JabiruJoe Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 Hi everyone, I am thinking of purchasing a second hand J160, about 2007 C model. Does anyone have any comments, good or bad, on the aircraft from a users point of view. Thanks in advance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueline Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 J160 very underrated. Get one that is maintained by someone who knows what they are doing! Much nicer to fly than the old LSA's (just don't expect a J160 to climb as well as the light weight LSA!) Great cabin space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadstick Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 160 Hi everyone, I am thinking of purchasing a second hand J160, about 2007 C model. Does anyone have any comments, good or bad, on the aircraft from a users point of view. Thanks in advance Hey mate, pay very close attention to the engine in perticular serial number and check what revision state it is, as there have been a lot of revisions to fix little problems. Next is to have an indipendant L2 or Lame conduct an inspection scrutinise the leakdown results for any indication of compression loss and look at the external underside of fuselage for oil, these cylinder and ring combo's love to blow by into the sump sending oil out the breather into the catch can (usually the first sign of a cylinder issue) causing flow on problems that excellerate exponentially until low compression. Other than crap cylinders/rings combo the other killers of jab engines is poor mixture spread and heat in the heads. The fuselage is usually fine but the engine is what will let you down if not payed enough attention, alot enough funds to overhaul the top end at any time and you should be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yenn Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 Deadstick. You say pay attention to the serial number. Why? What can the serial number tell you? For example my engine is 22A378. What can you deduce from that. My advice would be to talk to people who are running that plane and that engine to see what their experience is. There are an awful lot of jab engines out there and we don't hear of many of them failing, except from a few people who seem to be professional Jab knockers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadstick Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 Deadstick. You say pay attention to the serial number. Why? What can the serial number tell you? For example my engine is 22A378. What can you deduce from that.My advice would be to talk to people who are running that plane and that engine to see what their experience is. There are an awful lot of jab engines out there and we don't hear of many of them failing, except from a few people who seem to be professional Jab knockers. Hey Yenn, the serial number will tell you what the mod state of the engine is, (ie old style heads, pistons, rings, rockers, etc) I am speaking from experience I have rebuilt my, 3300 in my J230 (08 model) and maintain 160's 170's and 230's plus mutiple more types. I hope the dig (highlighted red) above was not aimed at me? as statistics don't lie, jab engines are failing all the time and not too many make TBO, a 160 we had here, had the cylinder fly off and then the brand new replacement engine failed as well, (was at another place at the time). The other 160 I just sent the engine back to jab as it lost compression in 1,2 and 3 cylinders after being rebuilt for the same problem 400 hours ago, my 3300 needed top end rebuild at 230 hours all the engines suffer badly from icing and poor mixture distribution across the cylinders (injection would help). If you dont hear about too many of them failing, where do you live? it is documented world wide! do you have any experience maintaining them or flying them? as far as being a professional Jab knocker I don't see how, I just relay information first hand, and Jab are fully aware of the engines short comings (from a jabiru technician)! Who also said they are looking at fixing the cylinder/ring problem. So anything else as you advised I am running that plane and that engine!!!:black_eye: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadstick Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 Yenn, Info from Jabs website in ref to serial number significance... JABIRU ENGINES SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ENGINE CHANGES – MAY ‘09 For Dealers and Maintenance Persons Information 2200 3300 Economy Tuning 1883 - 722 - Current Jabiru Engine Bulletin JSB 018-2 May ‘09 Gasket Less Exhaust 1597 - 562 - Keyed Crankshaft 2058 - 837 - Flywheel attachment JSB 012-1 June ‘06 Prop Installation Maintenance JSB 014-1 August ‘06 Crankshaft Dowel Modification Procedure AVDALSR038-1 January ‘07 Extractor System Exhaust 757 - Crankshaft/Flywheel Attachment Changed 2732 - 1522 - Hydraulic Lifters (High Leak Lifters Std Cam) 2068 – 2849 961 - 1683 Hydraulic Lifters (Slow Leak Lifters 285o Cam) 2850 - 3094 1684 - 1900 Hydraulic Lifters (Slow Leak Type 260o Cam) 3095 - 1901 - Modified Carby Needle Fitted by Factory 2920 - Wasn’t necessary unless using 2.90 needle jet Modified Tuning according to Bulletin JSB 018-1 Fitted by Factory 2850 - Tuning as per Bulletin had been fitted from S/N 914 on before Bulletin Issue Rocker/Valve Chest Venting 2068 - 2439 2200 Rocker