Yes this is a great illustration. Flip side is, I have heard guys complain about the cost of certified USB adapters in planes, which can be hundreds of dollars, when you can get one at Bestbuy fo $10. The thing is I have actually seen a $10 USB adapter start smouldering in the cockpit of a friends plane. Luckily that ended well, but it made the case for not getting a $10 USB adapter. That said, Garmin or Lycoming do not make their non certified products less safe, despite being less expensive.

@@FlightChops Can attest to the issue of 12v -> usb crap. Stuff you get from grey import from China, is very often unsafe. Same for random brands you can get at the gas station. They often don't have a 'real' regulator, just a underrated resistor and an underrated zener diode with no fuse or short circuit protection. The proper way to do it, is incredibly simple and rock solid reliable, but it may cost a whopping 50 cents more to produce.

@@FlightChops The cost of certification is the paperwork you get to accompany it. I work in Nuclear and the cost difference between "nuclear grade" and commercial grade is incredible, though the devices may be essentially identical. Liability also comes into play.

@@MichaelSteeves Probably why there hasn't been more then few new nuclear plants built in the last 30 years yet it's the only reliable power generator that does not release CO.

@@FlightChops Can you do commercial flight activity (tourist sightseeing) with an experimental engine/aircraft? What is the insurance difference?

Is that like a K&N Sticker on a car?

@@dasmellyyooper Definitely.

Don't forget the polished valve covers.

Yeah, but the Chrome Rocker covers are 10 horsepower.. so they are good.

That theory hasn't worked for Ferrari this year!

Thanks 👍

I'll try to have that discussion more deeply as we get closer to flying the RV-14... But at the end of the day, when dealing with a "real" company like Garmin or Lycoming... Their non certified stuff kind of IS as good as the certified... But I understand your point.

Certified still exists because it’s the only way you buy a new aircraft. If Cessna was allowed to sell a 182 “experimental” direct from the factory and they did it for half the price they would overnight double sells and certified aircraft would be a thing of the past nearly instantly. Regulation has created a market in primary cost of the certified part is not the part itself but the paperwork and pilot aren’t choosing that because they want to, they have no other option except for home builds.

​@@MrcaffinebeanI suspect paperwork has extremely specific testing requirements that accompany it. A small change can have unexpected consequences over time. Forms aren't usually expensive.

Glad you liked it! Go Canada! :)

Couldn't agree more!

I would like to see this rubber seal your talking about. The reason they have used thread is because the crankcase halfs need to stay tight together. Anything between the case halfs like rubber or silicone will allow the halfs to move and "freat", meaning the aluminum will rub together causing gaps and then the crankshaft bearings start to move and lots of shit starts to go wrong.

@@Airplanefish I believe there is an STC for it. It seems like the old way usually gets you to TBO, so probably not worth changing it.

@@quinnjim all be dipped....Ly-Con engine company in California does have the STC to perform that modification for Lycoming Engines and for Experimental Continental Engines. Interesting. Wonder what people's thoughts are on it that have done it? The more you know.....

I have seen multiple engines with the o-ring and have it personally on my Ly-Con built IO-540 for the SX300. It’s fantastic. The crankcase halves never leak. Many of the airshow teams use Ly-Con as well - with the same results. It’s a very tried and true process.

You bet! Thanks for signing up for the mailing list so we can reach you when KZfaq doesn't always do a good job sharing new videos.

Glen, you're here!

Mr kfc man welcome

Might look sweet, 1930s tech. Nothing high tech in a lycoming, no i am wrong farm tractor parts are better. I have watched lycoming for 60 years, They always have problems.

@@pauleyplay Yes it might be 1930s tech - but it has always worked for me. 30 years of flying under my belt, and the Lycoming has always been rock solid.

@@GlenAndFriendsCooking Great ,Glad you have not had any problems. Just check the ADs & general info to see what has been going on over many years. I had the pleasure of working at Alphin aircraft for years. We saw all kinds of airframes & engines. Does not take long to see what has evolved over the years. I wish you many more years of safe & happy flight.

I am indeed Canadian :)

Just out of curiosity (and to show you have veiwers all over the world) 🌎 I'm a Portuguese citizen, living in France, and glad to find an aviation tube channel like flightshopps

Your old 235 is good as it gets. THere is no difference. So its shines, that nice, but nothing has changed.

@@pauleyplay Just got it running again after a top end rebuild and a clean up. The old thing sounds good. Stay safe

I think your assessment is correct.

Which should cost less than a cutting edge efficient engine. Less as in a new vehicle engine.

Gov't regulations add time and money. Certification is my day job.

@@ihopetospeed1 aircraft engines are not standard. Actually almost nothing of them is still manufactured other then bare consumables, bearings and bolts for most of them. for most its either deep new-old stocks or just planes getting scraped for parts keeping the fleet going. try rebuilding a franklin, there are no oversized pistons or even a procedure to do that in the documentation. once the stock of barrels run out that's it. or like Beechcraft, the electric motors that run the gear on early bonanzas are just not made any more. companies have to resort to re-winding old cases to keep these planes flying. even a plane as popular as a bonanza dosent warrant the cost of spinning up the tooling again to make new replacements. at least with automotive derived engines there are hundreds of thousands out in the real world other then the few hundred that get sold in the air application. for people who restore ww2 aircraft the number of merlins and alisons made for boats, tanks, and generators has helped keep them going.

