Author Topic: Enya 45s (Read 20314 times)

Andrew Tinsley · « **on:** July 04, 2014, 04:08:59 PM »

I have both the 6001 and 6002 Enya 45 s. Now I remember that some while ago, there was comment in the postings, that one of these engines was a good stunt engine and the other (later 6002) didn't cut the mustard.
After having a quick check on the two engines, They seem to have near enough the same bore and stroke and the timings are not all that far apart and both are baffle piston engines. Now mine run just about the same in one of my test bed models.
So which is supposed to be the better stunt engine and what is the difference between them . I most certainly can't spot any dramatic differences.

Regards,

Andrew

Brian Hampton · « **Reply #1 on:** July 04, 2014, 11:07:48 PM »

Hi Andrew
I flew for many years with the 6001 and couldn't have been happier so bought a 6002 when they first came out. The run though was so different to what I'd become used to that I swapped back to the 6001. In retrospect it's possible that if I'd persevered with more run time and got used to the difference then it may have turned out to be fine. The 6002 is a completely different engine though with a much better head shape, different bore/stroke and more advanced port timings although crank timing is identical to the 6001. A bit heavier too. Port timings, with 6002 in brackets, are 66 (70) for exhaust and 58 (60) for transfer. As a matter of interest, none of the many variations of the 45 had the same bore/stroke and volume also varied slightly.

Brian Gardner · « **Reply #2 on:** July 06, 2014, 08:46:00 PM »

A friend of mine had the 6002. I remember I put an aluminium sleeve down the crank tunnel to improve velocity, but I don't recall what else I did. It ran like a dream after.

Andrew Tinsley · « **Reply #3 on:** July 07, 2014, 03:45:41 PM »

Hello Brian,
Would that have been Stuart Sherlock's 6002? I know he had a hemi head for the 6002 a la ST 46. Not quite sure what you mean, probably the difference between the Oueen's English and Australian English (just kidding!). Do you mean you sleeved down the crankshaft bore to increase the charge flow velocity? If so, Stuart didn't own up to that particular mod. Must check the crankshaft bores to see if there is any difference between the 6001 and 6002. I must admit I have never heard of that type of mod before. It will probably start off a new wave of engine reworkers!
Come to think, was this anything to do with his low speed high pitch experiments?

Best Wishes,

Andrew.

Brian Gardner · « **Reply #4 on:** July 07, 2014, 06:37:24 PM »

No mate, it wasn't SS.

Yes, the crankshaft bore.

I don't recall changing anything else, (possible a head shim or 2). It's an easy job. Machine up an aluminium sleeve, push it in with some JB weld and dremel out the intake window. Simplez.

Brian Hampton · « **Reply #5 on:** July 07, 2014, 10:08:36 PM »

Andrew
The 45/6001 has a crankshaft bore of 9.7mm while the 40/6002 has a bore of 11.5mm. I got these figures from engine tests and, not wanting to pull apart my 45/6002, figured they'd be the same 11.5mm.

Brian Gardner · « **Reply #6 on:** July 08, 2014, 02:41:51 AM »

That makes sense as I remember I made the sleeve a bit under 1mm wall thickness.

Steve Helmick · « **Reply #7 on:** July 08, 2014, 03:56:20 PM »

That will make Andrew happy, making aluminum chips!

I was going to suggest Stu Sherlock's website and discussion of the Enya .45 and ST .46. IIRC, he used a ST .46 head on his Enya .45...uncanny how metric engines have parts that interchange like that. Reminds one of the Rossi 2.5, Cox Conquest 2.5 and Taipan 2.5.

Steve

Air Ministry . · « **Reply #8 on:** July 08, 2014, 10:06:26 PM »

The Japs used Enya 45 6001s in 74 & 78 . Theres a venturie restrictor . Idea was a Light Tourquey motor .

Hara , 76 . Super Hurricane 30 . 7th place .this is woodville , so 78 .