Chamber Vent JSB 013-1 August ‘06 Sump Change Deeper 2553 - Increased Torque at Flywheel 18 ft/lb to 24 ft/lb 2103 - 857 - Oil Pump Spacer Plate 1958 - 795 - Jabiru Oil Pump JSB 004-2 December ‘04 Sump Extra Cap Screw(s) within Dizzy Case 1400 - 792 - Removed 2553 - Around 1196-not confirmed Larger Starter Ring Gear and Mount Plate 2087 - 857 - Fine Finned Heads 2553 - 961 - Increased Fuel Cut Off Seat (2.4mm) 1420 - Ignition Leads Black, Spiral Wound 2552 - 1206 - Changed Oil to Heads Routing 2553 - 961 - 6 Cylinder Alternators 2662 - 164 - Rockers Widened Contact Area to Suit Fine Finned Heads 2553 - 961 - Slimline Bridging Washer (use of 5/16 x 1 ¾ Cap Screw) 1669 - 572 - 3 Hole Intake Gaskets 01 – 2146 01 - 876 2 Hole Intake Gaskets 2147 - 877 - Vac Drive Change at Flywheel 2732 - 1522 - Conrods Alloy 01 - 436 3 Phrase Alterators 01 – 163 Std Cylinder Length of 107.00mm 832 - 154 Steel Conrods 437 - 01 – 11 steel capped alloy type 12 - Oil Pump All 2200 should use 14mm type All pumps 20mm wide Carbies 01-698 – 32mm type 699- 40mm type All 40mm type Flywheel Attachment 1/4 attachment 01 – 436 5/16 attachment 437 - All 5/16 sized attachment Oil Pump Pick Up Tube From 43-307 to be pinned No requirement all pick ups captured Alloy Rods on engines to be converted to steel type on overhaul. Hollow Cams not for re-use. Camshafts on 2200 Engines 01 – 377 unable to be used when steel rods are substituted Starter Motors 01 – 659 type no longer used 660 – 1468 Bosch type 1469 - Nippon Denso type 01 – 58 type no longer used 59 – 509 Bosch type 510 - Nippon Denso type Pushrods Solid Lifter Engines are 212mm long Hydraulic Lifter Engines are 216mm long NOTES HEADS: The multi-finned type used a different (longer) oil feed line from the crankcase. Valves were spaced further apart so rockers and rocker covers were changed. Head bolt washers were altered in shape for both engines. Rockers are available for using in multifinned heads on solid lifter engines. FLYWHEELS: The new type attachment incorporated a metal “spider” for attachment to crankshaft. Attachment bolts were now 1” x 5/16 UNF, not the usual 1 1/4” x 5/16. The dowel pins were then 20mm instead of the previous style in the dowelled crank at 24mm. In the new arrangement, the vac drive is a plug in machined aluminium type. Ring gear went from 99 teeth to 101. Increased torque on 5/16 cap screws went from 18 ft/lb to 24 ft/lb and loctite 620 used. CAMSHAFTS: Identification by 1 ring close to the oil pump is the 285o type, 2 rings identify the 260o type. Only visible out of the engine. Modified lifters used in standard cam only. Standard cam no “ring” identifier. Later camshafts have been revisited with extra attention to hardening. TUNING: The 4 cylinder engines with 290/245 jetting initially ran “rough” at idle. The cure was a slightly changed needle to affect a smoother idle. There is a possibility in hot climates the 2.90 needle jet may run too rich, low EGT’s and lack of performance. HEADS: 2200 01 – 56 Small heads, small valves, head gasket 57 – 224 Larger finned, J style, small valves to 153 255 – 644 Symmetrical, large valves 645 – 709 High top finned, large valves 710 – 2552 Large finned, large valves 2553 - Fine finned, large heads Combustion chamber change from S/N 1004. Head bolt sizes had changes. All previous head to 2553 are no longer in production. Rocker type to fit all but last 2 head types no longer in production. 3300 01 – 47 Small finned heads 48 – 223 High top finned, widened seats 224 – 960 New chamber 961 - Fine finned Combustion chamber change from S/N 224. All 3300 had large valves. Heads of fine finned now only produced. Head types have changed bolt lengths. All Bulletins for Jabiru Engines are available on the website www.jabiru.net.au Don Richter Jabiru Engine Division Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregF Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 I love my 160, it's just the right size for longer trips and some baggage! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thx1137 Posted August 24, 2010 Share Posted August 24, 2010 I would be happier if it could carry another 30 kilos (or me lose 30 kilos!). Our jab 160 is ok and has been doing the job fine, I would prefer a sportstar but they cost a lot more! Steven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JabiruJoe Posted August 25, 2010 Author Share Posted August 25, 2010 Hi Guys, Thanks for all your points and tips - seems to be a few against and a few for. I was thinking of a J120 but for the same $ (of which I am the same as BlackRod) I might be able to pick up a 3 yr old J160 with the extra range and payload. I did a very rough calc and can get about 140kg of people (politically correct? maybe persons?) 30kg of luggage and 80 ltrs of fuel and still be in the envelope. This gives about 5hrs with reserves I think. That makes it about a 2007 vintage - anyone familiar with that specific one? If it all gets too hard I might just walk and come back in my second life as a bird! