Log in
Search
Latest topics
» Tee Dee .020 combat modelby roddie Today at 1:34 pm
» Chocolate chip cookie dough.........
by roddie Today at 1:13 pm
» Purchased the last of any bult engines from Ken Enya
by sosam117 Today at 11:32 am
» Free Flight Radio Assist
by rdw777 Today at 9:24 am
» My latest doodle...
by batjac Yesterday at 9:47 pm
» My N-1R build log
by roddie Yesterday at 8:50 pm
» Funny what you find when you go looking
by rsv1cox Wed Nov 20, 2024 3:21 pm
» Landing-gear tips
by 1975 control line guy Wed Nov 20, 2024 8:17 am
» Cox NaBOO - Just in time for Halloween
by rsv1cox Tue Nov 19, 2024 6:35 pm
» Canada Post strike - We are still shipping :)
by Cox International Tue Nov 19, 2024 12:01 pm
» Duende V model from RC Model magazine 1983.
by getback Tue Nov 19, 2024 6:08 am
» My current avatar photo
by roddie Mon Nov 18, 2024 9:05 pm
Cox Engine of The Month
A Mid-70’s engine question.
Page 1 of 1
A Mid-70’s engine question.
I was just reading the Gremlin 1/2A pattern plane article in the May ’75 issue of Model Builder by Tom Dixon, and it says the plane flies on a Cox “stunt special” engine. The “stunt special” is a TD .049 with a Babe Bee piston/cylinder and a low compression glow head, a Kirn-Kraft NVA, and turning a Cox 6x4 prop on 5% nitro fuel from a Perfect wedge tank. Tom says this pulls the 12 ounce model through the entire stunt pattern. The KK fine needle would be the only thing I would have associated with “performance”. A low compression head topping a single bypass/no boost cylinder with SPI doesn’t scream “performance”. 5% nitro on a 1/2A doesn’t scream “performance”. A TD on suction from a standard plumbed wedge tank doesn’t scream performance. And a Cox 6x4 doesn’t scream “performance” (unless you’re propping for torque). And we all know Cox TD engines were made to scream.
What exactly am I missing on this?
That 70's Mark
What exactly am I missing on this?
That 70's Mark
batjac- Diamond Member
-
Posts : 2374
Join date : 2013-05-22
Age : 61
Location : Broken Arrow, OK, USA
Re: A Mid-70’s engine question.
If a CL model, he was basically matching the power to the model, flight environment and run reliability (suction feed, etc.). But then, this was a magazine article intended to sell more magazines and no doubt more Cox Tee Dee engines.
I'm guessing he could have probably gotten away with a .049 Medallion, but those are just my thoughts.
I'm guessing he could have probably gotten away with a .049 Medallion, but those are just my thoughts.
GallopingGhostler- Top Poster
-
Posts : 5722
Join date : 2013-07-13
Age : 70
Location : Clovis NM or NFL KC Chiefs
Re: A Mid-70’s engine question.
A TD runs just as good on a tank as it does on pressure. The problem is knowing how to setup the tank correctly. You also can't run a large heavier pitched prop using pressure. Running a bladder doesn't like a load. What Tom did was turn the engine into a tractor vs a Ferrari. Tom has done some mods to larger engines such as the FP .40 making claims that it runs better than true manufactured stunt engines. I've witnessed them run and I thought they were under powered and ran terribly. Articles written today are no different than years back. Editors will take anything and write about it due to a lack of material to write about. Just because it's in the magazines doesn't mean it worked. Believe what you've experienced. I should also add, the best stunt engines are the most under powered engines. This is what makes the LA engines a good stunt engine. He detuned the engine and overloaded the engine with too much prop. That was the thinking back then. Kinda of like a lugging Super Tiger .60 run. It really doesn't work all that well with smaller engines and it's better to run less pitch and more rpm's to keep it flying at the correct speed then it is to lug it.
Last edited by Ken Cook on Fri Sep 25, 2020 2:29 pm; edited 1 time in total
Ken Cook- Top Poster
- Posts : 5637
Join date : 2012-03-27
Location : pennsylvania
Re: A Mid-70’s engine question.
My first thoughts were, magazine? Sales, add revenue. Get the readers to go out ( there still were some active LHS in the 70’s) and buy some parts. KK, Perfect, Cox, were there any sidebar adds?
Marleysky- Top Poster
-
Posts : 3618
Join date : 2014-09-28
Age : 72
Location : Grand Rapids, MI
Re: A Mid-70’s engine question.
I picked up a ready to fly plane at a swap meet that had a TD with a single bypass cylinder. Kind of an oldtimer parasol plane. The older owner said it was too much with the twin bypass. I suppose it would be more suited to a reedy or Medallian as mentioned before. Glad I didn't pay too much because I really don't like using the single bypass cylinders even on the reedies.
aspeed- Platinum Member
- Posts : 796
Join date : 2013-01-18
Location : Leamington Ont. Can.
Re: A Mid-70’s engine question.
Single bypas cylinder is used on cars gtp first modèle wit round rc exaust y use single bypas for park flyer wit exaust dont change mutch of performance use large 6x3 prop plane was made of corflute coroplast balsa mix biplane 670gram plane 4ch tink no8 cylinder is Not si bad
davidll1984- Diamond Member
- Posts : 2327
Join date : 2020-02-12
Age : 39
Location : shawinigan
Similar topics
» Engine question
» OS Max .010 10 FSR RC Engine question
» Fox 36x engine question
» Product engine question
» Cox Engine Runtime Question
» OS Max .010 10 FSR RC Engine question
» Fox 36x engine question
» Product engine question
» Cox Engine Runtime Question
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum