Sky-Tec vs B&C Starter

Ask Questions and Offer Advice Related to the Cessna 120 & 140 Type

Moderators: 6643, 6183, V529

Forum rules
You must be a member of the Cessna 120-140 Association in order to post new topics, reply to existing topics, or search for information on this forum. Use the "Join" link in the red menu bar.
V529
Posts: 552
Joined: Tue May 01, 2018 7:00 am
Location: Michigan
Name: Victor G
Aircraft Type: C-120
Occupation-Interests: Work on airplanes till the cows come home..........they're still out.
Contact:

Re: Sky-Tec vs B&C Starter

Post by V529 »

8233 wrote: Wed Feb 20, 2019 10:38 pm Sounds like I can't go wrong either way. On these newer starters, I've also read that they can crank too fast and subsequently cause kickback for various reasons. Is that an issue found often with the smaller engines and consistent between these 2 brands?

I'm leaning a bit towards B&C mostly because I live in Kansas and want to support a company in my state.

Thanks for all the replies and insight. I sure wish we could get the old posts restored. I joined the association around the same time it was all lost so I feel like there is so much great info I'm not able to tap into but certainly appreciate those of you who take the time to reply to questions that probably got asked dozens of times on here before.
Yes, they do turn the engine over at a higher RPM than stock starters.....
However...........I don't think this is an issue.

"Kickback" is usually associated with two things.
1. Timing too advanced
2. Weak battery and slow cranking speed.
User avatar
6643
Posts: 2337
Joined: Tue May 01, 2018 7:00 am
Location: KLCI
Name: John C
Aircraft Type: 1946 C140/C90
Occupation-Interests: A&P, semi-retired
Contact:

Re: Sky-Tec vs B&C Starter

Post by 6643 »

I don't see why fast cranking would lead to kickbacks, in fact, I'd think the opposite would be true. Regardless, if your impulse couplings are working correctly, the mags won't fire until nearly TDC anyhow.

(I hate it when there's one more post on the next page that I don't see before I respond... ;) )
User avatar
8233
Posts: 276
Joined: Wed May 02, 2018 6:52 pm
Location: Kansas City
Name: David Freeland
Aircraft Type: 1946 C120
Occupation-Interests: Program Management
Contact:

Re: Sky-Tec vs B&C Starter

Post by 8233 »

Makes sense, thanks for clarifying!
David Freeland - CFII
1972 Bellanca Super Viking and 1946 Cessna 120
User avatar
VIP620
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue May 01, 2018 7:00 am
Location: 69nd
Name: ken tengesdal
Aircraft Type: 120
Occupation-Interests: fly the 120 over sunflower fields and shoot blackbirds at the same time from august thru october or until the crop is harvested
Contact:

Re: Sky-Tec vs B&C Starter

Post by VIP620 »

being no one replied to my post awhile ago on starters & alternators, and this post is starters, which one of the sky-tec and b&c does one get for a c-85 with the starter pinion cut, and never had a starter. the key one or pull cable one, plus mine is a non-electric c120
V529
Posts: 552
Joined: Tue May 01, 2018 7:00 am
Location: Michigan
Name: Victor G
Aircraft Type: C-120
Occupation-Interests: Work on airplanes till the cows come home..........they're still out.
Contact:

Re: Sky-Tec vs B&C Starter

Post by V529 »

620 wrote: Fri Feb 22, 2019 10:15 am being no one replied to my post awhile ago on starters & alternators, and this post is starters, which one of the sky-tec and b&c does one get for a c-85 with the starter pinion cut, and never had a starter. the key one or pull cable one, plus mine is a non-electric c120
Ken,

I'm sorry we missed your post.

If you have the starter pinon shaft cut off, the B&C is a great starter.
I don't have direct knowledge of the Sky Tech so I don't know if it can be used with the shaft in place or not? Hopefully one of our members can chime in.

Is this what you're looking for?

Regarding alternators, I installed the 'Plane Power' Alternator 1.5 years ago and it's been Fantastic. About as complex of an install as any other alternator would be as well. Probably no better or worse.
User avatar
8233
Posts: 276
Joined: Wed May 02, 2018 6:52 pm
Location: Kansas City
Name: David Freeland
Aircraft Type: 1946 C120
Occupation-Interests: Program Management
Contact:

Re: Sky-Tec vs B&C Starter

Post by 8233 »

+1 for Plane Power alternator. I had one put in last year and working great so far. On the starters, my understanding is both Sky-Tec and B&C require the pinion shaft to be cut.
David Freeland - CFII
1972 Bellanca Super Viking and 1946 Cessna 120
2066
Posts: 600
Joined: Tue May 01, 2018 7:00 am
Location: North Carolina
Name: Mac Forbes
Aircraft Type: '46 Cessna 140
Occupation-Interests: Retired - Current 120-140 Assoc. NC Rep.
Contact:

Re: Sky-Tec vs B&C Starter

Post by 2066 »

620 wrote: Fri Feb 22, 2019 10:15 am being no one replied to my post awhile ago on starters & alternators, and this post is starters, which one of the sky-tec and b&c does one get for a c-85 with the starter pinion cut, and never had a starter. the key one or pull cable one, plus mine is a non-electric c120
Ken, it'll be the "ST2" for a Sky-Tec...and, yes, it does require the starter pinion being cut off, just like I understand the B & C does for this installation. The B & C model # is BC320 & you'd need to call & discuss the installation "kit" needed for installing on a non-electric 120. As discussed already, both starters are apparently very good & dependable products for our little Continentals. Sky-Tec advertises their "kick-back protection" & I'm confident that B & C has a similar feature -- hopefully never needed, but good to know it's there. Mac
User avatar
VIP620
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue May 01, 2018 7:00 am
Location: 69nd
Name: ken tengesdal
Aircraft Type: 120
Occupation-Interests: fly the 120 over sunflower fields and shoot blackbirds at the same time from august thru october or until the crop is harvested
Contact:

Re: Sky-Tec vs B&C Starter

Post by VIP620 »

thanks, my original post was back on 19dec18, it had 82 views and no response. so this is a start, if i decide do a starter
User avatar
6643
Posts: 2337
Joined: Tue May 01, 2018 7:00 am
Location: KLCI
Name: John C
Aircraft Type: 1946 C140/C90
Occupation-Interests: A&P, semi-retired
Contact:

Re: Sky-Tec vs B&C Starter

Post by 6643 »

2066 wrote: Fri Feb 22, 2019 3:00 pmSky-Tec advertises their "kick-back protection" & I'm confident that B & C has a similar feature --
Interesting. My recollection was that the B&C was more "kick back resistant", and that was in their favor. Maybe Skytec made a modification and is playing one-upmanship...
6298
Posts: 243
Joined: Tue May 01, 2018 7:00 am
Location: California
Name: Randy Thompson
Aircraft Type: Cessna 140
Occupation-Interests: Work on airplanes and engines
Contact:

Re: Sky-Tec vs B&C Starter

Post by 6298 »

Skytec’s had a sheer pin in their early starters. The have modified them to be kick back resistant so you don’t have to replace the pin. More like B&C now..
Randy Thompson A&P IA Pilot
Hold STC SA547EA for installation of O-200 engine in Cessna 120/140 and 140A"s
Overhaul small Continentals
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests