Author Topic: Ohlsson and Rice 29... Glow? (Read 3337 times)

IdRatherBeBuilding · « **on:** February 10, 2019, 10:49:11 PM »

So I picked up a pretty nice O&R 29 with a glow plug on it. Did these ever come as glow? My engine has room on the crank just between the case and prop for what seems like the contacts.
I just looked a little closer. Looks like the plug is pretty old as well, at least from the exterior. And there might be an insert to adapt ther glow plug into the head.

Is anyone familiar with something like this?

David Miller

IdRatherBeBuilding · « **Reply #1 on:** February 11, 2019, 12:00:42 AM »

Here's a view with the plug removed. Doesn't look like an adapter. Now I'm thinking, how does the head come off of this guy?? lol

David Miller

Jim Kraft · « **Reply #2 on:** February 11, 2019, 08:41:31 AM »

The head is staked on with the glow plug insert. The cylinder is spot welded into the case. You can remove the crankshaft and front housing, and then turn the rod crossways to remove the rod and piston. that is all that can be removed. They did come out as a glow in the later years. I have on just like it. They have a brass caged roller bearing on the rear of the crankshaft that you need to be careful to not lose the rollers.

I have run mine on the bench, but never in a plane. They seem rather anemic by even Fox 29 standards. That is about all I can tell you about it. They do not like a lot of nitro as the welds can break and blow the cyl. out. The 33 was the worst for that though.

IdRatherBeBuilding · « **Reply #3 on:** February 11, 2019, 09:06:11 AM »

Sounds pretty bad other than they did make these as glow.
I bought it to put in a Top Flite Peacemaker. They call for a 15 to 29 and show mounting for a cox 15 and a K&B 19, I think a Veco. Do you think it would pull the Peacemaker around? I was thinking of 52' lines.
I admit I did impulse buy it on ebay. It just looks So different and seemed nostalgic, which is what I'm shooting for.
Thank you so much for your input Jim.

David Miller

Brett Buck · « **Reply #4 on:** February 11, 2019, 09:28:14 AM »

Quote from: Jim Kraft on February 11, 2019, 08:41:31 AM

The head is staked on with the glow plug insert. The cylinder is spot welded into the case. You can remove the crankshaft and front housing, and then turn the rod crossways to remove the rod and piston. that is all that can be removed. They did come out as a glow in the later years. I have on just like it. They have a brass caged roller bearing on the rear of the crankshaft that you need to be careful to not lose the rollers.

I have run mine on the bench, but never in a plane. They seem rather anemic by even Fox 29 standards. That is about all I can tell you about it. They do not like a lot of nitro as the welds can break and blow the cyl. out. The 33 was the worst for that though.

I can attest from first-person experience that you can blow the cylinder off a 23 Sideport, as well. These engines were just never designed to handle significant levels of power. They were fine as low-rev, chug-around, ignition engines. Not really their fault if a bunch of yahoos come along later and try to make it run 3x the power and rpm using (what was at the time) rocket fuel.

Brett

Bill Adair · « **Reply #5 on:** February 12, 2019, 01:31:44 PM »

David,

I have info on the manufacturing chronology of O&R engines, if you are interested? Just a short page, but it covers 1938 through 1953 when they apparently ceased production.

Seems most (if not all) of their engines are serialized, and these notes apply to serial number ranges. File is in an earlier MS Word format, but I can send it plain text if you prefer.

I also bought an instruction manual on the web, but it is of no use as far as I'm concerned. I'll send it as well, but mostly for your amusement.

Also have some odds and ends ignition parts I'll send, but I did not test the parts, so do that if you want to use them.

PM or email your mailing address, and I will get them on the way at no charge.

Good luck if you go spark ignition.

I'd strongly advise you to ask others who run these things how little nitro they can stand, and what size prop to run.

Bill Adair

kenneth cook · « **Reply #6 on:** February 12, 2019, 02:25:44 PM »

I have a glow O&R .29. I just put a 9x6 on it and 10% nitro with a high oil content of 25%. It's not a powerhouse, just a neat old piece of history. I run it on the stand just for fun, it starts right up. There's a funny bearing inside the case, a thrust bearing. Just make certain it's free and all should be good to go.

IdRatherBeBuilding · « **Reply #7 on:** February 12, 2019, 08:48:49 PM »

Wow Bill, many thank yous! I'll send my info.
I've been really wanting to do some ignition on a model, but just don't know where to start.
I think I'll build 2 Peacemakers now. One for ignition.

Kenneth- thanks for the info. I was just about to ask what prop to start with. I'm not looking for a power house so I think the O&R 29 is going to be nice. It's also surprisingly light! I compared it to my torpedo 19, and the 29 is lighter. And just a little heavier than my Enya 15. If it has the power of an Enya 15, I'd rather deal with the added weight just to have that cool looking engine in it.
I cant wait to hear what it sounds like.

