Exhaust Pipe extentions

Anything having to do with an engine that powers any Aeronca aircraft
Post Reply
User avatar
Nathan K. Hammond
Posts: 2371
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 00:22
Location: Danville, KY (DVK)
Contact:

Exhaust Pipe extentions

Post by Nathan K. Hammond »

On Hanlon/Wilson mufflers there is a separate tail pipe. If you were to extend them or say bend a new set that ran out the rear/belly hole in the cowl, would that consitute the need for a 337 ?

I think I could get away with extending them with no paper work but the re-route I'm fuzzy on.

nkh
7AC-5691
Super 85-12F @ DVK
MikeB
Posts: 3246
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 17:07
Location: Western Wisconsin
Contact:

Tail Pipes

Post by MikeB »

Nathan,
Pretty sure that would call for a 337, if for no other reason you're changing the location of the exhaust. I'm assuming out the pressure cowl exit as opposed to through the lower cowl. Interesting concept, though.
Can't imagine it would hurt anything, but could probably get to be a paper work nightmare, assuming it's never been done before.

I went through quite a hassle getting the Cessna 150 mufflers approved on mine and there were dozens of similiar applications and 337's approved.
I think sometimes a lot depends on your local FAA guy.
"If God had intended man to fly He would have given us more money"
visitor

Hanlon Wilson Mufflers

Post by visitor »

"I went through quite a hassle getting the Cessna 150 mufflers approved on mine and there were dozens of similiar applications and 337's approved.
I think sometimes a lot depends on your local FAA guy."

I think you are right about that! Of the 6 Champs in the close local area, mine is the only one with the original "Y" style Champ exhausts. The rest of them laugh at me because I don't have any cabin heat to speak of.

I do know that the STC/service bulletin(?) to the 85hp engine calls for conversion to the Cessna 150 style mufflers. One of the local Champs has had the same owner since the early 50's and he thinks his may have come from the factory with those mufflers as an option. If that be the case, all it would take would be a log book entry stating "P/N XX installed". Sure would beat playing roulette with the local FSDO.
User avatar
Nathan K. Hammond
Posts: 2371
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 00:22
Location: Danville, KY (DVK)
Contact:

Post by Nathan K. Hammond »

Well, it's kind of funny. I've been saving all the Champ photos I see to help determine what kind of a paint scheme I want to go with. About 2 or 3 months ago a 7AC converted to a 7GC came up for sale on Barnstormers, it had a nice paint scheme so I saved it. Looking back at it, I noticed the exhaust coming out of the Pressure Cowl instead of the lower half, and it looks amazing to me. It got rid of the "Walrus Tooth" look, exhausts stains on the cowl, and just made the airplane look amazing in my opinion. I've got the pic saved on the work computer, maybe try and get it to you Mike.

So if it's a 7GC, that means it has a Lyc up front most likely, or maybe even a complete GC setup FWF ??? It would sure be neat, but a lot of paper work I'm certain. Here in ATL, there are only a few FAA types that have a grasp on Common Sence, oh well. Seems like they are fewer and fewer.

Who knows, I may play around with it once I get this box of engine parts all put together....C-85... Yahoo!!

nkh
7AC-5691
Super 85-12F @ DVK
User avatar
joea
Site Admin
Posts: 5993
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 13:01
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Contact:

Post by joea »

One of the Aeronca's locally was trying to lower his CO levels in the plane and ended up putting extensions on his exhaust pipes. It did lower the levels in the cabin by quite a bit. Do not believe that there was any paperwork filed on it and they were just ordinary muffler pipe. Not sure how this will work out at annual or if he is ramped.

JoeA
Ron Babos
Posts: 571
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 16:23
Location: Woodstock, Ont, Can
Contact:

Post by Ron Babos »

Sound like it's easier to use the pipe extension you like, and switch to the regular for the annual. Everybody is happy and no paperwork. :twisted: Ron
User avatar
joea
Site Admin
Posts: 5993
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 13:01
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Contact:

Post by joea »

Ron,

Might be worth remembering that in the event of any accident the insurance company will be looking for anything they can find to make the plane illegal, and thus not have to pay for the claim.

I would be really mad if something like a wheel broke and the plane was damaged, then the insurance company refused to pay for the accident due to "undocumented" muffler extensions.

One reason why I am not going to do this on my plane. Believe its a good idea in some cases but I want it legal on my plane.

Joe A
User avatar
Nathan K. Hammond
Posts: 2371
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 00:22
Location: Danville, KY (DVK)
Contact:

Post by Nathan K. Hammond »

I can agree, there are several problems with "mums the word." For me, I only run liability insurance, so that lessens that problem. And the FAA would be a joke, I don't think they could tell the difference. But it would really suck to get gigged by something this small. :?

My big problem is the IA, my DAD. I can't get anything past him :!:

Paper work is no big deal in the long run, just time consuming.

nkh
7AC-5691
Super 85-12F @ DVK
Post Reply