Field Overhaul cost for a 0360-A4K

[Cesarmx]

Hi everybody

My engine O360 is approaching the 2000 hr TBO mark ( about 200 hrs away) and would like to find out from the audience with experience in this field of approx cost for a field overhaul ( not including mags, carb, starter, alternator and prop since they all have been OH in the last couple of years and are working fine).
I already have brand new Millenium cylinder kits with me and may buy a new camshaft and lifters as well; so basically the work involved will be disassemble engine, have crankshaft and case inspected ( I will even take them to inspection shop myself) and put back together with new cylinders and sign off book.
Anybody from Texas who can recommend a shop will nube appreciated near Houston, Austin, San Antonio?
( I know that a reputable shop name will be more costly so I want to avoid those).
Unganging and rehanging engine will be done by my AP and myself at my hangar in south Houston Tx , so I will personally deliver and pick up engine in my truck.

Thamks for you all’s inputs

 

[AvNavCom]

If you're flying under Part 91, you're not required to do an overhaul at TBO. Is the engine still running well? If so, perhaps you can consider continuing to run the engine while keeping a close eye on it (oil analysis, bore-scoping) and save yourself some money. An overhaul is going to run between $25k and $55k depending on where you get it done and what needs to be replaced.

 

[Cesarmx]

If you're flying under Part 91, you're not required to do an overhaul at TBO. Is the engine still running well? If so, perhaps you can consider continuing to run the engine while keeping a close eye on it (oil analysis, bore-scoping) and save yourself some money. An overhaul is going to run between $25k and $55k depending on where you get it done and what needs to be replaced.

Thanks Sir! Yes engine still running ok, no problems for part 91

 

[Rick A]

How many hours of flying between adding a quart of oil are you experiencing?

 

[Dixiebluesky]

I personally would not OH a good running O360 just because of hours, especially if it is able to be flown often. I would get a borescope to keep an eye out for changes in the top end, do oil analysis and most importantly cut open every oil filter. Preferably doing it myself and not at a shop. Lycoming has pretty good guidance for metal in the filter and what it means.

The O360 is a pretty stout engine.

 

[AvNavCom]

Thanks Sir! Yes engine still running ok, no problems for part 91

In that case I would keep flying it until the engine tells you that it's time by beginning to make metal, there is some obvious degradation in performance, or you find something unairworthy on borescope . No need to overhaul at TBO. It's not safer and may introduce new risk. Save your money!

 

[Cesarmx]

Thank you all for your replies! Yes, cylinder compressions have been 72/80 for the last 8 years when I did a top OH ( now about 350 hrs) and borescopes for last 3 years have been ok.
I was inquiring about the cost in case I wanted to sell it in the next couple of years; I have been gotten some negative inputs because of the height time engine even though it runs fine and it’s oil consumption is about 10 hrs per quart and no metal in top suction screen and bottom finger screen but people when inquire me get scared that the airplane is not safe and think it will fall off of the sky anytime. Lots of misconceptions out there even from pilots!

 

[Hang 4]

You'll need to be realistic about the value added to the sale price from a field OH vs OH from a big name shop.

 

[AvNavCom]

I was inquiring about the cost in case I wanted to sell it in the next couple of years;

Similar to installing avionics, I don't think you'd get your money back from doing an overhaul, especially if you don't get an overhaul done by a recognized shop, as @Hang 4 says. Probably better to accept a somewhat lower price for a "run out" engine than risk doing an overhaul and finding out that you need to replace the crankshaft too.

 

[Clip4]

You'll need to be realistic about the value added to the sale price from a field OH vs OH from a big name shop.

Also be realistic of how often you fly. If you don’t put many hours on an engine a year, corrosion is a larger threat than the engine not making TBO.

 

[Ed Haywood]

I disagree with advice to put it off. IMO a planned overhaul is preferable to a surprise overhaul. Do the legwork, negotiate a good deal, then eat the downtime when it works for you, not when the airplane decides to force you to.

 

[Cesarmx]

Also be realistic of how often you fly. If you don’t put many hours on an engine a year, corrosion is a larger threat than the engine not making TBO.