Brett Buck · « **Reply #8 on:** February 12, 2019, 09:29:39 PM »

Quote from: IdRatherBeBuilding on February 12, 2019, 08:48:49 PM

Kenneth- thanks for the info. I was just about to ask what prop to start with. I'm not looking for a power house so I think the O&R 29 is going to be nice. It's also surprisingly light! I compared it to my torpedo 19, and the 29 is lighter. And just a little heavier than my Enya 15. If it has the power of an Enya 15, I'd rather deal with the added weight just to have that cool looking engine in it.
I cant wait to hear what it sounds like.

For just flying around, it will probably be fine on a relatively small model like the Peacemaker. But be sure and try it on the bench before you spend time building an airplane for it. Both of the Olhssons my dad had failed to run on conventional fuel (10% nitro) without the battery attached. It worked on 30% and it worked on 10% with an ancient Arden glow plug, but the 30% is how I blew the jug off of it. Apparently they had the same problem back in the day, my dad said thats why he had two Arden plugs.

I would certainly start with a 9-6 and then try a 10-6. Forget trying to get a lot of RPM out of it, it's just not designed for that, you need to keep the revs down to keep it alive.

This is not an engine I would choose for a Peacemaker (or anything else) - I would probably use a 20FP because I have a lot of them and it's vastly overkill power-wise. But if it keeps running, it will work fine for what you are doing.

Brett

IdRatherBeBuilding · « **Reply #9 on:** February 12, 2019, 11:18:12 PM »

hmm.. I do want the Peacemaker to stunt well. I don't want a screamer either. Just something that can pull through verticals without having to clinch my teeth.

I have a few fp20s and a 25fsr. the 25 would definitely be a lot for it. But either way, their just not "the look" I'm going after. I know that sounds a bit ridiculous, but I want really want the plane to have a feel like a time machine.

I'll leave the engine rails alone and drill them once I finally decide on an engine. It's too cold out right now to run the engine. And all this white stuff in the backyard.. I don't get it?? They do this every year out here.

Any ideas for a decent plant from about the 50s-60s? Or even just has that kind of look?
I did also pick up a Torpedo 19 for this plane. I kind of like it. It has steel fins which I think is the cat's pajamas, But I wanted something a little older looking.
I was considering ignition..

FLOYD CARTER · « **Reply #10 on:** February 13, 2019, 11:40:37 AM »

This is my effort to prove what Bob Palmer claimed; that is, flying a Go Devil with an O&R 29 (FR). Although the model was built very light, the O&R would fly it, but no stunts except big loops and inverted.

If Palmer actually used this combination, as he claimed, he would have had to be very careful to keep it from falling out of the sky.

The O&R 29 front rotor on glo is a steady, reliable powerplant, but suited mostly for trainers or sport models.

Brett Buck · « **Reply #11 on:** February 13, 2019, 03:55:10 PM »

Quote from: FLOYD CARTER on February 13, 2019, 11:40:37 AM

If Palmer actually used this combination, as he claimed, he would have had to be very careful to keep it from falling out of the sky.

The O&R 29 front rotor on glo is a steady, reliable powerplant, but suited mostly for trainers or sport models.

He has a chance with a much smaller model like the Peacemaker, but, the engine is no powerhouse, that's for sure.

Brett

IdRatherBeBuilding · « **Reply #12 on:** February 14, 2019, 10:50:26 AM »

I've always liked the older McCoys. They have that classic look, even in the 70s, when I couldn't afford them on my 50 cents a week allowance.
I am building the Top Flite version, from the original kit. Do you really think it needs that much power? Its a 46" wing and 414 sq area. But that full balsa covered fuse might get a little heavy. I was thinking (now more like planning) to build 2. One being respectful to everything, and using the original wood. The other on a Huge diet.

Brett Buck · « **Reply #13 on:** February 16, 2019, 08:31:17 PM »

Quote from: IdRatherBeBuilding on February 14, 2019, 10:50:26 AM

I've always liked the older McCoys. They have that classic look, even in the 70s, when I couldn't afford them on my 50 cents a week allowance.
I am building the Top Flite version, from the original kit. Do you really think it needs that much power? Its a 46" wing and 414 sq area. But that full balsa covered fuse might get a little heavy. I was thinking (now more like planning) to build 2. One being respectful to everything, and using the original wood. The other on a Huge diet.

Top Flite kits varied in their wood quality. I think I had Noblers that were as little at 38 ounces and as many as 48 ounces, and that wasn't because of too much glue and paint.

In this case I would be quite concerned about weight regardless of the power, at least with the engines you are talking about - Ohlsson 29, McCoy, those are all going to give you similar performance. A McCoy might be stronger than a Ohlsson, but it uses the same sorts of propellors at similar RPM. Making it bigger, but still running the same sort of style, will not improve the performance as much as everyone seems to want to think.

