Roddie's Tee Dee .09

roddie Sun Jul 30, 2017 7:09 pm

As you may remember, this engine was "given" to me recently by a fella down the road who had the "holy-grail" of model-airplane yard-sales a few months ago.

https://www.coxengineforum.com/t10838-model-airplane-yard-sale?highlight=model+airplane+yard+sale

Today I decided to give the old girl some attention. It was grimy. I don't have any spare-parts or wrenches for this engine.. so I decided to just work on cleaning it up externally.

The rear of its thin-wall cylinder was caked with crap in-between the cooling-fins.. so that was the first order of business.

I used a plastic "dental flossing pick" to dig the crap out.

I have a nylon-bristle rotary-brush that helped to clean-out the cooling-fins after the initial crap was dug-out.

nasty stuff that I wouldn't want there, if I was to try to run the engine. This engine has a bit of time on it.. but that's to be expected when you get a "boxful of old engines". It's now as clean as it's gonna' get.

The glow-head; as member Ken Cook noticed, doesn't appear to be a Tee Dee/high-compression one.. and probably made for a Medallion.

That sux.. but if it's a good head.. the engine will run with it. I received this engine with an old Nylon 8 x 4 prop mounted on it. I'm "gun-shy" of old nylon-props now.. since hearing horror-stories of blades "departing" from the hub.. so I removed the old prop and measured the diameter of the boss on the engine's prop-drive plate.

.212".. which equates to 7/32". Cox must have made props with a hub-hole to fit.. but most of my various 7" and 8" diameter wood props have 3/16" (.187") hubs. I had a couple of J-Zinger 8 x 4 woodies.. and reamed the hub-hole of one with a #3 (.213") drill.

CEF member "Balogh" mentioned running smaller diameter props on his Tee Dee .09's.. so I don't know if I'd be "over-propping" the engine.. but it had an 8 x 4 on it when I got it. I have some 7" diameter "woodies".. (one 2.8" pitch and a pair in 4" pitches) that I can test, to see if they run better with the "low-compression" glow-head that's on this engine.

The carb-body looks pretty good.. I can't see any evidence of cracks which is good.. because as I mentioned; I have no spare-parts or tools for this engine yet.

I had thought about possibly running this engine on my ARF Sterling Jr. Ringmaster.. but it will be down on power with the low-compression head.

66 Malibu Sun Jul 30, 2017 8:23 pm

Roddie,
I had one that dirty a while back.
Then, I made sure the exhaust ports were closed and I sprayed it with automotive carb cleaner liberally on the outside.
After that dried, I opened the exhaust ports and directed the carb cleaner spray toward the bypass ports to fill up the crankcase.
With an old prop, I spun the engine backwards (CCW) from the front or left handed from the pilot view.
The cleaner gushes out the intake port looking really ugly.
I do it 3 times like that or until the cleaner runs clear.
Then a good shot of WD-40 inside and out after it dries.
It should be looking pretty nice by then.
If not, Rinse and Repeat ...
Safety glasses are must !!!!!
Steve....

roddie Sun Jul 30, 2017 9:07 pm

66 Malibu wrote:Roddie,
I had one that dirty a while back.
Then, I made sure the exhaust ports were closed and I sprayed it with automotive carb cleaner liberally on the outside.
After that dried, I opened the exhaust ports and directed the carb cleaner spray toward the bypass ports to fill up the crankcase.
With an old prop, I spun the engine backwards (CCW) from the front or left handed from the pilot view.
The cleaner gushes out the intake port looking really ugly.
I do it 3 times like that or until the cleaner runs clear.
Then a good shot of WD-40 inside and out after it dries.
It should be looking pretty nice by then.
If not, Rinse and Repeat ...
Safety glasses are must !!!!!
Steve....

Thanks Steve! Thumbs Up

I don't have any carb-cleaner.. but what I "did do" was to squirt a few drops of air-tool oil into the venturi.. and on the piston through the exhaust-ports. I haven't tried to run the engine yet.. but I figured that when and if it "fires-off".. it will blow-out some more crap. Maybe a "pre-flush" would be a good idea.. in case there's any grit that found its way down into the case.

