Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » [GMCnet] Running the Onan now, and then isn't as good as you might think
| Re: [GMCnet] Running the Onan now, and then isn't as good as you might think [message #317765 is a reply to message #317759] |
Thu, 18 May 2017 13:12   |
Richard Denney
Messages: 920
Registered: April 2010
Karma:
|
Senior Member |
|
|
To some extent, I wonder if worrying about byproducts of evaporation in the
float bowl is working at the margins.
Backup generators are only kept warm in certain situations--the typical
home backup or commercial lighting generator, even expensive ones that are
permanently installed, are not. One of the radio clubs I play with has a
30-KW diesel Kohler that came off the roof of a shopping center--it's role
was to provide lighting for safety in case of a power failure. It certainly
was never kept to operating temperature. But it was still subject to
periodic testing, mostly for the purpose of making sure it worked.
Thermal cycles are what they are. I drive my Ford every day of the year. I
traded the previous one in with 170,000 miles on it to avoid having to
spend a lot to repair a transmission that was certainly not failing because
of thermal cycles. That drivetrain went through 300-400 complete thermal
cycles a year, maybe more, for eight years--maybe 2500-3000 over its life.
My Honda lawn mower (to choose an example from the other end of the scale),
which has certainly not received diligent maintenance, has been used about
20 times a year for 18 years, for a total of 350-400 thermal cycles. It
needs a new recoil starter, which is on order, but otherwise still runs
great. Run once a month, an engine capable of only 400 thermal cycles can
go over 33 years. If the engine can survive ten times that number with no
loss of function, then it's a non-issue. So, it seems to me that thermal
cycles are a marginal issue at best in the consideration of monthly
exercise, though I don't doubt their real effects.
And the things we might do to prepare for long-term storage are
interesting, but nobody's going to do them. Fogging the engine with oil
vapor? Not a chance. Pulling the plugs, squirting oil in the cylinders, and
then cranking the engine to distribute the oil? Nope. Maybe if I owned a
backup engine being stored for later use, but not in a vehicle I can drive.
So, how to we prevent the damage of corrosion, which seems to me worse than
the effects of evaporated fuel in the float bowl? Use it. A monthly drive
(not just sitting in the driveway idling, of course--but the Onan, which
runs at 1800 RPMs, never really idles) heats everything up, boils off
condensation, distributes oil and coolant, exercises tires (which are
constructed to stay softer when exercised, which I learned I think from
Emery about 15 years ago), knocks the dust off, chases off the mice, and
reinforces our confidence that the machine works well enough to be used on
a whim. The more we use it, the more use we get out of it.
The problems I had with my Onan were not related to varnish in the carb.
They were related to three things: 1.) Unreliable electrical control
system, 2.) the spray of oil it produced when running (which was not any of
the easy things to fix--I tried them all), and 3.) a cracked exhaust riser,
which could have burned the coach up--it was jetting right onto the plywood
enclosure. People are still fighting the control system, and yes I could
have overhauled the motor to fix the other two issues. None of these were
related to varnish. The oil spray might have been related to corrosion--in
the cylinders and affecting the seals I did not replace. The exhaust leak
might have been related to thermal cycling, but I suspect it was corrosion
in that threaded connection that provided a crack path. And corrosion in
the control board was part of its problem, too.
Rust never sleeps (I think I heard that somewhere) and that is the real
enemy, it seems to me. I'll restate what I suggested in my first message in
this thread: The risk of varnish formation seems to be much less than the
risk of things getting too used to not being used, and becoming unusable.
I'm certainly not saying Bob is wrong, but I would rather address the issue
by contriving to *need* the generator once a month--that way, I'm not just
running it without need.
Rick "trying to keep things in practical perspective" Denney
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Matt Colie wrote:
> Marc,
>
> With a virtual antique as our Onans are, you will be hard pressed to get a
> lube oil that not effective. A problem with any small engine is that the
> cooling of the lubricating oil is problematic at best. So, all my small
> engines use a 10W30 synthetic. Recently, that has been Mobil 1 because of a
> wonderful casual evening dinner at an SAE conference years ago. Other may
> have caught up with Mobil, but I don't have freinds in the business
> anymore. (The luck of those I did have are retired.) One thing of value
> that I found out then was that while the oil may continue to lubricate a
> much
> longer time, the anti-corrosion additives do loose effectiveness due to
> oxidation. That can't be prevented. They las ta bit longer than a year.
> So,
> I don't bother tracking hours onmy small engines (the Onan I do for fuel
> use) I just date the engine cowl with a china marker.
>
> Matt - still reading while Mary drives.
> --
> Matt & Mary Colie - '73 Glacier 23 - Members GMCMI, GMCGL, GMCES
> Still Loving OE Rear Drum Brakes with Applied Control Arms
> SE Michigan - Twixt A2 and Detroit
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
>
--
'73 X-Glacier 230 "Jaws"
Northern Virginia
Offlist email: rick at rickdenney dot com
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://list.gmcnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gmclist_list.gmcnet.org
|
|
|
|
 |
|
[GMCnet] Running the Onan now, and then isn't as good as you might think
|
|
|
Re: [GMCnet] Running the Onan now, and then isn't as good as you might think
|
|
|
Re: [GMCnet] Running the Onan now, and then isn't as good as you might think
|
|
|
Re: [GMCnet] Running the Onan now, and then isn't as good as you might think
|
|
|
Re: [GMCnet] Running the Onan now, and then isn't as good as you might think
|
|
|
Re: [GMCnet] Running the Onan now, and then isn't as good as you might think
|
|
|
Re: [GMCnet] Running the Onan now, and then isn't as good as you might think
|
|
|
Re: [GMCnet] Running the Onan now, and then isn't as good as you might think
|
|
|
Re: [GMCnet] Running the Onan now, and then isn't as good as you might think
|
|
|
Re: [GMCnet] Running the Onan now, and then isn't as good as you might think
|
|
|
Re: [GMCnet] Running the Onan now, and then isn't as good as you might think
|
|
|
Re: [GMCnet] Running the Onan now, and then isn't as good as you might think
|
|
|
Re: [GMCnet] Running the Onan now, and then isn't as good as you might think
|
|
|
Re: [GMCnet] Running the Onan now, and then isn't as good as you might think
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed Oct 02 13:56:26 CDT 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00691 seconds
|
GMCforum
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