" This 'Hurricane' design is kitted in Japan - flown by Sasaki. "

1974 , Fujita, Yamazaki, Sasaki

1972 , " First entrant from Japan to these meetings was Atae Yamazaki "

http://f2b.io.ua/album_4

Andrew Tinsley · « **Reply #9 on:** July 09, 2014, 04:20:39 AM »

Thanks guys,
I didn't know about the large crank bore on the 6002, that could explain why people find a difference in stunt performance. Maybe my selection of venturi bore was a bit on the small side and masked the difference, or it could be that I am lousy at assessing engines back to back (that is more likely the answer!).
Steve, it was reading the Enya articles on Stuart's site that got me into all this in the first place! I then started talking to Stuart about the odd way he ran the Enyas, 9" pitch prop and just over 6000 rpm launch revs. I was so fascinated, that some of the 9" pitch props are on the way from Australia. All I need to do now is to make more chips and fabricate a hemi head. I don't suppose I can lay my hands on an ST 46 head when I want one!

Andrew.

Brian Gardner · « **Reply #10 on:** July 09, 2014, 10:50:52 PM »

Andrew, I have a leftover ST46 hemi head if it helps you out. Send me a PM or email if you want it.

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #11 on:** August 03, 2014, 08:43:35 PM »

Speaking of Enya 45s, https://cs206.xbit.jp/~w041133/store13/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=1_29&products_id=556

The 45S-MSQ has a square venturi boss, which I guess means that Enya has made a spiral venturi to fit the older Enya 29-35. Interesting.

Andrew Tinsley · « **Reply #12 on:** August 04, 2014, 05:35:13 AM »

Hello Luke,
The "new" 45 sounds an interesting animal and at just over 9000yen is well worth investigating. I see there is also a "new" 60 that has an aluminium chrome cylinder. I suppose that these are constructed mainly from the spares stocks. I think I may well treat myself to both engines.

Thanks,

Andrew.

Bill Hummel · « **Reply #13 on:** August 04, 2014, 11:28:40 AM »

Andrew, do you think the "new" Enya 45 would have a 4/2/4 character like the old 6001?

Brian Hampton · « **Reply #14 on:** August 04, 2014, 03:57:01 PM »

Quote from: Andrew Tinsley on August 04, 2014, 05:35:13 AM

I see there is also a "new" 60 that has an aluminium chrome cylinder.

Hi Andrew,
That's an Enya 60X which first came out in about 1976 and was the first production engine to use AAC construction. They were improved over the years ending up with the 60X-IV but even the first version was extremely powerful. The carb on them is probably the best there is with a ratchet lever mid range adjustment you can alter while the engine is running and it really works

. A magnificent engine for RC but a bit heavy for CL stunt being about 6 ounces heavier than the Enya 61CXL. I have a 60X-III and it seems to be unwearoutable

.

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #15 on:** August 04, 2014, 07:12:47 PM »

Quote from: Andrew Tinsley on August 04, 2014, 05:35:13 AM

Hello Luke,
The "new" 45 sounds an interesting animal and at just over 9000yen is well worth investigating.

Precisely, and knowing Enya they will be a limited release. I bought a 45 last night before they are gone.

Balsa Butcher · « **Reply #16 on:** August 04, 2014, 10:26:33 PM »

Having run both the 45 6001 and 45S here's some of my thoughts:
*This engine is lighter than the 45S and will address one issue I had with the 45S-that is that its mounting footprint is different than the 6001 (which is identical to the ST-46 making the interchangeable).
*Must be a really old/new case-my 6001 has a round venturi, not the earlier square one.
*Muffler mounting lugs-not there. 45S has them. Their absence makes for a light engine but will make it necessary to use a strap on muffler.
*Since it uses the 45S piston, liner and crankshaft I would expect a 45S run (fast, little break) over a 6001 (traditional ST-46 style 4/2/4). On the plus side it will be more powerful than the 6001 version.
*Like the 45S it will require a great deal of time to break in (not a fault, just an observation).
*Swirl venturi-not sold on them. They do work, maybe a little too good as the engine will really pick up RPM's when the plane reaches flying speed. The problem is that it makes it hard to set the NV correctly on the ground as the engine runs so much faster in the air. I went back to a traditional venturi on my 45S.
*Kudos to Enya for continuing to produce engines specifically for C/L.

Andrew Tinsley · « **Reply #17 on:** August 05, 2014, 04:45:02 AM »

Hello Bill,
I would expect the new 45s will run like an ST46, exactly as Balsa Butcher (I just love that name!) says. I must check the Enya direct site again as I seem to remember that they are using the 6001 crankcase for this new limited release 45.
I realise that the reintroduced 60 is just a bit too porky for a stunt engine. however it is a piece of history in the saga of developing two stroke engines. I may just put it in an R/C plane (perish the thought!) but will more probably put it in a glass case.
BB's comment on the swirl venture is very interesting indeed. Who would have thought the humble venturi could be improved on? Just one query, does this venturi finish up giving more power than a standard offering? I appreciate the negative about setting up the needle. Can you use a tachometer to check revs on the deck and hence repeatable in flight revs? If not, then it is a great pity, I can't think that anyone else but Enya would have bothered to do any development work for C/L

Andrew.

