Cox Super Power Fuel

Nice !
Now back to the fuel topic. I wish to know if the new fuel will foam easily if shake it a little? That's another issue that we always concern of.

tru168 wrote:Nice !
Now back to the fuel topic. I wish to know if the new fuel will foam easily if shake it a little? That's another issue that we always concern of.

You probably know a minute amount of Armor All stops foaming. I usr Son of a Gun spray. Same thing apparently. I spray it into the bottle cap to prevent accidental overdosing. I've never had a glow plug problem after years of use.
Rusty

George I loved you post! I retired from Operational Test Command 2 years ago after 11 years there after my Active Duty Army time. Mostly I worked ACAT-I (acquisition category one)projects that required DOT&E approval (big wigs in WDC who only report to the Sec Def). Many many tests were Joint DoD acquisition items. I got to work very closely with my AFOTEC(Air Force test agency),COMOPTEVFOR(Navy test agency), And MCOTEA (Marine Corps test agency) counterparts.

Your self admitted "facetious" post was fairly comprehensive and true for most projects. However, on Top secret, or many of the Joint projects, we usually added in a Council of Colonials, a General Officer Steering Committee, multiple briefings to POTUS appointees, and of course a thorough examination of the Life Cycle cost benefit analysis.

Your post was indeed taken with light hearted grin remembering the vast bureaucratic hoopla necessary should we need to empirically declare the new fuel "superior"!

As I had not studied the entire thread, it seemed to me, by a few of the posts that a few of our test volunteers were questioning their own methodology

I was not too clear it seems, with my final thoughts that I too, was being a tad facetious....GRIN

fredvon4 wrote:George I loved you post! I retired from Operational Test Command 2 years ago after 11 years there after my Active Duty Army time. Mostly I worked ACAT-I (acquisition category one)projects that required DOT&E approval (big wigs in WDC who only report to the Sec Def). Many many tests were Joint DoD acquisition items.  I got to work very closely with my AFOTEC(Air Force test agency),COMOPTEVFOR(Navy test agency), And MCOTEA (Marine Corps test agency) counterparts.

I was working on ACAT-1. Changes in the system and for continued existence, it was time for me to bow out and I too retired two years ago. Did a new school campus K-8 school on 30 acres on the Navajo Reservation for the Department of Interior, they had their own unique bureaucratic requirements.  

Your self admitted "facetious" post was fairly comprehensive and true for most projects. However, on Top secret, or many of the Joint projects, we usually added in a Council of Colonels, a General Officer Steering Committee, multiple briefings to POTUS appointees, and of course a thorough examination of the Life Cycle cost benefit analysis.

Ooh, don't get me started on SCIF (sensitive compartmented information facilities). One of my projects involved that.

Your post was indeed taken with light hearted grin remembering the vast bureaucratic hoopla necessary should we need to empirically declare the new fuel "superior"! As I had not studied the entire thread, it seemed to me, by a few of the posts that a few of our test volunteers were questioning their own methodology. I was not too clear it seems, with my final thoughts that I too, was being a tad facetious....GRIN

Yes, now that I can step back and enjoy life without the bureaucracy. I saw some foolishness that I no longer have to witness and play with. And I am grateful that our "fuel testers" don't have the bureaucratic hoopla that I had to jump through in order to succeed under the rules of the game and law.

For those interested, here is a bit of humor: LHUP: New chemical Element Discovered

Okay, so I’ll start with the summary first:
Does the Cox Super Power Fuel work well?  Yes.  Did I have any problems running the Cox Super Power Fuel in my engine?  No.  Would I recommend it?  Yes.  Will I use it myself?  Yes.  As soon as I run out of my SIG supply, I’ll be ordering the new blend of Cox Super Power Fuel if it is available.

So, on to the test:

I ran the quart of beta Cox Super Power Fuel supplied by Hobbico Dave (Kruzn) using a stock cast case Cox product motor that I ordered from Bernie (http://coxengines.ca/cox-.049-surestart-engine-die-cast.html).  I did nothing to the engine other than resetting the piston rod with the Cox reset fixture, and using a plug insert and head (http://coxengines.ca/cox-.049-glow-plug-adapter-insert-style.html ) rather than using a stock glow head.  Three shims for the 25% nitro.  To keep the neighbors happy when I ran it at home, and the nice church people happy when I was flying it, I put on a NOS muffler.  All flying/running was done with a Cox 5x3 Safety Tip prop (http://coxengines.ca/cox-.049-propeller-5-x-3-safety-tip-yellow.html ).  I treated the engine as I basically figured a novice would treat it.  No special care or cleaning.  I didn’t put any effort into the head cooling either.  I figured the hotter I let it get, the better the test of the castor content.

