Micro CoGen.

I gave the guys email address to a local farmer here and he got a deal on an S195 engine from the guy. The seller has crated up and shipped the S195 to a port in UK where it would fit into the Defender and save on shipping cost. All this within 24hrs shows service you dont see much these days.

Had I known a deal was struck I would have asked about spare parts cos I dont see them advertised anymore.

There is nothing worse than the item you want getting torn from your hands with people who wait for the last second to bid. If you want something, just pay what you thing is fair. Engines like Changfa and Listeroid are hard to get now and when they come up I am with rcavictim, I'd jump all over it too!

David

Those of you in the UK and Europe could snap up the export version of the Changfa engine. They have more useful features over the standard engine most others have and there is a nice manifold on this one too.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=280703000156

David

Dr D, money no object?.....please do send some my way

Crofter, I understand what you say and bobg's idea for testing is the most applicable so far that anyone has brought up. But I just dont have the time to go to these lengths and will let the engine run until it makes new noises. We have so much other work to do that we cant justify spending the time on an engine that only cost us less than half the price of a 6-1 and has outlasted all Listeroid's we and others here ever had. And all these engines work hard for a living here in remote locations for the most part. The engine owes us nothing at this stage and its a real little gem.

Perhaps someone will post how the test WMO in the correct manner and show what is causing wear. Until then I am happy to give what input I can and claim nothing other than these are my experiences and I am no authority on the matter. I can say with the greatest authority.....the Changfa has and continues to save me a lot of money!

David

A few good points mentioned, and I think BobG got it right. The way to scientifically determine what causes wear can only be done through tests and not what I or anyone else considers to be a fact. I will place my faith behind scientific testing any day.

In effect this means we can have one, or two ways in which wear is caused. Mechanical or chemical, or both.

Testing the deposited ash for acid to me sounds like a basic process and should not cost much. Testing particles of ash to determine if they are above a certain roughness is the final test, we hope.

I got our aircraft guy on the radio this morning and asked if he would compare the Listeroid piston rings and valves against the Changfa items. He gave a reply an hour later and he said..... the Changfa rings are far harder and break with the sudden 'snap' you would expect, whereas the Listeroid rings bent first and then snapped with a slow and 'unexciting' break. They are his words not mine, by the way. The Changfa valves are very hard and the seats also good quality. I sent an email to my supplier also today and asked if he could give some run hours on valve seat wear time. My reason for asking is if the ash is indeed akin to sanding parts I should see it happen in my engine.

I also thanked my aircraft guy for breaking my spare piston rings.

David

Bob,


Sorry no pics. I know every cell phone has a camera these days and there should be no excuse. But we dont have service anywhere near here for many miles. My setup is nothing special.

The guy who supplied my engine knows a lot more of the engines history and deals with people in very remote corners of the world and makes all sorts of wonderful automation gadgets for them. I had to do a lot of research before I found someone who walked the walk and had a proven track record before I bought another lemon. i.e not another damn Listeroid or variant. The Changfa engine my supplier tells me is based on a Deutz design and has been modernised by the Chinese. Both Kubota and Yanmar he says have possibly done the same thing as their engines have a similar birth as Changfa.

He has clients with Changfa engine purchased in the 1970's and are still going strong. It is testiment to how good the engine is and once you dump the fuel tank and fuel lines they are a good engine and the lack of rattling tin keeps the noise less 'entertaining'.

David

BobG and other logical thinking and non blinkered, open minded posters,


My WMO comes from a farm service company, most of their oil is from engines and gearboxes. It is filtered as I mentioned already. How different its chemical composition is I cannot tell. I did run with unfiltered oil at one time but it was a bad move. Things get gummed up fast.

The Changfa engine I believe is very much under rated and has given me all these hours for the price of a head gasket that cost me a few euro to replace from a guy in Europe who carries engines and parts. I have not even heard of a Changfa engine giving major trouble whereas all the Listeroids that imported here are always trouble when you get them, or will soon develop a failure after they go into service. 'Here' is the African bush where we have no hope of power or water without an engine and the Changfa works very well for us. We have a 30hp changfa powering a digger, works very good.

We did have some Listeroids but they dont last long in service when ran on WMO and even a genuine CS imported at twice the cost of a Changfa in shipping alone, it has proven to be unworthy to be the shade of a CS when burning filtered WMO. The additional life must be attributed to better filtering and a better burn....maybe a better liner? I cannot think of any other reasons.

We have a retired aircraft designer come by once a month to help out and he did comment on the material grade and finish on the Changfa liner. He said 'huh'. And for this guy to mutter that means it met his approval. He tested some Indian valves for our Lister and said we would get better use from them if we sharpened one end and used it as a nail.

We have a neighbour 2 hours away (by light aircraft) who has 11,000 hours on his Changfa, its only ever got rings and a head gasket. All our engines are radiator cooled and no thermostat and run 1800 to 2000RPM fully loaded. Perhaps the loading helps burn the WMO better than those running slow speed engines?

David

For what its worth and to all concerned, I run a Changfa S195 on WMO filtered by centrifuge. All carbon deposits, water and heavy metals are removed. I dont know how to test for the presence of salts some of you mentioned and I burn the filter WMO thinned 8% by volume with petrol.

Over 5000 hours run time nothing untoward shown up. But do remember the quality of the parts are far better than Indian Listeroid parts and the build quality is light years ahead. In particular the cylinder liner is very well made and very hard, much better than the Listeroid liner. I will have you note the Changfa has a higher compression ratio and a more efficient overall head and fuel system design, and that is my opinion from working with these engines and not a qualified opinion from an engineer. I get an average of 20% better fuel economy on the Changfa than I do with my genuine Lister CS running the same load from the same PMG.

If I had the Pope witness the engine it still wouldnt be good enough for some people, so take what ever you want from this and be happy.


David