TCM Lifter Problem - Grounding Aircraft

AirBaker

AirBaker

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Mar 3, 2005
Messages
1,519
Location
San Jose, CA
Display Name
Display name:
AirBaker
This just came through my email. For those with TCM engines, you might want to check this before your next flight.

http://www.genuinecontinental.aero/documents/Lifters-FAQ.pdf

From their site:
October 30, 2009

Dear Valued Customer,

Teledyne Continental Motors (TCM) announced yesterday a limited recall of Hydraulic Lifters used in TCM engine valve trains. TCM has determined that these lifters are subject to early wear.
These parts are designed and supplied by an outside vendor, which is working aggressively to identify the root cause and to deliver good parts.
These parts were first used in late June of 2009 and affect only a small percentage of the flying fleet.

I am writing to let you know not only that we have identified an issue, but that we are taking aggressive action to retire these hydraulic lifters with minimal impact to our many customers. Specifically, TCM

  1. Identified alternative sources of lifters.
  2. Established dedicated Customer Service representatives to handle replacement scheduling and customer questions.
  3. Developed a plan and series of priorities to restore internal engine production.
  4. Will provide replacement lifters affected by this issue at TCM expense. It is our goal to manage this program responsibly and quickly.
I appreciate your effort and support as we work through this issue.

Sincerely,

Rhett Ross
President
 
Sigh.

I like getting letters from my car mfr so much more. You know, the part about "we pay for this repair, 'cause we screwed up."
 
AirBaker said:
This just came through my email. For those with TCM engines, you might want to check this before your next flight.

http://www.genuinecontinental.aero/documents/Lifters-FAQ.pdf

From their site:
October 30, 2009

Dear Valued Customer,

Teledyne Continental Motors (TCM) announced yesterday a limited recall of Hydraulic Lifters used in TCM engine valve trains. TCM has determined that these lifters are subject to early wear.
These parts are designed and supplied by an outside vendor, which is working aggressively to identify the root cause and to deliver good parts.
These parts were first used in late June of 2009 and affect only a small percentage of the flying fleet.

I am writing to let you know not only that we have identified an issue, but that we are taking aggressive action to retire these hydraulic lifters with minimal impact to our many customers. Specifically, TCM

  1. Identified alternative sources of lifters.
  2. Established dedicated Customer Service representatives to handle replacement scheduling and customer questions.
  3. Developed a plan and series of priorities to restore internal engine production.
  4. Will provide replacement lifters affected by this issue at TCM expense. It is our goal to manage this program responsibly and quickly.
I appreciate your effort and support as we work through this issue.

Sincerely,

Rhett Ross
President
Click to expand...

As an "alternative engine" guy this stuff is fuel on the fire for certified engine mfgs. All I hear is " we have been building engines for 60 years , time tested, fail safe, quality control etc. !!!! Thats the excuse they use when they sell a 8,000 engine for 50,000 bucks. Now they use the, " "these parts are designed and supplied by an outside vendor" excuse.... Where the heck is that QC part that added some much to the initial cost of the certified FAA approved engine ???? So now alot of pilots/owners will get hit with repair costs and the dreaded downtime.:mad2:

YMMV.
 
Last edited:
I still do not understand why the consumer has to pay for the mistakes of the manufacturer. ALL costs, and I mean ALL, for fixing this should be borne by TCM.
 
tdager said:
I still do not understand why the consumer has to pay for the mistakes of the manufacturer. ALL costs, and I mean ALL, for fixing this should be borne by TCM.
Click to expand...
Considering that the affected parts were manufactured less than six months ago, this should be covered under the manufacturer's warranty.

Ron Wanttaja
 
It looks like I might have squeaked by on this one. My Reman 550 came earlier in June. I only went with the Factory Reman since the 550 crank price was jacked up by TCM. Hopefully they've got their cylinder issues within spec now too.
 
I'll ask before Kent does... would this affect say a newly overhauled O-470 done by a well known shop in Poplar Grove, WI?
 
vontresc said:
I'll ask before Kent does... would this affect say a newly overhauled O-470 done by a well known shop in Poplar Grove, WI?
Click to expand...

