The engine comment debate!

I have started this topic as a couple of recent posts are getting sidetracked by our preferences/loyalties to engine manufacturers. It is obvious that everyone wants to express their feelings on the matter but in a short posting it is easy to cause offence either with a comment or by not commenting at all.

https://www.coxengineforum.com/t10352p25-a-hurlable-fox-15#130950

https://www.coxengineforum.com/t10362-enya-09-ii#130944

We are all different, from different backgrounds, varying age groups and have different life experiences and so we are bound to have a certain modicum of bias.

Now before I carry on, for those who aren't aware - I have probably run up more engines than anyone else on this site. I have flown with very few but I have modded may for flyers. Model engines are my hobby and throughout the passage of many thousands of engines through my hands - there are only two that I consider crap.

The DC Bantam and the Deezil. Now, as I have said before, as a young boy the DC Bantam was my first glow brand new glow engine - I read the engine test report and was more than sorely disappointed with the engine and its lack of power. Having only run diesel engines.

Did that put me off glow engines? --- YES!!

My next new engine was an Enya 15. Easy to start and very powerful (for the time!) but with the addition of a silencer - it lost power and gained too much weight. So I replaced it on the model with a PAW 15 and then a PAW 19.

Did this put me of glow engines even further?-----YES!!

So, the most of my control line flying was under diesel power. That also combined with the simple fact that glow fuel was expensive - we could make up our own diesel fuel - it didn't smell as nice, glow engines don't have the diesel bark and almost all the good diesel engines (bias alert!!!) were British! - and you didn't need expensive (at the time) batteries and glow plugs.

So - is my opinion likely to be biased? Of course.

I have an open mind about all engines - except the two mentioned above. I see quite a few negative comments on many sites where I then see the exact opposite positive comments.

An engine is the easiest thing to blame for the shortcomings in a built model, piloting skills and engine set up. The BluePants that I put the Enya in was way too heavy!

Quite a few of my inherited engines have had a short running life due to them being dismissed as crap. I have found that in the majority of cases - they were not run in properly and given the required TLC from the beginning. These days a brand new in box engine carries a premium but back in the sixties - a used and run in engine carried the premium. Engines like Oliver Tigers (bias show again) ran better and better and pistons/cylinders were easily replaced. They were built to last and not throw a ways.

Premium engines were finished by hand and test run before leaving the factory.

As each one of us is individual - so is each engine. No two are exactly the same!

Our biases are built on past experience and memories. These are often reinforced with time.

I value other chaps (not chapesses! Bias showing again!) comments because they are based (not biased) on experience or sometimes lack of it. All engines are "fettleable" with very little effort but require patience. Negative comments help lead to a solution.

I have never flown 2-4-2 but have altered engines so that they will perform the break. (Not necessary with diesels! Bias again!) There is no set formula for this and there are many variables but it is doable.

However, I find a lot of negative comments are based on engine power and I summarise that easily. The engine wasn't matched to the model! Many old kits specify, what is to me, a dubious range - The Carl Goldberg Buster says .19 to .35 engines. That is one hell of a range without even considering a particular engines performance. Would you use and Enya 19, a PAW 29 or a Fox 35.

Some are easy. The Blue Pants was designed around and won with an ED Racer 2.49 cc diesel. So base on my bias and experience - you are also safe to install an Oliver Tiger or a PAW 15. Mufflers make very little difference to these but a Fox 15, Enya 15 or OS MAX 15 would be a different story with a silencer fitted. Without - who knows?

Am I exhibiting bias, preference, loyalty or all three.

On the other hand - I wouldn't put one of those diesels in an RC plane with throttle control!

I like the Fox engines and have quite a few but you have to remember that they weren't available here during my formative years. I can tell you though that they need careful running in and if you expect them to perform on any old fuel from the get go - then forget it.

A pal gave me a Fox 35 to fettle - he wanted to put it in an original Nobler kit he was building. There was no history with the engine and it was gummed up. There were no carbon deposits or glazing in it but it was clapped out. No compression worth talking about. If I was to base my opinion on Fox engines and that example it wouldn't be good but I have several 35's in my collection that were well used and are still as tight as a Duck's a..e.

That engine was recovered by case hardening the liner and re honing the piston. It has had three hours on it since then - one of which was running in. His opinion is one of being very pleased with it! Mine is that this was another badly treated engine that would give a bad name to the manufacturer. Try recovering a more modern ABC, AAC, ABN, XYZ engine. I would not contemplate a second hand one unless I knew the history!

We all have our favourites.

Now, I also hold the record on this site for unanswered posts with not one single comment. They are usually engine postings - Non Cox engines, Diesel Engines -- there are 17 with zero replies. More elsewhere.

In fact, out of 535 unanswered posts - 50 of them are mine. It is not my fault that you don't like Diesel engines and are all biased!

Joking aside, I find it difficult to post a reply on topics that I am not familiar with. I didn't know the the Enya 09-II was rare. In the period it was produced - few would have made it here and it wouldn't have been seen as a top of the queue engine.

The foreign glows didn't take off until RC became affordable and reliable. This left diesels behind. For RC - I am electric only!!!!!!!! Not a single British motor in my collection! Not biased - we don't make anything anymore!