 800 hours without the drag of the geared starter. Still haven’t got over the companies policy of requiring a core when buying a new part

I installed an ST5 with the MT 2 blade prop back in 2017 (C-180A) when I was on a mission to lose weight and improve cg. I learned the hard way about that starter with a light prop. I have no idea if there's a new version of the ST5, but I'd be real cautious. I went with a new Hartzell starter (no core required then) and it's been fine. I have a firewall battery and the cg is fine with the MT, plane flies great. Another thing to get weight off the nose is install an alternator to replace the heavier generator. I did that and really like it. I also ditched the vacuum system and haven't missed it.

fredy wrote:Skytech has a newer PM starter available now, which I believe may be OEM on new SR-22s. It's direct drive instead of geared and according to their website has equal or better cranking performance compared to an Energizer starter. It's only .5 lbs more than the ST5.

Ok that looks promising - after it has some time in the fleet and when mine has more hours on it - might look into this.

The early style continental starter adapter needs the starter to rotate backwards slightly to disengage fully. The geared starters often have enough resistance to reverse rotation to not allow that reverse rotation. The result is that the starter adapter remains slightly engaged and it wears out prematurely, occasionally failing catastrophically. The newer style of starter adapter works differently.

I had an ST3 starter, and it was a worthless pile of crap. It turned over the prop lethargically when cold, and I could see slipping when hot. It wasn't applying enough torque or spinning fast enough to lock the starter adapter tight. I replaced it with an Energizer, and the difference was dramatic. No slipping, turning over with authority.

I'm not sure if it applies to the ST5, but many Cirrus owners were having problems with the OEM geared starter and replacing them with Energizers. Even Cirrus changed to direct drive, the newer version of the Energizer.
https://hartzell.aero/news-release/cirr ... us-models/

All good info here. I have like 15 ST-5’s and ST-3’s I pulled off of SR22’s and replaced with Energizers. And the new direct drive starter coming on newer Cirrus’s seems just as good as an energizer.

In 3,200 hrs in Cirrus’s Ive been stranded for a broken airplane twice. Both were because of lightweight starters.

My 185 I just got has some giant starter on it I’m not familiar with, and it’s a bit weak so just ordered an Energizer.

7GC wrote:I installed an ST5 with the MT 2 blade prop back in 2017 (C-180A) when I was on a mission to lose weight and improve cg. I learned the hard way about that starter with a light prop. I have no idea if there's a new version of the ST5, but I'd be real cautious. I went with a new Hartzell starter (no core required then) and it's been fine. I have a firewall battery and the cg is fine with the MT, plane flies great. Another thing to get weight off the nose is install an alternator to replace the heavier generator. I did that and really like it. I also ditched the vacuum system and haven't missed it.

How much weight did you save ditching the generator? Also vacuum?

I’m leaning towards the PM Hartzell starter but I’m only finding 24V.