Get the work order for the engine overhaul and check the part numbers. If the engine was overhauled and it's lifters were sent out for refacing or exchanged with "overhauled" units and not exchanged with the new type you're OK.
 
I purchased Factory new IO-550 Still in shipping crate. Lifters are pitted and cam shows mrkings. Continental has decided damage is not significant and will not take back the engine. Bob Robbins, with Teledyne, basically informed me I was SOL. Anyone have any ideas
 
mstalls said:
I purchased Factory new IO-550 Still in shipping crate. Lifters are pitted and cam shows mrkings. Continental has decided damage is not significant and will not take back the engine. Bob Robbins, with Teledyne, basically informed me I was SOL. Anyone have any ideas
Click to expand...


What ??? Are you saying you have a Factory NEW I0-550, never been run and the lifters are pitted ??????

I am getting confused again . :yesnod::eek:
 
Yeah, I know that but how can a few hours on the factory dyno cause pitting? If it really did the Factory might as well shut down now. GEEZ !!!!:yikes::yikes::nono:
 
I'm terribly sorry to hear about this. Tragic.
We looked at TCM remans and are headed another direction. This is not the first story I have heard about TCM's approach to their workmanship.
For years, owners of those engines have had issues with the valves and guides. Found out the way there are tested at the factory is if they hold a preset amount of pressure for a period of time. That says little about valve seating and how they will wear if not properly seated over time. Guides not speced well will pass initial tests, but not wear well.

Best,

Dave
 
So Dave, you're actually getting your engines overhauled? Any reason or just because it was getting time being a couple hundred past TBO?
 
Ted: We're a couple hundred over TBO, cylinders have almost 1,000 hours on them.

There is a point where it's not just how the engines run, compressions are and oil analysis is; there is a point where a lot of things are wearing out and need to be replaced. If one is highly sensitive to dispatch rate, other things come into play. These engines were installed April of '94. We're very happy with how they've done.

In the 58P we have a lot of wonderful stuff; as a matter of fact, almost too much <g> Turbos; waste gates, exhaust, mags, fuel lines that are all tired. Had an oil pressure relief valve stick, etc.

So, my partner and I have decided to fire wall forward both engine to get rid of all the stuff that is tired and get the benefit of not fixing a lot of little stuff that is just worn out all the time.

Best,

Dave
 
Thanks, Dave, that answers my question wonderfully. I remembered you were a couple hundred past TBO, I was curious as to what strategy you were going to use as I'll have a similar choice to make eventually.

On the Aztec my left engine is 500 SMOH and the right engine is 1500 SMOH, 2000 hour TBO on both. I talk about the left engine being the "good" engine, and it's amazing how many little things I've had to do on the right engine (baffling, exhaust, and a bad spark plug wire come to mind off the top of my head, but there's been more) while the left one has been virtually trouble-free (now that I've said that... ;)). What doesn't help is that both engines were done "on the cheap" by previous owners, so some of what I've been doing is just replacing things that should be fixed, not necessarily things that need to be since, like you, dispatability is important for me and I like everything working properly.

Hope it all goes well!
 
Luckily it doesn't affect all TCM engines, the TSIO520 BE and the TSIO550 C engines use a different Part#. The same engines missed the earlier cyl. mess. Finally, the PA46 dodges a bullet, we may not be so lucky on the upcoming Piper spar SB and AD note.

The quality of the TCM product and factory support has been a big disappointment to me over the past 6 years.
 
I remember debating an issue with a TCM factory rep at a Beechcraft Inspection clinic. I recited factual, directly relevant information; he gave general, irrelevant responses with dire warnings I would ruin my engine doing that. The engines on that TN plane went more than 500 hours over TBO. My current plane engines are more than 200 over (TC engines).

Last I looked, they didn't have a P.E. on staff in a quality control position.

Guess ya don't need to know nothin to see those engines <g>.

The place I'm headed spent more than an hour going over how they seat the valves, replace factory rings, align guides, spec cam, crank etc. and completely agreed with how I run the engines.

Best,

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top