News:


  • May 04, 2024, 08:06:23 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Power difference between Cox Black Widows.  (Read 1576 times)

Offline Andrew Tinsley

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1345
Power difference between Cox Black Widows.
« on: July 21, 2011, 02:36:16 PM »
A propos of my earlier thread on a Black Widow, Just how much power is lost with the later two slit exhaust compared with the single large exhaust? If it is appreciable then milling out the bridge between the two slits seems a simple solution. I notice that Xenalook are doing this with product cylinders to supply the TD market. Is it just looks or are there serious power gains to be had? My first reaction is yes there is, but I am betting on not too much of a difference!

Regards,

Andrew.
 
BMFA Number 64862

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12813
Re: Power difference between Cox Black Widows.
« Reply #1 on: July 21, 2011, 02:51:47 PM »
Try a few of each and see?  Xenalook is probably smart enough to know that you don't make money selling the customer what they need, or even selling them what they want -- you make money by selling the customer what they think they want, and what they'll pay for.  If that's TD cylinders with uselessly big* exhaust ports, then that's what you sell.

* And no, I don't know if that makes a difference or not.
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Offline Paul Smith

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Power difference between Cox Black Widows.
« Reply #2 on: July 21, 2011, 08:28:41 PM »
I never quite figured out the theory of the slit exhaust.  Maybe it had to do with a cheaper cutoff tool.

I've always had a theory that Cox engines had way too much exhaust area and not enough intake.  A modern schrurle ported engine has three times as much intake as exhaust.  The Cox is the opposite.

My belief is that most of the exhaust gas & noise exits the engine as soon as the exhaust cracks open, so when it opens means more than how long it stays open. 

Cool, low pressure incoming air needs a BIG passage.  High pressure exhaust will find its way out from the smallest hole.  If had the machinery, I'd like to have a Cox cylinder with one exhaust port left closed and the area used for a third (really big) intake bypass.
Paul Smith

Online kenneth cook

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1466
Re: Power difference between Cox Black Widows.
« Reply #3 on: July 21, 2011, 09:09:23 PM »
  I believe the slit type cylinders were designed for fire protection. Earlier attempts used the welded wire screen on the cylinder. I suppose that the slit restricts the flame from jumping out on start up.  The slit type cylinders have a slightly different porting arrangement than the standard Black Widow cylinder. If you look up inside you will see what appears to be 2 ports just like the Black Widow,  but each port is divided . It looks like you have 4 channels. This is what I believe is what is known as the transfer port which was typical of TD cylinders. The older TD's had the tapered cylinders as well. Some of my older TD pistons have a oil hole also located on the bottom of the rod. I feel the Sure Start cylinders work very well, but they're all not up to par. I noticed that when I purchased some of them for $5.00 when Estes was unloading them. 1 out of 4 though were doing pretty well. They certainly have tremendous ball socket play for new piston rod assemblies. I generally get around 19k + when using the Sure Starts but my Black Widow's do better than that. Ken

Offline Bill Little

  • 2017
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12671
  • Second in COMMAND
Re: Power difference between Cox Black Widows.
« Reply #4 on: July 21, 2011, 10:17:26 PM »
hi Kenneth,

I never really realized how much the "play" in the ball socket joint of the rod/piston meant on the Cox engines until I got a resetting tool.  A tightened ball socket joint does give more rpm! ;D

Big Bear
Big Bear <><

Aberdeen, NC

James Hylton Motorsports/NASCAR/ARCA

AMA 95351 (got one of my old numbers back! ;D )

Trying to get by

Offline minnesotamodeler

  • 2014 Supporters
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2335
  • Me and my Chief Engineer
    • Minnesotamodeler
Re: Power difference between Cox Black Widows.
« Reply #5 on: July 22, 2011, 08:12:39 AM »
hi Kenneth,

I never really realized how much the "play" in the ball socket joint of the rod/piston meant on the Cox engines until I got a resetting tool.  A tightened ball socket joint does give more rpm! ;D

Big Bear

More important: You won't beat a hole through the top of the piston.  That's what it took for me to buy a resetting tool.
--Ray 
Roseville MN (St. Paul suburb, Arctic Circle)
AMA902472

Offline Mark Boesen

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • New Pilot
  • *
  • Posts: 19
    • 049 Collectors
Re: Power difference between Cox Black Widows.
« Reply #6 on: July 28, 2011, 10:10:26 PM »
Ken, your correct. The slit type exhaust port was to reduce the chance of fire.

If your planning to operate the engine at very high RPM you will see a slight drop in RPM...but we're talking top end RPM and above of what the engine was designed to operate normally. If your building a Mouser I would not use a slit type cylinder, if it's gonna pull a stunter or for sport they're great.

Mark

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/049Collectors/


Advertise Here
Tags:
 


Advertise Here