Steve and I had the B & C starter installed in our Tiger quite a bit ago. He could give you more about installation, costs etc. Sometimes the engine turns over with two blades..... such little drain on the battery even on the coldest of days. I'd highly recommend it !
I have used the B & C starter in a number of aircraft and can highly recommend them, although not cheap they are great, as Neita says starts within 2 blades turning over plus they go on for ever, contact Bill Bainbridge at B & C on 316 283 8662 and give him my regards from down under.
I put one on my 75 Tiger last year and I am pleased with the results. You will have to modify the starter/alternator strap, and the baffling on the front will have to be filed some in two places to make sufficient room for the new B&C starter. You will also have to add some baffling seal to the pilot's side to close off air bypass.
How does it work? Great. First time one of the Grumman Guru mechanics got in the plane and I went to start it they had two remarks.
It allows me to start my plane on a 10 degree day with no preheat (turn over about as fast as a normal starter in warm weather) and mineral oil (40W). During normal weather, you can even start it on just the right mag (should you ever need to do that). It is quite a comfort. Also should you not start, the starter drive is not left against the ring gear.
I give it a high rating. For 580 dollars US you get the STC, and considering what a rebuild Lycoming starter sells for, the difference is worth it. Plus you save 11 pounds. SO have those extra pizzas.
Thanks all for your input, but I've one more question. I talked to the folk(s) at B&C and there seems to be some confusion on whether I need a 149-12PM or a 149-12LS as there may not be enough clearance for the Bendix to clear the landing light. Which model did you install (I have a '75 Tiger).
Dale, on my '75 I had to tell them the number of teeth on the ring gear (149 teeth) and my voltage. I though they would have had a cross reference for the engine from Lycoming, but I guess not. My voltage was 12 and that told them which starter. The landing light is 8.5 or so inches from the side of the starter, so I can't imagine a clearance problem. When you talk to Bill again, tell him to send you the same one I order last week. Hope this helps.
It is very light weight, it turns the engine very fast. However, it does not disengaging very fast.
I called up SkyTech and they have admitted that there is a problem with back EMF keeping the solenoid energized for as much as 6 seconds too long. They say that 1 out of 100 had this problem.
They will fix the starter (and replace the motor if it has become burned out). I will send it to them next day air. They will send it back same day, next day air. They will not pay for the labor to switch the starter. Also, one new wire will have to be added.
What a pain in the butt!
Oh, well, I had to remove the prop anyway because there is a new AD that requires me to change my prop bolts at overhaul. When my engine was done the bolts had not come in yet so I opted to do that another time.
My mechanic has my starter back from the factory.
The current fix is to add a new wire.
There is now a new terminal on the starter. The power for the solenoid (permanent magnet starter with a solenoid to move the Bendix gear) has been separated from the power for the motor (because back EMF was causing the solenoid to remain energized). The fix requires a 16 gauge wire to be run from this new terminal to the "S" terminal on the aircraft starter solenoid. This connects the solenoid on the starter directly to power if the master is on the you are pushing the starter button.
The president of SkyTech (Tom Williams) is also the only engineer and so you must deal with him (unfortunately). I told him to send me a drawing (for the record). He said that he would not because it would be too much work for such a simple change. I asked him to fax me a hand written drawing or even a simple explanation. He said that he was the president and he was too busy and maybe later he would have time. I told him that my mechanic may not want to install it without some sort of paperwork from SkyTech. Tom told me that I had a "cantankerous mechanic". I got so mad that I told him that I would report his customer service techniques to the American Yankee association.
I called Chief (where I got it) to warn them about this problem. I told them about how friendly and helpful Tom Williams is and the guy laughed and said that they have never received a complaint about SkyTech products but they have received many complaints about Tom. ;). The guy at Chief was very friendly and thanked me for the info and took down my phone number.
The question: Do I have a problem?
It sounds like it is technically illegal to have this wire installed in my plane because the STC does not mention the wire. (Actually, the STC came with no instructions, on the other hand the installation was exactly the same as the original starter). My understanding is that SkyTech files the details of the STC with the FAA and if they make a change the STC number does not change but there is a modification to it. Is there someone that I can call to find out this or should I keep my mouth shut.
