Sky-Tec vs B&C Starter

[8233]

I'm researching light weight starter options for my 120 with a c-90. Does any have opinions or experiences to share on Sky-Tec or B&C? My initial reading might suggest Sky-Tec isn't as well made or as well supported as B&C. Looks like the B&C is about 1lb heavier.

Thoughts anyone?

[6277]

I switched to the Sky Tec some years ago and have had no problems. I did not use the big push button switch that came with the starter. The shaft on the switch was I believe 1/2" in diameter. I did not want to drill a larger hole in my panel, so I went to a local auto parts store and got a pull-on switch that had a smaller diameter shaft that fit though the hole in my panel. Then to my amazement, the brown knob from my cigar lighter had the same thread as the knob on the pull on switch. This matched the other knobs on my control panel. The fuse holder for the circuit is on the outside firewall.

[8359]

My O-290 has the Skytec Starter. I've had zero issues with it and it turns the thing over/fires up really fast.

However, I just purchased a B&C Alternator and I have to say their service and kit quality is top notch. Very friendly and willing to answer questions, very thorough with everything.

With the C90 I wouldn't worry about that extra pound up front.

[2066]

+1 for Sky-Tec. We installed the Sky-Tec @ major OH (C-85) and learned (the hard way) that the old starter pivot shaft really must be cut off almost flush ("follow the directions" ). In any event, a problem developed with the starter "Bendix" due to the lack of clearance. Even though it clearly didn't seem to be the "fault" of the starter, Sky-Tec replaced it without question. It's been flawless since...and, as many have joked, it could almost take you home if the engine stopped running because it turns almost that fast! . All that said, I'm convinced that the B & C is also an excellent starter, probably equal. FWIW. Mac

P.S. I've had the B & C 12A "Alternator" for almost 20 years and it's performed flawlessly. (John C. doesn't "like" the outer case spinning around back there...and because of that "feature" , admittedly, I was almost surprised at the ease of the field approval back then, but the quality of the unit and its operation has been excellent.)

[6183]

I too have a Sky-Tec starter. I'll have to say the unit has operated every time, and does turn the engine over faster than the stock OEM starter did. With that said when I took my engine apart for overhaul I sent the starter back to Sky-Tec for checkout and refurbishment. Received a call from Sky-Tec shortly afterwards and was informed that the unit was found to have oil inside the motor assembly due to a failed seal. Sky-Tec replaced the unit with a brand new one for the same price that the company charged for overhaul.

A quick check on pricing between a B & C and Sky-Tec starter sold through Spruce is very close for the Continental series engines.

[8233]

Good feedback! I had read in a few places that Sky-Tec ownership changes may have impacted quality and service more recently. Anyone have recent experience one way or another?

[8244]

I have one purchased in 2014 it slipped a little when starting. I sent it back it has been working perfectly so far ,no charge. I highly recommend the starter,alternator and odyssey battery. No more repairs and unreliability . Also a couple pounds less weight

[2066]

Good feedback! I had read in a few places that Sky-Tec ownership changes may have impacted quality and service more recently. Anyone have recent experience one way or another?

...not currently, but in talking to one of the previous/original ownership team, Rich Chiappe, Sky-Tec did due diligence++ to ensure that Hartzell would continue to provide both the customer-focused service and continuous product improvement to match Sky-Tec's reputation. Hartzell seems to talk the same talk and I'm not hearing any indication that they're neglecting to honor the commitment. There's already a lot of new "Hartzell Sky-Tecs" our there flying now...so far, so good(?). Mac

[V529]

Everyone seems very content with their Sky Techs. That's good, if they are working, keep them.

I have a B&C starter since 2003. It's been perfect. B&C incidentally presented at the Kansas Convention and gave a plant tour. Great people, they are in growth mode and it appeared like many companies (including ours!!) that get in growth mode, "expansion" comes with its set of challenges.

I feel they were and possibly are a superior product to Sky Tech.

That being said, for our small aircraft the Sky Tech starters are just fine. The starter isn't "worked too hard".

We have fleets of larger bore Continental TSIO 520s' and see many 550's. I wouldn't put a Sky Tech starter on those engines unless the customer demands it and overrides my input. They fail more than any other starter. Long story short, they can't take it. This really only seems to be an issue on the larger engines. (read large displacement or high compression w/ larger displacement.)

That being said...........again......I feel Hartzell does an excellent job, so perhaps things will improve. I have supreme confidence in Hartzells' leadership, I recently met the President of Hartzell propeller, Top Notch! Extremely pro GA aviation.

[8233]

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.