Balsa Butcher · « **Reply #18 on:** August 05, 2014, 09:32:14 AM »

Actually, my guess is that with internal parts from the 45S it will run closer to that engine than the 6001. Wouldn't mind being wrong here because I prefer the 6001 type run. As far as the spiral venturi goes, the engine did seem to make more power with it installed. A tach was used in the setting of the NV but I did not write down the numbers. I'm sure with more testing a proper launch RPM could be found, just ran out of time. May do some more testing after the contest season is over.

ALEXANDRE TAPXURE · « **Reply #19 on:** August 06, 2014, 04:37:38 AM »

Hi Sirs;

I have a very antique ENYA 45 R/C mod. 6001, with two rings and baffle. Anyone tell me if is a good "option" turns it on
C/L engine, with actual ventures? This engines seems that was never used! I will clean it with very carefull!

Andrew Tinsley · « **Reply #20 on:** August 06, 2014, 05:43:29 AM »

Hello Alexandre,
Most people reckon that the 6001 engine to be a very good choice for stunt. Mine works well in standard form. It is even better making the mods suggested by Stuart Sherlock (See Joe supercool propellers), and using one of his props.

Regards,

Andrew.

ALEXANDRE TAPXURE · « **Reply #21 on:** August 06, 2014, 08:11:24 PM »

Hi Andrew;

This home page I did not know! Very interesting the articles about the propellers and engines ENYA. I will read everything carefully!

Thanks a lot;

Alexandre

Air Ministry . · « **Reply #22 on:** August 06, 2014, 09:03:34 PM »

This is the PLAIN BEARING one , alledgedly used by the Jap F2B Team .

Reading a review in a ancient aeromuddler mag , it says it is esentially the 35 case with a machined head ( but finned I think )
and showed .55 horse at 12000 . ( about what a plain bearing stunt 35 produces ) . Advantage being light weight , same Hp as the OS 49
in the same mag .

Tripe from write up on the Jap W/C effort stated they used them for light weight steady running on a 11 x 5 ( If I remember Wright ) ,
to pull 35 size muddles . Though the Hara hurricane 30 is , maybe the others are 60 in. ? ? Though maybe theyre not 6 ft. tall .

Presumeably the B. B. has hotter Crank Timing ? ? . would presume it has larger balls .

Dave_Trible · « **Reply #23 on:** August 07, 2014, 07:18:11 AM »

Quote from: ALEXANDRE TAPXURE on August 06, 2014, 04:37:38 AM

Hi Sirs;

I have a very antique ENYA 45 R/C mod. 6001, with two rings and baffle. Anyone tell me if is a good "option" turns it on
C/L engine, with actual ventures? This engines seems that was never used! I will clean it with very carefull!

Alexandre they will convert to nice C /L engines. Here is a .60 III and three 6001 .45s that Lees Machine Shop set up for me.

Gerald Arana · « **Reply #24 on:** August 07, 2014, 12:49:21 PM »

You can also get the venturi's (At various sizes) direct from Enya along with NVA's.

Jerry

Brian Hampton · « **Reply #25 on:** August 07, 2014, 10:07:47 PM »

Quote from: Matt Spencer on August 06, 2014, 09:03:34 PM

This is the PLAIN BEARING one , alledgedly used by the Jap F2B Team .

This was the first of the 45 model 6001 based on the 35-II crankcase but with a more heavily counter weighted crankshaft for the heavier cast iron piston. There were two different heads on these (thick and thin) with the one in the photo being the thick head. These were made from about '61 to '64 then came a finned head until '66 when the new 45BB (the one we know and love) was introduced. The only change made to the 45BB was a swap to a single ring in around '71 which was when the single ringed 60-IIIB was introduced.

ALEXANDRE TAPXURE · « **Reply #26 on:** August 08, 2014, 07:07:16 AM »

Good info, friends! I've done engine cleanliness. Despite being very old (60's) it is practically new. A friend suggested to install a venturi of 7.5mm and 11x6 propeller, to start.