He said that he would not because it would be too much work for such a simple change.
I doubt that the FAA would share that opinion. It can also be argued that there are no "simple" changes on an aircraft.
It sounds like it is technically illegal to have this wire installed in my plane because the STC does not mention the wire. (Actually, the STC came with no instructions, on the other hand the installation was exactly the same as the original starter).
Any STC should have some sort of instructions or diagrams detailing what the modification involves, even it it only says to "remove old starter and bolt on new starter". In this case, the instructions, and therefore the STC, should be amended to read "remove old starter, bolt on new one, and run 16ga wire from terminal Q to point B." In the absence of such a revision to the STC, an official service bulletin or AD would suffice.
My understanding is that SkyTech files the details of the STC with the FAA and if they make a change the STC number does not change but there is a modification to it.
Reasonably correct. However, the FAA's approval is based on the submitted data. Changes to that data mean that the approval is (technically) not valid for the modified data. The STC is legal as it stands, without the wire. The addition of the extra wire is, from a legal standpoint, changing a wing mod by adding a few more ribs.
Is there someone that I can call to find out this
The manufacturer would be prime source for this kind of information. Failing that, you could try and call your local FAA and get an opinion from them. Or keep calling local FAA's around the country until you get the answer you want.
...or should I keep my mouth shut.
Having said all that (and probably having sent a dozen people scurrying for their maintenance records), the most practical thing would be to install the wire and not talk about it. Not that I'm recommending that you do that, because, as I pointed out, it's technically illegal and I would NEVER suggest that someone do anything illegal (wink, wink, nudge, nudge).
In this case, you have a choice of being legal (don't install the wire and risk a hung starter), safe (install the wire and prevent the starter problem), or get a different starter.
BTW, my A&P finally found why I had such trouble with my engine starts. After changing the battery and the engine starter (see previous mails), I still couldn't have an easy start, so then went the mags. I had the mag with impulse coupling overhauled ($800 in France :-( and now the engine starts as it never did (i.e, on blade two or so), just using the electric primer. This was worth it, tough I begin to think that had we found this first I could have spared the battery and the light weight starter (not sure about this last item though since Lycoming doesn't support it anyhow). Admittedly, the mag is only 300 TTSN so it was not a highly probable culprit from the beginning.
Also, what I noticed with the new Prestolite starter, is that the prop turns much slower than with the previous one. My A&P ensures that this will in no way diminish the ease of starting, since what matters is the impulse coupling. Do you buy this? He also says is that the lightweight starter was turning the engine so fast that it didn't have enough time to disengage, thus creating the munching of ring teeth!
Also, what I noticed with the new Prestolite starter, is that the prop turns much slower than with the previous one. My A&P ensures that this will in no way diminish the ease of starting, since what matters is the impulse coupling. Do you buy this?
True enough. This is why you can hand prop one of these things, and why a hot mag is so dangerous.
As you pull the prop through (slowly), the impulse coupling mechanism engages and, instead of turning the mag, you wind up a spring. At a point just past top-dead-center the spring releases and gives the mag a spin, creating a spark that should ignite the fuel in the cylinder and start the engine. Actual rotating speed of the engine doesn't make much difference.
So why do new starter manufacturers make such a big fuss about being able to turn the prop fast at start time? See for instance Flying February mag on page 61/62.
In advertising, it's not technical merit that counts, but what sounds good.
I suppose a faster-turning starter might have an advantage as the battery weakens, assuming a linear decrease in speed, the slower starter will reach 0 RPM sooner. Then again, the faster starter is probably pulling more energy to do it, so the battery will drain faster anyway.
Now, I suppose, if you had a starter that could turn the engine over at about 300 or 400 RPM, that might be a significant advantage since you wouldn't need impulse couplings or starter vibrators or other junk.
Sounds close to home, since my previous light weight starter (admittedly using a somewhat flaky mag impulse coupling) dried my former battery in a little less than 3 years. We'll see if the new one last longer with a slow-turning starter :-)