I fly about once a week for 0.5-1 hr most of the times, occasionally x country trips of 1-2 hours for a total of about 50 hrs a year, however I must confess that for the last 3 years it has been less than that.
My primary concern to go for an OH , probably in 1-2 years, is the fact that the last time it was OH was in 1991, 45 years ago!

 

[Cesarmx]

I understand the issue, it’s mainly economics…..do it now or wait…….a fellow pilot in my field owns an American Tiger with also an O 360, it has 2250 SMOH and still flies and passes inspection at each annual, no issues or complains from him!
I have owned mine for almost 26 years and always have kept up with regular maintenance and properly operating the engine per manufacturers recommendations.

I also know that a reputable shop over a field shop is also more expensive and but necessarily better or safer and all will have strings attached for warranty such as minimum of hours flown a year, for a max limit of hours etc.

 

[WDD]

oil consumption is about 10 hrs per quart

A great running engine you've got there. I'd run it for another 500 hours at least, check it again, and then keep running it. It's a myth that an engine can only last 2000 hours and you're on borrowed time. A good running engine with 2000 hours is more reliable than a new engine that you're breaking in.

 

[schmookeeg]

I'm not sure overhauling to sell would ever make sense. An 1800 hour Lycoming is nearly as valuable as a 2300 hour one is nearly as valuable as a 3000 hour one...

like someone is gonna pay the piper eventually and anyone buying the risk assumes it's them and offers accordingly.

I think run that sucker hard then sell it at the low price and just deduct the 35ish K it would cost to MOH from the sales price, so the downtime is someone else's.

DM me when you get there. I got PPL in a Sundowner and have a weakness for them

 

[Kevin Holbrook]

Don’t you have to overhaul carburetor and mags (maybe oil cooler too) if you’re going to call it an overhaul?

 

[Rcmutz]

I once had a broker tell me that 1500 hrs or more, it’s a run out engine and you price accordingly. If you OH, fly it for at least 500 hrs before selling to get the most benefit out of the money spent for the OH.

 

[Bell206]

Don’t you have to overhaul carburetor and mags (maybe oil cooler too) if you’re going to call it an overhaul?

Unless specifically stated in the engine OH manual it is not required to OH any 3rd party accessories as they have their own maintenance schedules. While typically, you might see someone OH or IRAN the accessories at engine OH, it typically depends on their individual service history.

I was inquiring about the cost in case I wanted to sell it in the next couple of years;

FYI: in most cases, you will not recoup your engine OH costs at aircraft sale.

 

[bonefishpete]

Run It. If a cylinder goes down pull check cam and slap one of the new cylinders on.
Run some more.

 

[rockyfatcat]

Before pulling the trigger on an overhaul. Find Mike Bush’s info on overhauls.

If you are part 91, still making power, good compressions, and not making metal, keep flying it.

Statistically a well maintained engine will fly well beyond (2-3x) recommended TBO. Most catastrophic failures happen within a couple hundred hours of invasive surgery. (Split the case, or pull a jug).

Do your own research and don’t be in a hurry to pay for recreational maintenance (the really expensive kind) that could ultimately will cost way more.

In my opinion. The best value in used aircraft engines are engines removed at TBO from to remain legal under part 61/141. They are flown frequently, inspected and maintained.

“If you don’t put many hours on an engine a year, corrosion is a larger threat than the engine not making TBO”. This is a very real statement. If you can’t fly it more frequently. You probably need to find a way to partner up with someone who can.

 

[Clip4]

I understand the issue, it’s mainly economics…..do it now or wait…….a fellow pilot in my field owns an American Tiger with also an O 360, it has 2250 SMOH and still flies and passes inspection at each annual, no issues or complains from him!
I have owned mine for almost 26 years and always have kept up with regular maintenance and properly operating the engine per manufacturers recommendations.

I also know that a reputable shop over a field shop is also more expensive and but necessarily better or safer and all will have strings attached for warranty such as minimum of hours flown a year, for a max limit of hours etc

Even zero time engines from the OEMs can fail.

