Warbird Information Exchange

Does anyone know what the TBO is on the O-470-11 engine of the L-19, and can provide documentation. I put the question up on the IBDA message board but did not receive an answer. I am actively looking to buy one but all of the planes that have been offered to me have been 1200 hrs or more SMOH some as high as 1500 hrs. Some of the owners are quoting 1500 hrs but one says it is 1800 hrs.

I always thought they were the same as all of the other Continental O-470 engines, 1500 hrs. I owned a C-180 and it had a TBO of 1500 hrs.

Thanks for your help
steve

_________________
https://www.facebook.com/groups/2282629 ... ref=SEARCH

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1062859 ... 8743408401

http://www.tcmlink.com/pdf2/SIL98-9A.pdf

Since Continental probably didn't certify the -11 there may be nothing published.

All O 470's in the service letter are listed as 1500 TBO with the exception of specific O 470 U models which are listed in the SL under note 3. As said above the -11 is not listed at all.

If the AC is going to be flown under part 91 the TBO is just a recommendation and there is no requirement to do a major at that point. In fact if you look at 98-9A it has hours and time. The time is 12 years so technically you could have an engine with 300 SMOH and the OH had been done 13 years ago and it is past TBO.

I flew my Mooney with an O 360 A1D for 2450 hours before we did an engine exchange. When it was pulled it still had good oil analysis and consumption and good compression. TBO for that engine was 2000 hours. We had a fish spotter here that ran a O 320 to almost 4000 before they did an OH.

_________________
Flying Piper L4-J 45-55209

I understand that it is only a recommendation but it has a huge impact on the selling price of the aircraft. A quality overhaul on the O-470-11 is around $23,000 plus another two or three thousand for the pressure carb. If the TBO is 1500 hrs then there would be a big difference in value in two planes one with 1300 hrs SMOH and another with 350 SMOH. The difference would approximate $12,000.

I have owned three Bird Dogs and restored two and really miss owning one. I was hoping someone might have an engine overhaul manual that might have the Army recommendation on the TBO. As has been mentioned it was never used in a certified production aircraft.

My last two L-19s had zero time engines on them when I restored them, i am not a fan of high time engines, I had a Cessna Cardinal swallow a valve on me while IFR, it had 1600 hrs TT on a 2,000 hr TBO engine.

Thanks
Steve

_________________
https://www.facebook.com/groups/2282629 ... ref=SEARCH

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1062859 ... 8743408401

The O-470-7 is the equivalent of the E185-3 which has a TBO of 1500hrs*
The O-470-11 is basically a Continental E series engine with a modified accessory section.
The O-470-A etc, parallel valve engines use essentially the same cylinders and rotating parts, albeit with a flange for the prop instead of SAE splines. They also have a TBO of 1500hrs*.
So, a very supportable argument (the kind the FAA likes) could be made for a 1500hr TBO

*as per SIL98-9A



The O-470-7 and O-470-11 overhaul manual (T.O. 2R-0470-3) does not specify a TBO, although it does provide rather detailed inspection criteria (Better than most TCM manuals). I have a copy to hand as I type

One big difficulty is that TCM no longer supports any of the E-series, or parallel valve O-470 engines, making parts difficult to procure at best. Our shop has stopped doing overhauls on them for that very reason.

TBO is, as has been pointed out, a recommendation in most cases. The big killer of engines is not the time they spend working, but rather the time they spend sitting. I've seen 520's make 3600hrs with regular use (yes, it was worn out by then, but not as bad as it could have been), and I've seen O-300's need a complete overhaul at less than 100 (rusty from sitting, but oh so pretty on the outside)

_________________
Lest Hero-worship raise it's head and cloud our vision, remember that World War II was fought and won by the same sort of twenty-something punks we wouldn't let our daughters date.

The O-470-11 series engines are certificated:

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guida ... /E-269.pdf

They had to be in order for Cessna to type certificate the 305 airplane (L-19/O-1).

_________________
If God had wanted man to fly behind a flat motor, Pratt Whitney would've built one.

This is exactly the information that I needed. Concise, accurate and to the point. Thanks very much for responding.

Best Regards
Steve

_________________
https://www.facebook.com/groups/2282629 ... ref=SEARCH

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1062859 ... 8743408401

A friend of mine worked on them in Vietnam, they got about three weeks TBO due to the volcanic dust on the airfield they operated from.

Shrike should be punished for being clear, concise, and non-combative here on WIX. This place is for wild speculation, man, not real information. What is wrong with you?

Thanks for the information. I was always curious how the L-19 compared to the L-5.

_________________
REMEMBER THE SERGEANT PILOTS!

I have flown both the L-5 and L-19, much more time in the L-5 towing gliders, I liked how the L-5 flew much better, for one thing the landing gear on the L-19 on pavement would constantly wiggle in all directions, never did anything funny but always had me wondering. The lycoming in the L-5 is a good engine but good luck finding parts, but from reading the posts here maybe the o-470-11 is not far behind. Be nice if you could just put a newer O-470 in the L-19.

The 435's in the L-5 are also complete orphans now.

Theoretically, you could upgrade the engine in the L-19 to an IO 470 C or H (250 and 260hp respectively) but that would mean a new prop as well.
Once you've accepted the cost of a new prop, and a lot of hoops to jump through you could just as easily (or just as hardly? With great and equal difficulty!) upgrade to an IO520 or 550

_________________
Lest Hero-worship raise it's head and cloud our vision, remember that World War II was fought and won by the same sort of twenty-something punks we wouldn't let our daughters date.