I did a break-in per the instructions at Cox International (http://coxengines.ca/files/EOG.pdf ), using a ½ ounce tank.  I ran a half ounce rich, a second little leaner, and then finally a lean tank.  After that, I ran an ounce at the peak RPM setting to get the baseline of 15,800 peak RPM with muffler aperture open, and 13.5 minutes to run a 1 oz. round Sullivan tank dry.

I then ran it either on a test stand when the weather was crappy, or went roundy-roundy on my BTC-4R when it was good outside.  I tach’ed it at 16,400-16,500RPM when I was at the 12 ounce point, but didn’t do a timed ounce test.  I did not at any time do any maintenance or detailed cleaning of the engine.  I just fueled it and ran it.  The glow plug insert worked fine, so the head never came off.

I finished up the quart on the afternoon of Friday, October 10.  If I did my time logging correctly, I put 8 hours and 3 minutes on the engine running out the quart.  This was all done in approximately 2 weeks.  By the end of the quart, the engine was running great. If I didn’t flood the prime, the engine would fire up on the first backward flip of the prop.  I did the last run on the test stand to get the final numbers.  Peak RPM was still 16,500 RPM.  But the fuel economy was better at 16min/oz.  I guess this is attributed to a light varnishing of the cylinder walls creating a better fit for better combustion.  That’s almost a 16% increase in duration from the initial run.

After finishing out the quart, I proceeded to take the engine apart.  All photos are of the engine as pulled apart.  I did not clean off any of the internals before I took photos.  The engine as removed from the stand and wiped down:






Pulling off the backplate showed very minor wear.  The case internals are extremely clean.  I had to use an X-Acto knife to gently pry up the reed retainer, as it was stuck good and tight.  You can see the seat pattern on the steel reed, but it is in no way deformed.  I’d be curious to see what a mylar reed would look like after 8 hours.






You can see varnishing on the glow head adapter and cylinder fins, as I did not do much in the way of detailed clean-up.  I figured I’d run it like a kid and run it hard and put it away wet (oily).  I just wiped the excess fuel residue off so it didn’t drip on anything, and left it at that.




Pulling the cylinder off showed the condition of the piston.  It’s got a bit of crud starting to build up on top, but nothing out of line with being run hard for eight hours.  In fact, it’s a little cleaner than I expected.  I’m sure when I get to wiping off the parts, it’ll come clean.




Again, some varnishing on the adapter and cylinder fins from fuel residue not cleaned up.  And a slight film on the cylinder walls from the castor, but not enough to be deleterious to the engine’s operation.  As you can see, the piston’s in great shape.  No scratching or excessive wear marks.  Play in the ball joint is very minor, not much more than right after I reset it in the Cox fixture.  Definitely less than it had when I pulled the engine out of the plastic bag.  And no real varnishing of the inside of the muffler.







It took a good bit of work to get the head adapter off of the cylinder.  Not surprising due to the varnish from the baked on fuel residue.  I took a torch to it to soften up the varnish and remove the head.  You can see the combustion chamber of the insert has a nice film of varnish.  This did not affect the head operation, though.  You can see that the filament is still nice and clean.  You can also see the varnish layer on the fins of the adapter.  The blacker colored varnish is from heating it with the torch.




All the parts laid out after disassembly:




And a note about the packaging.  I always wondered about the shape of the bottle.  It seemed a little weird to me, but I figured it was just to make it easier to grab about the neck when carrying.  Now, after having had to try and get the last little bit of fuel out of the bottle, I can appreciate the shape of it.  The way the neck is corrugated and then flared at the top makes it easier to get the last little bit of fuel out of the bottle and into the syringe hose, unlike the quart bottles that SIG comes in.  In fact, I’m going to transfer my SIG fuel into the empty Hobbico bottle so I can get the fuel out easier.

So, is the beta blend of Cox Super Power Fuel successful?  Yes.  It runs well, and the castor does as it should, lubricating the engine when it gets really hot, coating the ball joint, and filming the cylinder walls to make a smooth, tight seal that improves operation and fuel economy.  I’d say it’s a very good fuel for our engines.  Now let’s see what the other beta testers come up with in their tests.

The Kid Mark

And some pics I took when the sun peeked out for a few minutes this morning:

The crank looks great.  Just a little discoloration on the back.  The rear journal is nice and polished.  The front journal has some wear marks, but nothing you can feel if you run your finger over it.





You can see the internals of the case.  Looks like new.   My camera is lousy at macro photos, but you can see the inside of the shaft bearing surfaces are smooth and polished.







And trying to get a good picture of the cylinder walls.