Andrew Tinsley · « **Reply #27 on:** August 09, 2014, 04:32:00 AM »

Hi Brian,
Thanks for the interesting history of the 6001, I certainly wasn't aware of the iterations of the 6001, so the 45BB is the 6001 variant that is considered the best? When did the 6002 come out and did it supercede the 6001? Where in the 6001 timeline does the latest Enya retro 45 fit into the picture?

Thanks in advance,

Andrew.

Brian Hampton · « **Reply #28 on:** August 09, 2014, 08:46:33 PM »

Andrew
The 6002 45 came out in late '74 about a year after Enya's very first 40, the model 6002, which superseded the old 45. To be precise, the 6001 is called the 45BB and the 6002 is a 45-II. The 40 was the only Enya to use a Dykes ring.

Just to muddy the waters a little, about a year before the end of the 45BB Enya made a short run of a couple of hundred engines called the 45 S which used a plain bearing and based on the earlier PB 45 but used the crankcase from the 45BB so it can be identified from the original PB because of the boss in the centre of the exhaust. This was for CL only as no throttle was ever made available. This is the engine that was the basis for the 2007 45 SM although that one used the front housing from the 35-V, which caused some problems, and there's no boss in the centre of the exhaust.

Andrew Tinsley · « **Reply #29 on:** August 11, 2014, 10:27:32 AM »

Thanks Brian,
That helps a lot, the various names for the same engine certainly had me a touch confused! So the New offering from Enya is not "new" but is the 2007 45SM? Just to make sure I have things right? Do you know if it has been available from 2007, or is this the latest batch?
Again I assume that the SM version is lighter than the 6001 BB or is the bush pretty heavy?

Thanks again for the timeline,

Andrew

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #30 on:** August 11, 2014, 04:56:36 PM »

Andrew,

I have my Enya 45S MSQ in front of me.

The 45S-M used the 35-V front housing as Brian mentioned but was bored out to suit a larger venturi insert OD, this made the walls a little thin, so much so that on some engines the crank would pinch in the crank bush when the needle valve assembly was tightened.

The new 45S MSQ uses the front housing of the 35 III (5224) with the square venturi. It comes fitted with the new spiral venturi and still uses the 6001 crankcase, so basically it is the same as the older 45S-M but with a better front housing. I am actually quite pleased to see Enya has made venturis to suit the square hole, I have some 5224 engines that need venturi inserts.

BTW, the 45S-M weighs 8.35 oz, the 45S MSQ weighs 8.30. They take any of the mufflers that fit the 29 IV-35 III using the horse shoe bracket set up.

Air Ministry . · « **Reply #31 on:** August 11, 2014, 06:44:52 PM »

Aeromuddler September 1976 - W / C report - " The Japanese had a very professionally turned out team , all using a new variant of the Enya 45 which is lighter than the standard version , and has a plain main bearing . These engines ran faultlessly . "

Andrew Tinsley · « **Reply #32 on:** August 12, 2014, 09:28:30 AM »

Thanks Luke,
Now I like the old Enya 5224 a lot and I have several of the square venturi versions. So do Enya do an adapter to go from square to round and then fit a new style spiral venturi, or is it a single piece unit. Whatever it is I want some more for my 5224 35's. I can't seem to find them in the Enya Direct website. Any idea of a part number so I can try ordering a few more?

Thanks again,

Andrew.

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #33 on:** August 12, 2014, 04:48:03 PM »

Andrew,

the square venturi fitted to the engine is a single piece and definitely a new item, I just removed it now to have a good look. So, it's a new venturi and this suggests we will be seeing it as a spare part on Enya's website in the near future. If we don't then I will be asking Mr Enya why not seeing as they exist on the 45S-MSQ. It would be interesting to see how the 5224's run with the spiral venturi.

Balsa Butcher · « **Reply #34 on:** August 12, 2014, 05:05:20 PM »

It will also be interesting to see if the 45S-MSQ runs like the 6001 45 or the SS45. The difference will be noticeable. With SS45 P&L, my bet will be like that engine. Sidenote: After extensively running my SS45 and not really liking the stunt run I was able to coax from it, bench ran an SS50. WOW!

, now that's the engine I have been looking for. Started on the second flip, solid 4 stroke with an 11x4 (break-in) prop, good compression even when hot, ring looking like it is seating just fine-I have a good feeling about this one.