 

[Cesarmx]

I am surprised the consensus is to continue running it ( while monitoring cylinder compression and borescopes, metal in oil, CHTs, Max RPMs etc). Maybe my grandson (almost 16) will have a use for it!
Thanks

 

[Kent Wien]

This Vref podcast talks about overhauling to sell an airplane. I plan on going well past TBO, but this was really eye opening with regards to the market:

Why “Engine Overhauls Don’t Add Value” Is the Most Dangerous Take in Aviation | EPISODE 21

Podcast Episode · VREF | The Truth About the Aviation Market · January 30 · 26m

podcasts.apple.com

 

[bonefishpete]

Time in service is more important than hours. Don’t have much trust in a 30 year old low time rebuild. Exactly because of corrosion.

Lycoming Warranty
Lycoming new and rebuilt engines warranted against defects in material and workmanship for a period of either
twenty-four (24) months or the recommended time in engine hours between overhauls (“TBO”), whichever
occurs first. TBO shall be as stated in the latest edition of Lycoming Service Instruction 1009.

 

[hindsight2020]

This Vref podcast talks about overhauling to sell an airplane. I plan on going well past TBO, but this was really eye opening with regards to the market:

Why “Engine Overhauls Don’t Add Value” Is the Most Dangerous Take in Aviation | EPISODE 21

Podcast Episode · VREF | The Truth About the Aviation Market · January 30 · 26m

podcasts.apple.com

Good thing I only read the AI review, cuz good lord what load of pRidE iN owNerShip poor-shaming balderdash, with True Scots fallacy at the end for good measure. I swear with friends like these.....

Fact remains, not all individual samples can support the post-2020-M2-theft-event cost basis of powerplant replacement. Yes, it's sunk for the user, but for resale, it doesn't pencil out in many instances. I lost way less money than I would have gambled away by replacing the engine prior to sale. And most importantly, did so at a much greater liquidity of transaction. Paradoxical, given that thing had to be hauled away in a trailer by the new owner as a necessitating requirement for the transaction mind you.

fwiw, there's always been a lot of hubris from the "haven't had to face the step up in cost basis" crowd. No different than housing. If I had a quarter for every jabrony who privately utters in between chuckles "I couldn't buy my own [_____] today if I had to", I'd be able to retire in my 40s. Tyranny of incumbency masked as financial acumen. Incumbents are the "third basemen" of life, always gum flapping about the triple they never hit.

 

[schmookeeg]

In case anyone else was too tired to parse that:

Ha, got it — you're sharing somebody else's rant and asking me to translate it from Forum Aggrieved into English.

The poster is responding to a podcast episode that apparently argued: if you're selling an airplane, overhauling the engine first adds value / is the right move. The poster thinks that take is wrong, or at least wrong often enough that presenting it as gospel is obnoxious. Their actual points, stripped of the venom:

1. Cost basis has stepped up dramatically post-2020. Engine overhauls (and new/reman engines) cost a lot more now than they did pre-pandemic. So advice calibrated to the old cost structure doesn't automatically transfer.
2. For some airframes, the overhaul cost exceeds the value it adds at resale. A run-out engine on a low-value airframe can mean the math says: sell it run-out (or as a project), eat a smaller loss, and move on. Sinking $80K+ into an overhaul to recover maybe $40K of resale uplift is the gamble, not the safe move.
3. Liquidity argument. A run-out airplane at the right price actually moves — sometimes faster than a freshly-overhauled one at full ask, because the buyer pool that wants a project at a discount is real. The poster claims they sold theirs (literally hauled away on a trailer) and still came out ahead vs. having gambled on an overhaul.
4. The sociological jab. They're accusing the "always overhaul before selling" crowd of being incumbents whose own cost basis was set years ago, who haven't had to write a 2025-priced check, and who mistake their lucky timing for wisdom. The housing analogy ("couldn't buy my own house today") is the same complaint — people confusing being early with being smart.

The "True Scots fallacy" line is them accusing the podcast of doing no true aviation owner would skip the overhaul — i.e., gatekeeping rather than arguing.

Net translation: the podcast gave one-size-fits-all advice that ignores current overhaul economics and the existence of the run-out / project buyer market, and the host's tone implied anyone who disagrees just doesn't love airplanes enough. The poster is mad about the tone more than the content, but the underlying economic point is legitimate — pre-sale overhauls are very airframe-and-market specific, and the "always overhaul" take genuinely doesn't pencil for a lot of pistons right now.