You can see that the top of the piston is pretty good.  I have not wiped the top of the piston off yet.  And trying to get a picture of the varnish build up in the ball socket.  It looks thick, but the piston rod flops around easily, so the varnish is just enough to coat the bearing surfaces.





A picture of the head and insert.  Again, the black is from me heating it with my butane torch.



As you can tell, even after 8 hours of running, the internals are practically new.  The only issues at all are from my neglecting to clean the outside of the engine good after each run.  But a new engine user wouldn’t do it either, so I figure this is a fair test.  After all the photos were taken I did clean the head and cylinder a bit and the varnish came right off with a little elbow grease and a stiff bristle tooth brush.


The Sunny Mark

That's a good thorough analysis. Thanks for taking the time to do a great job of evaluating the new fuel. I'm itching to buy some now. I wish they would offer it in 25% and 35% nitromethane, as the 35% is better for bladder use.
Rusty

Pretty varnish! That is what a loved engine is supposed to look like. I bet that a toothbrush full of fuel will strip the majority of that varnish off the exterior quite quickly. This can be done when the color becomes noticeable or offensive and while the engine is still warm to most excellent effect.

Thank you Mark (batjac) and Dave (Kruzn) for this effort. This looks like a product I would buy if it becomes available through regular retail sources.

Phil

That is very detailed Mark, great pictures! I would almost put that engine on a shelf and display it next to the empty bottle of test fuel and the letter or whatever you got from Hobbico. That fuel looks promising, I know I'll be picking up some of it once it hits store shelves. That test engine looks like it would have many more hours of use left in it.


Thanks to Dave from Hobbico, Mark and whoever else tested the fuel (I look forward to hearing the other results).


PS: Mark, Did that engine come with the thin wall cylinder or did I miss where you said you added it?

Admin wrote:
PS: Mark, Did that engine come with the thin wall cylinder or did I miss where you said you added it?

Jacob, the engine is as I got it out of the plastic bag. I wasn't aware that this is different than expected.

Mark

batjac wrote:

Admin wrote:
PS: Mark, Did that engine come with the thin wall cylinder or did I miss where you said you added it?

Jacob, the engine is as I got it out of the plastic bag.  I wasn't aware that this is different than expected.

Mark

That's interesting! Those thin wall cylinders were used on engines up until the late 60s. Unless someone at Cox International put that on there, Estes may have done another odd thing (Estes was throwing together engines out of any parts they happened to have right at the end).

Is the metallurgy different between a thin wall and thick wall cylinder? Would it possibly change the results of the test?

Very Nicely Done Mark , this fuel does look very promising , What color is the fuel and the shape of the bottle as you mentioned is a Plus in its own , pic please , I am down to a 1/3 of a bottle in the sig and it is a pain to get out with a small syringe and not spill it out. Seems to me these people at Hobbico are TRULY CONCERNED about our model engines !  Getback

Thanks batjac you presented a well written and photo documented report

This should make a great fuel for our Cox engines and can easily be reformulated at home with extra nitro or Castor oil, or both for any bladder fed engines


George, I doubt there is much if any change in the metallurgy between the various cylinder designs. On the other hand there is probably some different heat dissipation variables. That said we see here that the test was done with the thin wall cylinder and looks like it can be run on this blend for a long service life.

GallopingGhostler wrote:Is the metallurgy different between a thin wall and thick wall cylinder? Would it possibly change the results of the test?

Not that I know of. I was just curious about the cylinder.

Didn't mean to go off topic with it.

getback wrote:What color is the fuel and the shape of the bottle

Here is a link to the Cox Models Super Power Fuel page.  You can see the color and shape of the bottle.

http://www.coxmodels.com/fuel/index.html

The Colorful Mark

Yeah! Sounds like we have a winner in 20 % synth / castor blend. Without to much of that new element (administratium) involved at Hobbico,  How soon or where will the new and improved super fuel be available?? Please let me know. Thanks for everyone's effort. Wishing I could have been part of the Beta testers. You guys are having fun on top of fun and providing valuable test data for one of our best vendors.

Im ready for 8 Qts.

Lets get this fuel out the doors!

batjac wrote:
Here is a link to the Cox Models Super Power Fuel page.  You can see the color and shape of the bottle.

http://www.coxmodels.com/fuel/index.html

The Colorful Mark

Don't get too excited yet, this is what that link took me to. The old stuff.

Ditto from Tower Hobbies.

Hi guys!
We have one full report (above) and are waiting on the other three, due by the end of the month. Once we have all of the reports, and assuming all agree with the first, then we can proceed with the production formula change.

We also will need to update and print new labels or add a sticker to the existing label. All of this takes a little time, so we ask for your continued patience.

The new formula will be coming soon, I promise.

Thanks Dave, we're hanging in there.
Rusty