Ken Cook Mon Jul 31, 2017 3:38 pm

Roddie, the TD .09 even with the standard Medallion plug offers more power than ANY engine that was offered from the time frame the plane was developed. Unfortunately, no muffler which could be a problem unless you find a Medallion muffler but that could prove to rob needed power. The stock Sterling JR Ring flies poorly, to narrow of a wing in span and in thickness. People constantly over power them with modern .15's which makes it fly even worse. Putting a modern .15 makes it fly fast with little to no control inputs and it's a very common mistake I see quite often. A good modern choice would be a FP .10 but they're hard to come by. The TD .09 in my opinion would allow for some good maneuverability due to placing the Ring in a possible tail heavy condition. You could drop the line size to .012's and shorten them to 48' center to center.

Just about every Sterling profile builds nose heavy. Newer laser cut kits are totally different and THERE"S NO COMPARISON. One crashes and places divots in the earth and the other explodes into splinters. There's nothing your going to do to fix a STOCK Ring other than lengthen the fuse or slide the wing forward ( This assists the already too short doublers in the kit which don't go back onto the wing enough) The Ring though already has too short of a nose. Engines of that period were the K&B Torp .09, the OK Cub .09 ( Not a real performer ) , Fox .09 ( Horrible engine) the Fox .15 steely which makes decent power The OK Cub .149 would be a good choice due to making good power for it's size, The OS MAX-S .10. The Enya .09 would be a good choice but slightly heavier than the above but lighter than modern. The TD .09 would be an excellent choice if you do away with the 8" props. 8" wood props have too much blade area, it would fly the plane but it would seriously hinder maneuverability due to killing too many rpm's. The Cox 7x3.5 is the prop for the TD. Master Airscrew makes the GF series in a 7x3 and 7x4. Thinner blade area needed to turn up some needed R's.

To sum it up, it's a excellent choice and a avenue that should be explored.

roddie Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:13 pm

Ken Cook wrote:Roddie, the TD .09 even with the standard Medallion plug offers more power than ANY engine that was offered from the time frame the plane was developed. Unfortunately, no muffler which could be a problem unless you find a Medallion muffler but that could prove to rob needed power. The stock Sterling JR Ring flies poorly, to narrow of a wing in span and in thickness. People constantly over power them with modern .15's which makes it fly even worse. Putting a modern .15 makes it fly fast with little to no control inputs and it's a very common mistake I see quite often. A good modern choice would be a FP .10 but they're hard to come by. The TD .09 in my opinion would allow for some good maneuverability due to placing the Ring in a possible tail heavy condition. You could drop the line size to .012's and shorten them to 48' center to center.

Just about every Sterling profile builds nose heavy. Newer laser cut kits are totally different and THERE"S NO COMPARISON. One crashes and places divots in the earth and the other explodes into splinters. There's nothing your going to do to fix a STOCK Ring other than lengthen the fuse or slide the wing forward ( This assists the already too short doublers in the kit which don't go back onto the wing enough) The Ring though already has too short of a nose. Engines of that period were the K&B Torp .09, the OK Cub .09 ( Not a real performer ) , Fox .09 ( Horrible engine) The OK Cub .149 would be a good choice due to making good power for it's size, The OS MAX-S .10. The Enya .09 would be a good choice but slightly heavier than the above but lighter than modern. The TD .09 would be an excellent choice if you do away with the 8" props. 8" wood props have too much blade area, it would fly the plane but it would seriously hinder maneuverability due to killing too many rpm's. The Cox 7x3.5 is the prop for the TD. Master Airscrew makes the GF series in a 7x3 and 7x4. Thinner blade area needed to turn up some needed R's.

To sum it up, it's a excellent choice and a avenue that should be explored.

As always Ken; "Thanks" for taking the time to write me. It's time out of your busy-day.. and I really appreciate it. Twice now.. I've held the Tee Dee against the bearers in the Jr. Ring.. and shook my head. Mad

The .09's mount-holes fall on-center of the inside edges of the beams.