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thx1137 Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 With those weights you could carry 60 liters of fuel in our 160 so thats 4 hours total fuel. Our BEW is 327kg. Steven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derby Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 HI Steven, that is only 11kg less than my j400. is your 160 factory built? Rory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thx1137 Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Yes Derby. The aircraft seems fairly standard to me. The only additions I can see are the transponder, gps and the tiedown kit and two headsets. I can take 5kg of the number if I leave the tie down kit behind. As for published figures. They will be the lowest possible of course. Ready to fly with -any- options will make a difference. The actual number is only known after weighing! Oh, and which "empty" weight are the publishing, needs to be careful with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eightyknots Posted August 26, 2010 Share Posted August 26, 2010 as statistics don't lie, jab engines are failing all the time and not too many make TBO, a 160 we had here, had the cylinder fly off and then the brand new replacement engine failed as well, (was at another place at the time). The other 160 I just sent the engine back to jab as it lost compression in 1,2 and 3 cylinders after being rebuilt for the same problem 400 hours ago, my 3300 needed top end rebuild at 230 hours all the engines suffer badly from icing and poor mixture distribution across the cylinders (injection would help). If you dont hear about too many of them failing, where do you live? it is documented world wide! This paints a very sorry picture for the Jab engine. Does anyone have similarly brutally honest 'failure' statistic on the Rotax 912? Where would you get them from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted August 26, 2010 Share Posted August 26, 2010 Who's putting a rotax in a J160?.. Won't be certified if they do.. The J160 is an excellent all round aircraft. But, its horses for courses. You need to think long and hard about what your going to be doing with it. Its an excellent x-country machine (for the price). Strong and reliable, save some engine issues that deadstick has mentioned. But if local scenic tours with friends is more your cup of tea, then a new 120 would be more of an option, in my opinion, With the extra performance and the price tag id be looking at it. I think the main issue with the jab engine, as deadstick has pointed out, is the fact they all seem to loose compression. The way the heads cool at low power settings could not be good for any engine. Cold starting remains an issue despite many attempts by Jab to fix the problem. That being said, they are cheap as chips. You could pay double for a rotax, and get mabye twice the life out of it. But, you can't fit them to jabs (for certification). cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yenn Posted August 26, 2010 Share Posted August 26, 2010 I wasn't pointing the finger at any one person, but from the number of people who rubbish Jab engines and the lack of anything about them coming from RAAus i wonder what the real position is. If they are failing as often as some would have us believe then i think reports should have gone into RAAus and that info should have been relayed back to us. Maybe RAAus is not advising us as I believe it should, or maybe people who have failures in their Jab engines are not putting in reports to RAAus. I run a 2.2 Jab and have so far had no problems, before that I ran a 1.6 Jab and had no problems other than oil leaks and a lack of power at high temperatures. If I have a problem with my engine you can rest assured that I will post about it, even if it is my faulty handling rather than the manufacturers fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derby Posted August 26, 2010 Share Posted August 26, 2010 g'day Yenn i'm with you my J400 has 375 hours now I have only had a stuck ring on no6 piston, easy fix, only found it after leak down test, apart from that it was and still is runing like a clock could not be happier. ps i have never had to use the choke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Walter Buschor Posted August 26, 2010 Share Posted August 26, 2010 this is a little silly to continue jab versus Rotax. Regardless of cost it IS a FACT that the Rotax WILL go the distance and might go past 5000Hrs without reconditioning. It is also a FACT that Jab engines will NOT go the distance without lots of TLC. The Rotax is for the time being the only reliable and cost effective choice as well as "piece of mind" choice when getting there matters. The Jab is a great aircraft as I have said before and I would like to own one but.... I would ditch the donk for something reliable... ie: Rotax. The record speaks for itself. No excuses. With the Jab engine , well .... Fly safe ... fly Rotax 912! & safe money in the long run & your nerves! Walter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultralights Posted August 26, 2010 Share Posted August 26, 2010 this might sound like madness, but the more you thrash a jabiru, the better it will be. ever notice how school jabs that work hard rarly have engine probs, sure, they might dump a tonne of oil, but the school jab here is on its third engine, the previous two made it to TBO, even if it was burning or loosing 200ml per hour. advice from our CFI to instructors, when in the Jab by yourself, fly it at full power. it helps prevent sticking rings, bore glazing etc. though i still feel more comfortable behind my 912ULS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David F Posted August 26, 2010 Share Posted August 26, 2010 Rotax Powered Jab I hear that there is a J 160 with a Rotax 912 uls at Warnervale its owned by a flying school so I would assume the certification issue has or will be resolved.I recon it would make a fine aircraft.They havenot done this for the fun of it,probably one engine incident too many. