Hi all, I replaced the tired Johnson Stunt (small case) in my Hemstrought PT-19 with a Brodak .40.
I have no experience with this motor and Id like to hear from those who have.
what  prop works best, what fuel and how much fuel to fly the pattern,

Larry, Buttafucco Stunt Team

Larry....They are terrific engines...especially those made after the first two production runs.
They like flat props and a spirited speed, ala a tuna piped engine.

I had good luck with lighter props in the 4 pitch area, and have had really good luck with a 10 1/2 X 4 1/2 APC.

Have fun

Hi all, I replaced the tired Johnson Stunt (small case) in my Hemstrought PT-19 with a Brodak .40.
I have no experience with this motor and Id like to hear from those who have.
what  prop works best, what fuel and how much fuel to fly the pattern,

Larry, Buttafucco Stunt Team

Call Antone he is the master at running them, and don't call him what you usually call him.

Good morning all from Spofforth village in North Yorkshire , England.

I have an early B40 . Wonderful engine , once broken in carefully.
It loves the APC 10.5 x 4.5 and the Bolly 10.5 x 5.

Mine is in a Sig Banshee. I launch , using the Bolly prop’ set at around 10,200.

Currently using fuel with 20% castor and 10% nitro.

Keep well during this health crisis .

Robin.

From all of the reports I have gotten over the years the Brodak .40 is a good engine. Only comments I have ever heard was the needle valve (copy of the old Fox .35 twin hole spray bar) should be replaced with a ST51 unit to stop the tendency to flood. Also been told about the excessive fuel consumption due to the 0.309 venturi. Most people simply reduced the venturi hole to 0.295 by sliding a thin wall aluminum tube in and cross drilling at the spray bar location. Once these two minor mods were done the Brodak .40 worked great.

Say "HI" to Mr. Kephart for me.

B40 == Easy to Achieve Break, most any prop. 

Sorry but I will disagree with needing an upper rod end bushing.
Yes, the lower end needs one as it is subject to high speed rotary motion.
The upper end sees only oscillating motion.
Furthermore, I have never witnessed a Brodak 40 returned to us because of a worn upper (or lower) rod end bushing.
Regarding a "limited life" engine, that pretty well describes every engine ever made. They ALL develop wear at some point, whether its connection rod, cylinder/piston, or crankshaft bushing/bearing wear. I have even serviced a few Foxes and McCoys that had unacceptable wear on the crankshaft.
I still have in my possession the original Brodak 40, the first one to arrive here. I was at Brodaks when it arrived and we used it to test a number of the new ARF/ARC planes. I do not know how many hours it has accumulated as I loaned it to a number of people to try before they purchased their own engine.
I instructed everyone I loaned it to to use ONLY Brodak 10/23, 50-50 fuel.
I really have no idea how much time the engine has but I'd bet that it is well over 1000 flights.
This engine shows NO SIGN of wear. John gave it to me and asked that I keep  an eye on it and report any wear issues to Sergai Ivanov, who builds the engines. The engine is still in like-new condition, starts and runs perfectly.
If anyone does encounter a premature wear problem, I will gladly assist in evaluating and solving the problem.
The Brodak 40 is, in my opinion, the best all-around stunt/sport engine ever made.

Bob Z.

If you want a “classic “ .60 call Tom Dixon about a Stalker .

The Brodak .40 and .25 have stood up very well for me . I have abused the.25’s for years in speed limit combat using 15% nitro 20% synthetic fuel running 8x4 and 8x5 props .

The only failure was due to a pit man sticking the glow plug clip in the exhaust. He put a BIG gouge in the piston and it still ran ! Just not real fast .

Brad