... I could cut a pair of 3/16" x 1/2" Maple plates and glue them in between the existing bearers.. but the new mount-holes for the Tee Dee will go right-through joint. Maybe that would be ok?

Then there's this option.. which I do have a muffler for.. an "FP-RC".. never been run.

Same deal pretty much.. with having to add beam-area.. but it falls high on your list of engine-recommendations. I believe that there was a C/L version of the FP .10 but I can't find any info on it. I'm sure that I could just wire the throttle wide-open on the RC engine.. and just fly-it.

Well.. Rolling Eyes

there's two options for flying the old Sterling S5-Jr. This would be a BIG step for me; in that it would be my first flight with an airplane having an "air-foiled" wing.. and lines longer than 30 feet. I'm sure that it will give me a thrill!

**Cribbs74** Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:55 pm

That's an easy fix Roddie. I am sure Ken would agree that the glue holding those doublers on is totally dry and brittle. Just use a knife, peel them off, cut out the old bearers, install wider ones, perhaps going back a little further into the fuse. Trace out the doublers(using old as templates) onto new 1/16" ply and epoxy the whole shebang back together. About 30 mins of effort.

Ron

Ken Cook Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:13 pm

Ron couldn't of said it better. The FP .10 did come in a control line version, I own 2 of them. The needle valve is almost to the point of unobtainable. They were very well made and they were specific to the .10 only. I personally would save that FP until you get some fly time under your belt. You also have the Fox .15 which would also be a good choice, heavier which wouldn't be an issue for one that hasn't flown anything like this before. A lot more timid than the FP but a decent powerplant. However, your going to need to add castor to your fuel to run that one. In addition, I have added just strips of of hardwood epoxied onto the existing bearers and redrilled. This isn't a issue with .15 size engines, I have done that with the .35 size stuff but I usually make a backer plate from aluminum on the engine side. Ken

roddie Mon Jul 31, 2017 9:24 pm

Thank You so much Ron and Ken. You two are so patient with me.. as frustrating as that surely must be.. Rolling Eyes

I've been thinking about ordering some fuel from Sig. I want some fresh 1/2A fuel.. and I've also been considering their all-castor Champion "25" for my old steel-fin engines.. (like the Fox .15, .29/.35 and the old McCoy Red-Heads) It's available in 5 or 10% nitro. Which is the better-choice? It would be a "one-stop" shopping thing to bundle the shipping-cost for all of my fuel needs. "Thanks" Smile

**Cribbs74** Mon Jul 31, 2017 10:08 pm

I think with what you want to do either would be fine. Personally I would do 10% as it's a little more versatile. Performance wise you won't see much of a difference. OTOH since you are in a cooler part of the country 5% may work better. I really doubt you will tell a difference.

Not much help was I? Rolling Eyes

balogh Tue Aug 01, 2017 1:43 am

Roddie

pm me you postal address and I will ship you a spare wrench I have for my TD 09-s. I suggest you wait until you get the wrench before you start the engine up...you never know what hides in the cylinder and any foreign material may kill the piston/cylinder set that will be hard, if not impossible, to find a replacement for.

I see your thin walled, probably first generation TD 09 cylinder does not have the flats machined on the top fin? The wrench I will send you was made for these i.e. fitting in the exhaust ports for cylinder removal....
I second to Ken's opinion: the 09 is a real "beast of burden". I run it propped with a 7x4 Graupner, but have equally good performance out from 6x4 3-bladed Master Airscrew props- as on my avatar picture. With these props the engine runs around or a bit above 17k if fed with 20% nitro, with a Medallion 09 muffler installed. A SP induction design, the TD09 will suffer a bit if run with a muffler. I will swap this muffler with a home-made exhaust throttle ring on my Sterling Cosmic Wind soon and see how it works if inhales fresh air under the piston skirt instead of its own fumes.

The tester of this engine Peter Chinn used a wide range of props and the 8x4 pulled its speed down to 13k, while a 6x4 prop allowed it to rev up to 20k

http://www.sceptreflight.com/Model%20Engine%20Tests/Cox%20Tee%20Dee%2009.html

roddie Tue Aug 01, 2017 9:08 pm

Cribbs74 wrote:I think with what you want to do either would be fine. Personally I would do 10% as it's a little more versatile. Performance wise you won't see much of a difference. OTOH since you are in a cooler part of the country 5% may work better. I really doubt you will tell a difference.

