This Forum is a place for Piper Comanche pilots to communicate and discuss technical issues
If you join or reset a password, please check your Spam Email box for emails from Admin at ComancheTechTalk.com
Please put your questions on the forum as well so everyone can read and respond. Someone else might be having similar questions.
All questions or topics on the Forums automatically get sent to the Tech team as well.
B & C Starters vs Sky-Tec Starters for PA-30
Thanks,
Mark Felsen
- Mark Felsen
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 7:53 pm
Re: B & C Starters vs Sky-Tec Starters for PA-30
All the best!
Jim
- MULEFLY
- ICS member
- Posts: 900
- Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2000 1:34 am
- Location: Wisconsin
Re: B & C Starters vs Sky-Tec Starters for PA-30
Welcome to the ICS Forum.
I've had Sky-tec starters since 2003 and am very happy with them - crank beautifully - way, way better than the bendix starting system. Full disclosure requires me to tell you the counter-rotated one failed due to a Sky-tec problem - they replaced the whole starter at no charge to me. The left one failed due to vibration caused by a mechanic not correctly torqueing the Lord mounts - even though it wasn't caused by them - Sky-Tec entirely overhauled the starter while I waited and charged me nothing. The right starter has been 100% trouble free for 5 years and the left for 4 years - never had that relaibillity from the bendix in the previous 41 years of the Twin's life.
Hope this helps.
Patricia Jayne (Pat) Keefer ICS 08899
PA-39 #10 Texas
N3322G- ICS member
- Posts: 1911
- Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 1:58 pm
- Location: Fort Worth, Texas area
Re: B & C Starters vs Sky-Tec Starters for PA-30
dap8@comcast.net
- David Pyle
- ICS member
- Posts: 372
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2003 10:33 pm
- Location: Houston
Re: B & C Starters vs Sky-Tec Starters for PA-30
I have never seen this problem on the PA-39 which runs the same IO-320 engines as the PA30 except the right one runs 'backwards'. This was true after overhaul as well.
Patricia Jayne (Pat) Keefer ICS 08899
PA-39 #10 Texas
N3322G- ICS member
- Posts: 1911
- Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 1:58 pm
- Location: Fort Worth, Texas area
Re: B & C Starters vs Sky-Tec Starters for PA-30
It is likely that the four cylinder PA 30/39 engines would be easier to start than a relativity new IO 540. Your experience would prevail with TC owners. BTW I once bought an airplane from one of the owners of Sky-Tec.
dap8@comcast.net
- David Pyle
- ICS member
- Posts: 372
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2003 10:33 pm
- Location: Houston
Re: B & C Starters vs Sky-Tec Starters for PA-30
About 3 yrs ago the factory starter on the 260B died without warning. I went through the same process you are doing now. Conclusion was that both Skytec and B&C were reputable products worth having. I went with the Skytec as my IA had a sense that product support was better and because Lycoming had chosen to go with Skytec on their new engines.
This aircraft has never had a problem with hot starts with either starter. That said it is amazing how fast the Skytec spins that io540 . The suggestion that these light weight starters are somehow a compromise is reactionary at best and in my opinion BS. They are in every way better than the old prestolites.
Good luck, Don
- 9089P
- ICS member
- Posts: 426
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 7:01 am
Re: B & C Starters vs Sky-Tec Starters for PA-30
-Zach
Zach Grant L1011jock- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 1404
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 4:35 pm
- Location: Indianapolis KEYE
Re: B & C Starters vs Sky-Tec Starters for PA-30
Alan
Alan Cheak- ICS member
- Posts: 142
- Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2003 8:17 pm
- Location: Peachtree City, GA KFFC