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted August 26, 2010 Share Posted August 26, 2010 No, thats not true, unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted August 28, 2010 Share Posted August 28, 2010 this might sound like madness, but the more you thrash a jabiru, the better it will be. ever notice how school jabs that work hard rarly have engine probs, sure, they might dump a tonne of oil, but the school jab here is on its third engine, the previous two made it to TBO, even if it was burning or loosing 200ml per hour. advice from our CFI to instructors, when in the Jab by yourself, fly it at full power. it helps prevent sticking rings, bore glazing etc. though i still feel more comfortable behind my 912ULS. That is also what i have been told over the years.Give the engine a flogging.If you baby them, they dont like it.I only did about 30 hours in a Jab.The information, above is from experienced instructors , with alot time in the Jabiru's. It would be interesting to hear from Eugene Reid. His engines make TBO regulary, from what i here on the street. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted August 28, 2010 Share Posted August 28, 2010 If they are failing as often as some would have us believe then i think reports should have gone into RAAus and that info should have been relayed back to us.Maybe RAAus is not advising us as I believe it should, or maybe people who have failures in their Jab engines are not putting in reports to RAAus. Hi Yenn, Unfortunately a lot of these problems are not being reported. I recently spent a lot of time working on Jabs and saw lots of problems at very low hours. For example a camshaft that was wrecked after only 125 hours, engines with even lower hours and no compression etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dieselten Posted August 28, 2010 Share Posted August 28, 2010 The J160 is a rugged, tough, no-frills aircraft that is unbeatably good value-for-money. The 2200 Jab engine requires regular inspection and maintenance, but it properly maintained and operated correctly it is a reliable mill. You'll be putting the spanners to it a good deal more than you do on a Rotax 912, but your parts cost is way down by comparison. It is a much simpler engine to work on. What helps greatly is to whip the heads off at 500 hours, replace (and lap) the exhaust-valves and seats, re-lap the inlet valves and seats, decoke the head, replace all the glacier bushings and the rocker-rods. Seems not enough oil gets up into the valve gear at times, hence bushes and rocker-rods wear. The latest hollow push-rods and high-flow hydraulic-lifters may improve this somewhat but we need hours on the engines to see if this is the case. If you do this then your top-end will get you to 1000 hours without dramas. The bottom-end of the 2200 Jab is now a pretty good section, and if run regularly they run well. Not using aircraft engines is not good for them! They are designed to work and work hard. Don't baby your engine. Airframe-wise, the only issues I have is tyre-wear on abrasive taxiways. Mine scrubs out the outside of the tread fairly quickly. I change on average four new maingear tyres every year. I swap them side-for-side on the hubs to wear both sides out. When I replace them, there is no tread left at all. At last I am using all the tread before replacement! If was asked would I buy another J160, I'd answer "Yes", without hesitation. (Mine has done just under 500 hours in two years, on cross-hire.) It's a good little working aeroplane. I also have a 912-powered aeroplane, so I have direct experience with both engines, and have a fondness and respect for both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dieselten Posted August 29, 2010 Share Posted August 29, 2010 BlackRod, Engine cooling on my installation hasn't been an issue up to the 38C max ambient temperture limit in the handbook. At that temp the oil went to the bottom of the red - and stayed there. Never went any higher. After that flight we changed the oil and filter as a precaution. Initially I changed oil and filters at 25 hours. After seeing nothing in the filters after 100 hours we went to the 50hr interval. Using Aeroshell 15W50 exclusively in this engine. As for a 160 with a 912, I belive it's been done but the lower engine cowling shape was "ordinary". The big issue is the need for some largeish holes in the front of the lower cowling for air to flow through the heat-exchangers for oil and coolant, and this can cause differential pressure problems between cowling intakes and exit vents. Airflow inside cowlings can be somewhat complicated, as and slight oil-leak will soon show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomo Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 Oil doesn't wear out! It can get dirty b that's what filters are for. I could understand changing filters at 25 hours rather than oil. Oil does wear out actually. I might let Vev or someone else explain that to you though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now