Not much help was I?

Ron, I greatly value your advice. The main thing I was concerned with, was the oil-content.. more-so than the nitro. Sig specifically recommends the 25% "all-castor" for the old steel-fin engines that I have. I'm going to purchase some "mail-order" from Sig.. because my only other option is to drive 1+hrs. to Sturbridge, Ma to Hog Heaven Hobbies.. for "Power-Master" fuel. The local to me N.E.S.T. flyers swear by Power-Master fuels for running in their vintage engines.. and some of them recommend the 10-29 blend. I feel that Sig's 10-25 will be adequate.

**Cribbs74** Tue Aug 01, 2017 9:24 pm

roddie wrote:
Cribbs74 wrote:I think with what you want to do either would be fine. Personally I would do 10% as it's a little more versatile. Performance wise you won't see much of a difference. OTOH since you are in a cooler part of the country 5% may work better. I really doubt you will tell a difference.

Not much help was I?

Ron, I greatly value your advice. The main thing I was concerned with, was the oil-content.. more-so than the nitro. Sig specifically recommends the 25% "all-castor" for the old steel-fin engines that I have. I'm going to purchase some "mail-order" from Sig.. because my only other option is to drive 1+hrs. to Sturbridge, Ma to Hog Heaven Hobbies.. for "Power-Master" fuel. The local to me N.E.S.T. flyers swear by Power-Master fuels for running in their vintage engines.. and some of them recommend the 10-29 blend. I feel that Sig's 10-25 will be adequate.
You

I run 10/22 half synth half castor in all mine. So that should tell you something...

Tons of flights on them and no worries. 10/25 all castor is fine. Eventually they will need to be de-varnished, but you could always just run some synth fuel through it to take care of that.

roddie Tue Aug 01, 2017 10:15 pm

Cribbs74 wrote:
roddie wrote:
Cribbs74 wrote:I think with what you want to do either would be fine. Personally I would do 10% as it's a little more versatile. Performance wise you won't see much of a difference. OTOH since you are in a cooler part of the country 5% may work better. I really doubt you will tell a difference.

Not much help was I?

Ron, I greatly value your advice. The main thing I was concerned with, was the oil-content.. more-so than the nitro. Sig specifically recommends the 25% "all-castor" for the old steel-fin engines that I have. I'm going to purchase some "mail-order" from Sig.. because my only other option is to drive 1+hrs. to Sturbridge, Ma to Hog Heaven Hobbies.. for "Power-Master" fuel. The local to me N.E.S.T. flyers swear by Power-Master fuels for running in their vintage engines.. and some of them recommend the 10-29 blend. I feel that Sig's 10-25 will be adequate.
You

I run 10/22 half synth half castor in all mine. So that should tell you something...

Tons of flights on them and no worries. 10/25 all castor is fine. Eventually they will need to be de-varnished, but you could always just run some synth fuel through it to take care of that.

Thanks Ron.. I want to at least "bench-run" my Foxes and McCoys! Did you mention a wrench for the Tee Dee? I'd be interested in that. This is an "early-one".. if that makes any difference. Thanks.

**Cribbs74** Tue Aug 01, 2017 11:07 pm

Yeah I'll take a look Roddie.

Sponsored content

Roddie's Tee Dee .09

Roddie's Tee Dee .09

RE: Roddies Tee Dee .09

Re: Roddie's Tee Dee .09

Re: Roddie's Tee Dee .09

Re: Roddie's Tee Dee .09

Re: Roddie's Tee Dee .09

Re: Roddie's Tee Dee .09

Re: Roddie's Tee Dee .09

Re: Roddie's Tee Dee .09

Re: Roddie's Tee Dee .09

Re: Roddie's Tee Dee .09

Re: Roddie's Tee Dee .09

Re: Roddie's Tee Dee .09

Re: Roddie's Tee Dee .09

Re: Roddie's Tee Dee .09