Glad to hear you're getting through it - and don't jinx us :P. Hopefully that was the one and only time we need to hang it :)

Happy to share!

Good eye - I'll have to point that out to the guys

Glad it was helpful!

Wait… diesel?

@@anthonyserafin4931 Diesel and Jet A are the same thing

It’s the 390 actually, and yes the Thunderbolt is a more expensive option

Heck of a long way to drag a fuselage, but sure if you’re up for it when this is all over - the more the merrier!

Agreed! and you are correct! It is a massive project, but we're restoring a Mosquito!

I swear by the KISS concept :)

@@FlightChops respect ;D

Hmmm... I guess we assumed most people would know Lycoming is a major aircraft engine manufacturer, and the Thunderbolt is a sort of "up trim / hand crafted" version of the base model engines? I am not even explaining it right now... haha. Anyway maybe this link will help: www.lycoming.com/engines/thunderbolt

You are getting an improved performance over a base model cert. engine and a lower cost. Lycoming has to build certified engines to the exact type design to maintain certification thus can't make all the trick mods without redesigned and recertification of a new engine type. That takes a long time and millions of dollars to do. Experimental class stuff is not subject to these standards.

@@mytmousemalibu If I have to add, the safety standards are the same, as said by the Lycoming guys, the high cost of the certified engine comes with the high capital cost from Lycoming to satisfy the FAA paperwork. The experimental engines don't have to have the same "paper trail" but they are built with the same standards without the high certification cost.

The Thunderbolt is a Balanced & Blueprint version of the stock model along with the other custom add on or Take Offs, in Steves’s case.

@@2Phast4Rocket Absolutely! With an OEM like Lycoming, you can breathe easy knowing that regardless of cert or not, you are getting trusted, reliable engines & parts. Lycoming has to maintain their place in the market and they aren't going to jeopardize their good name. The EX ticket components has its benefits for sure. I understand both sides of the coin having worked experimental flight test for Learjet/Bombardier. The cost to the road to certification is almost unfathomable.

14 years with this backup alternator setup and no cracks or fall offs.

Thanks for the tip to watch for that. I'll ask HET if they've heard of this issue. It probably won't hurt that the Thunderbolt should be fairly low vibration.

@@FlightChops I certainly hope it's not an issue for you! The peace of mind is certainly nice and I'm in favor of anything that gets rid of vacuum pumps

I hope they use a proper type of paint. Ca 1990 in the Netherlands I was watching an engineer take of the engine cowling of a similar engine. The private owner had sprayed all the cooling fins with a thick layer of a sticky anti-corrosion liquid. He had spotted the beginning of rust he thought. During the taxi run, he noticed smoke...

I think that dude is better looking than me :P. But thanks :)

I was wondering about that cover as well! As an ex-BMW employee and a current BMW lover, this caught my eye immediately.

@@groggysword33 Same here! I went through BMW S.T.E.P. almost 20yrs ago (I don't think its called STEP anymore?). Was a BMW tech for 10-11yrs before retiring to aviation.

@@mytmousemalibu They call it different now, but some of the older guys called it step. I was encouraged by the techs to go into it, so they started mentoring me. Good times.

@@groggysword33 Yeah, that was a good time! I went to Wyotech out of HS. Also a good time, fond memories! Took automotive technology, minor in chassis fab & high performance engines. We were told about the more elite OEM programs like STEP, Mercedes program, Audi, etc. Always love BMW, first car was an E12 538i. Back then it was a pretty elite deal to get entrance to BMW's program. Something like 3-4 people accepted out of 50. I tested well and selected! It was basically a full-ride scholarship deal. I had to handle my living arrangement and finances but BMW covered the training. I had my choice of school location. I believe it was San Fran, Phoenix?, Cleveland and Jersey? I wanted to go to Arizona but it was 6mo wait. No interest in the coasts and Cleveland was the soonest start so went there at Ohio Tech where BMW had their own program within. Can't say I loved Cleveland but class was good and got me on my way. I was right there at the end of my favorite BMW designd cars under Claus Luthe era to the Chris Bangle designs. I love look of the e46 e39, e38. So the new flagships were just in then too. The e60, e65/e66 etc. The N62 and Valvetronic was all state of the art. All the new bussing systems and fiber optic stuff was brand new. Active roll systems, just all that stuff. Some of it a real nightmare to work on back then, so many software problems, problems with the Dis, OPS heads, fiber optic communicate issues, a hot mess. Made the older GT1 and Modic seen like a breeze! I appreciated the older cars for their lack of next gen problems. Out of all the cars BMW made, I love the e30! Best car they made, the 2002 was great also. The e30 looks fantastic, great balance in its design and performance and very reliable. Great car to modify and build on. 👌