 

[pfarber]

This Vref podcast talks about overhauling to sell an airplane. I plan on going well past TBO, but this was really eye opening with regards to the market:

Why “Engine Overhauls Don’t Add Value” Is the Most Dangerous Take in Aviation | EPISODE 21

Podcast Episode · VREF | The Truth About the Aviation Market · January 30 · 26m

podcasts.apple.com

From the episode desription 'Key Takeaways':
Engine overhauls are not investments. They are risk management decisions.
Their value is not theoretical—it lives at the intersection of safety, finance, insurance, and real market behavior.
No serious aviation professional expects dollar-for-dollar recovery. What matters is whether an aircraft remains financeable, insurable, and sellable.

Of the 3 'keys' I kinda agree with #1. Its not an investment, your motor is putting chunks-o-metal in the filter or burning way to much oil... its time to evaluate the benefit of a rebuild or overhaul or other corrective measure as opposed to an engine stoppage.

The COST is not theoretical (its actually a hard number) but using a mythical 'value' proposition is. Engines that have had major MX are unknown quantities. New motors die, don't get broken in correctly or simply are not put together properly... how can you derive safety from a motor with 20-50 hours? I can tell you a 2000 hour motor, good compression and not making metal/burning much oil is a safer bet.

When did 'financeable' become part of the decision. Once you have the loan I don't think there are many banks that want your asset, they want your payment. If banks starting repossession of aircraft that were unairworthy then they would most likely be the largest owners of GA AC in the world. I get that new owners may think that new motors are better than ones with say 1000 hours... but SMART owners price that into the offer.

Engine rebuilds and overhauls are the safe answer. The MX/shop isn't paying a dime, in fact they have a distinct financial incentive to recommend them. Being able to bill 80+ hours? Yes please. The sad fact is that liability is a bigger part of the 'yeah, you should OH' answer than looking at the engine OBJECTIVELY and giving an answer.

Something that trash-cast seems to not understand.

 

[Garee]

I fly about once a week for 0.5-1 hr most of the times, occasionally x country trips of 1-2 hours for a total of about 50 hrs a year, however I must confess that for the last 3 years it has been less than that.
My primary concern to go for an OH , probably in 1-2 years, is the fact that the last time it was OH was in 1991, 45 years ago!

45 years? Might want to check your math……

 

[WDD]

Eh - 45 or 35, at that age doesn't matter much - implications are the same. But, with low oil consumption, good compressions and what not, good oil filter exams, good oil analysis, you should still be good to keep running it.

 

[Cesarmx]

45 years? Might want to check your math……

Thanks, 35 years!

 

[Rcmutz]

When did 'financeable' become part of the decision. Once you have the loan I don't think there are many banks that want your asset, they want your payment. If banks starting repossession of aircraft that were unairworthy then they would most likely be the largest owners of GA AC in the world. I get that new owners may think that new motors are better than ones with say 1000 hours... but SMART owners price that into the offer.

I have heard where certain financial organizations and/or insurance companies will NOT finance an aircraft if it is past recommended TBO, weather age or time. Of course, if the buyer is not financing the total amount, maybe that will not be an issue.

 

[danhagan]

I have been gotten some negative inputs because of the height time engine even though it runs fine and it’s oil consumption is about 10 hrs per quart and no metal in top suction screen and bottom finger screen but people when inquire me get scared that the airplane is not safe and think it will fall off of the sky anytime. Lots of misconceptions out there even from pilots!

I sold my Tiger nearing TBO same as your plane now. It went to FletchAir who Dave Fletch I've worked with before and he said it would most likely fail the wobble test and borescope ... surprise, engine was in GREAT shape. Sold it several years ago and I here it is well on it way towards 3000 hours. Tigers are selling for a LOT now, I priced it where I thought it should be given that engine time ... buyer got a great deal. Could sell it now for a HUGE profit without ever having taken care of the engine ...

 

[Rcmutz]

I sold my Tiger nearing TBO same as your plane now. It went to FletchAir who Dave Fletch I've worked with before and he said it would most likely fail the wobble test and borescope ... surprise, engine was in GREAT shape. Sold it several years ago and I here it is well on it way towards 3000 hours. Tigers are selling for a LOT now, I priced it where I thought it should be given that engine time ... buyer got a great deal. Could sell it now for a HUGE profit without ever having taken care of the engine ...

I wonder what that says about SB388C???