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #35 on:** August 12, 2014, 06:37:19 PM »

Balsa Butcher,

the 45S-MSQ uses the 45S piston, liner and crank from the original 45S released in the seventies, they are baffle piston engines and have nothing to do with the SS45-S which is a schneurle ported engine from the later SS series.

Balsa Butcher · « **Reply #36 on:** August 12, 2014, 08:16:23 PM »

OK, I get it now

45S different from the SS45-S. Thanks for the clarification.

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #37 on:** August 13, 2014, 12:52:40 AM »

Not a worry

Enya has made quite a few 45 configurations over the years and it can be somewhat confusing.

Andrew Tinsley · « **Reply #38 on:** August 13, 2014, 07:35:50 AM »

Luke..
You can say that again! I was very confused indeed until Brian sorted me out. The dual naming of some of the engines really had me fooled. Mind you that isn't hard to do these days!

Regards,

Andrew

Andrew Tinsley · « **Reply #39 on:** August 18, 2014, 03:18:54 PM »

I just got my new 45S MSQ today, taking a quick look through the exhaust port, the engine appears to have been run. At first I thought that this was an iron steel lapped engine. Looking more closely, it appeared to have a Dykes ring fitted at the top of the piston. Not wanting to strip it down yet, can anyone tell me what sort of P/L this engine has?

Regards,

Andrew

Akihiro Danjo · « **Reply #40 on:** August 18, 2014, 07:24:10 PM »

iron steel lapped engine

Balsa Butcher · « **Reply #41 on:** August 18, 2014, 07:41:29 PM »

Are you sure it is a ring? Many engines have a thin "oil" groove at the top of the piston the purpose of which is to trap oil which insures proper lubrication at the top of the stroke.

Brian Hampton · « **Reply #42 on:** August 18, 2014, 08:20:53 PM »

Easiest way to check if an engine has an iron piston or not is to cut a strip about 1/4" wide off a fridge magnet and lay it on top of the piston. I'm sure there's no need to explain what to look for

.

Andrew Tinsley · « **Reply #43 on:** August 19, 2014, 03:06:45 AM »

Thanks Akihiro!
I need some new glasses, I could have sworn that it had a Dykes ring! Thanks for correcting me!

Andrew.

Luke Spreadborough · « **Reply #44 on:** August 19, 2014, 01:13:09 PM »

Andrew,

the piston on mine has a step lightly machined in the top of the piston, i.e. oil groove fairly typical of Enya's older engines. . Easy to mistake for a dykes ring.

Bill Morell · « **Reply #45 on:** September 01, 2014, 07:26:46 PM »

Has anyone actually ran one of these besides on the bench? For appearance reasons only I wish they had put the venturi down inside the square port rather than on top. Looks funky and almost like a after thought. Other than that I feel it is most likely a darn nice engine.

Andrew Tinsley · « **Reply #46 on:** September 02, 2014, 08:14:11 AM »

Hi Bill,
I have not checked this, but I am pretty certain that the old Enya 35 (5224) square venturis will fit and I will probably use these to begin with. Easier to get the tank on spraybar centre line using those older square venturis.
Having said that, I have a sneaking feeling that it won't make a blind bit of difference to the tank placement, which venturi you use. The old style ones are certainly more crash proof!
I have started running in and I expect that to take a little while. I am going to use an ultra high pitch prop from Supercool Propellers and run the engine at around 6500. So highly irregular way to run things! I won't be reporting back on that for fearing to be hung as a heretic!

Regards,

Andrew.

Bill Morell · « **Reply #47 on:** September 02, 2014, 10:45:47 AM »

Andrew, I figured to do the same thing when and if I go for it. #3 square venturi should be just right.

Steve Thomas · « **Reply #48 on:** September 02, 2014, 04:51:08 PM »

Quote from: Andrew Tinsley on September 02, 2014, 08:14:11 AM

Hi Bill,
I have not checked this, but I am pretty certain that the old Enya 35 (5224) square venturis will fit and I will probably use these to begin with. Easier to get the tank on spraybar centre line using those older square venturis.

The rerun of the 45S they did about 5 years ago used a 5225 front housing, so I'd strongly suspect they're using a 5224 front housing on this one.

Phil Spillman · « **Reply #49 on:** September 15, 2014, 01:03:19 PM »

Hi All, several years ago I had an Enya .45 on my Viking and that combination flew really well in OTS! I then used an 11 X 5 Zinger prop on it which was fine! My question is what prop are you all ruining now on these engines?