Valentine engines

[quote="fit90"]Is a Valentine Cox engine considered a Cox engine?[/quot


I believe so, I think if it has any main cox part it is cox.

Has anybody used one?? They do look nice. Sure miss my RR1 that my Dad gave away. Just to expensive to replace.
Dan

dankar04 wrote:Has anybody used one?? They do look nice. Sure miss my RR1 that my Dad gave away. Just to expensive to replace.
Dan

I have never owned one of his cox engines but from personal experience anything worked on by Valentine will be top notch.

If I get a day or two off next month I hope to run one of my Cox Speed Bees. I have a Speed Bee I reed valve, a Speed Bee I disc valve and three Speed Bee II disc valves. I am really itching to run a disc valve engine. I have never run one and am really curious to see how they perform. Does any have any idea?

Bob

fit90 wrote:If I get a day or two off next month I hope to run one of my Cox Speed Bees. I have a Speed Bee I reed valve, a Speed Bee I disc valve and three Speed Bee II disc valves. I am really itching to run a disc valve engine. I have never run one and am really curious to see how they perform. Does any have any idea?

Bob

I think they should have close to tee dee performance.
Maybe more maybe less.

This old post seems to have a group who are knowledgeable about Valentine modified Cox engines. I have had a Speed Bee for years. It is a rear rotary valve engine. About it: when the back plate/rotary disk is removed, the prop flips very freely, but when I put the backplate on (very carefully to insure that the disk is properly engaged), the prop seems to be binding and is not free. If I keep the backplate bolts "loose" (the screw heads touch the backplate but not enough to affect a seal, the prop is pretty free. It almost seems that the connecting rod is rubbing on the backplate when tightened, like it needs a very thin gasket which would back the backplate away, but not enough to disengage the disc valve.

On to a second topic. I have just obtained an engine which is obviously a Valentine, but also obviously a reed valve as the back looks just like a Surestart. Is it also called a Speed Bee? I'm about to be an owner of a second reed engine. It is just a different color. I paid little of nothing for these reed engines. Can anyone tell me what they usually sell for these days?

By the way, I woud have liked to insert a photo, but I can't figure out which menu icon allows that.

Unfortunately these are just some reworked cox engines that are more for display than for proper use.

If you remove the cylinder and piston, then mount the backplate back on, and you can take a peak (at TDC) of how the end of the crankpin sits in the disc-valve. On yours it might bottom out in the shallow impression/pit of the disc and thus put pressure on the disc towards the back plate. If that looks okay though, then you might need to make the lower end on the conrod even narrower (it has already been reworked compared to a stock cox).

On mine I had the opposite problem, if I rember correctly, there was too little of the crank-pin that would engage into the disc. So I removed some material from the backplate (in a lathe). This moved more of the crankpin into the disc, without it bottoming out.

Here are some pictures of mine, including a custom muffler and Turbo head:

It was good that you were able to fix the shortcomings with your Valentino custom modified engine by tweaking it, @Surfer_kris . Your example looks like a very strong Cox Engine of the Month potential winner, because it has the qualifying Cox original cast crankcase with original cylinder, but an unusual bulkhead mounting bracket similar to a 1950's Thermal Hopper with a rotary rear valve like an RR-1. Plus, with the powder coat crankcase and aftermarket muffling system, definitely has eye appeal.