You don't get the quantum leap in performance until you get to 4" of pitch instead of 6, with engines that can handle that like the Veco 19, 20/25FP, 25LA, etc. The better speed control in the corners will allow much higher wing loading, just like it does with modern stunt planes VS classic. I flew a very similar airplane (410 square inches with a better airfoil) with both a Fox 35 and a ST46, at 27 and 31 ounces respectively. It was better (and the ST46 would at least keep running in outside corners), but not that much of an improvement. I would expect a 20FP to be *drastically better* than the ST46 in that case.

This airplane was originally designed around a 15 *diesel*, so you have a chance. I would expect a tremendous performance improvement using a 15FP over an Ohlsson 29 or McCoy 29, Fox 25, that sort of thing, but that just means you need to be very careful about the weight regardless of which vintage engine you use.

Brett

Dan McEntee · « **Reply #14 on:** February 16, 2019, 09:09:25 PM »

Did Larry Fernandez build one of these recently and post pictures? Maybe one of the other west coast guys? I did a search but didn't come up with what I think I remember. I just can't remember what he was putting in it, but a tank was a minor issue?
Type at you later,
Dan McEntee

PS; Found it, but no pics in this thread;

https://stunthanger.com/smf/engine-set-up-tips/fp-20-fuel-consumtion/msg485684/#msg485684

He was planning on a FP-20 for this one. If you want a period engine that is correct for it and easier to find, get a Veco .19. Only problem with that engine is finding a muffler for them but they are out there.

Brett Buck · « **Reply #15 on:** February 16, 2019, 10:30:42 PM »

Anticipating the next likely question - I would not suggest trying to use a 9-4 (like the 20FP would use) or the 10-4 on the Ohlsson or any other vintage engine aside from the Veco 19. Even if it doesn't break the engine, you will not get the performance that you would get with the same prop on a 20FP or similar. It might spin it fast enough to fly it level at the right speed, but it will do *nothing* in the maneuvers. That includes almost any vintage engine including 35's.

I have tested several vintage engines, even strong ones, on the Skyray 35 (30 ounces and 400 square inches). The Duromatic McCoy 19 RR (reworked to original condition (not improved...) by no less than GMA himself), seemed pretty promising on the ground. It would easily spin a 9-4 APC at about 11,800 on the ground, which is about the launch RPM for the 20FP, so I figured I was in business. We took it out, set it, running great, released it - and it rolled about 5 feet and died! To get that kind of power out of it, the venturi was huge by stunt standards, and it wouldn't keep drawing fuel well enough to make it through the acceleration. Eventually, I got a strong push-off, and it sagged but made it. It was near the right speed in the air, but was so gutted out it had *no* chance in the maneuvers. It did not take long to discover that it needed something like an 8-6, that cut the acceleration in the air, and could be backed off enough to make it, weakly, through the maneuvers. It was about as good as a Fox 35, but it very delicate piloting.

There has also been a sad history of over-revving the older engines and having them break the crank or some other part. The Ohlsson, in particular, was designed around chug around at low RPM with large FF props. Only the stronger racing engines can take the sort of RPM required and even then, there is just not enough RPM capability.

Brett

Jim Kraft · « **Reply #16 on:** February 18, 2019, 11:02:06 AM »

I fly mostly 60 size sparkers. Most of the very powerful ones, Orwicks, Anderson Spitfires, and Atwoods fly very well on 13X6 props. The Super Cyclones like 12X8 props. I have also run 12X6 props on the more powerful engines, but unless you keep the timing set back or restrict the intake, they are way to fast even on 68' lines for me.

I have a couple of Olsson 23's that I fly on free flights, and they will run on about anything from a 9X4 to 12X4. I have one Ohlsson 60 side port that will turn an APC 13X4 at 9,000. I have one that is a front intake, and it pulls pretty hard but I have never checked to see what RPM it is running at. I had it on a Super Zilch for a while with a 12X6, and it pulled well, but did not like some maneuvers. Could have been the tank placement. I just switched to an Atwood Super Champion and all was well.

With all the good electronic ignition and good batteries we have now, Ignition engines are easy to start and run. Mine usually start easier than my glow engines. They do not run away because the timing is fixed. There only draw back is noise. They do not like mufflers, although I have run one on one of my Super Cyclones.

IdRatherBeBuilding · « **Reply #17 on:** February 18, 2019, 01:55:41 PM »

What IC ignition are you using? I have a couple C&H, but they're kind of big.
What planes are you running your 60 size engines in.
That Suoer Cyclone isn't beautiful, it's Gorgeous!!
I can't even get my teeth that clean!

David Miller

Jim Kraft · « **Reply #18 on:** February 18, 2019, 03:21:31 PM »

I have used Floyd Carters ignition, and Don Hutchinson's ignition. I think both are now available from Larry Davidson. I have also used just one transistor and that works well also.

I have several planes set up with ignition engines. Two Humongous, one Taurus, one Box Car Chief, one stripped down Super Zilch, and a Viking I am in the process of changing from a Fox 59 to a Super Cyclone. I also fly a couple of Old free flights on ignition with a radio.

Fuel is cheap and it only takes half as much. This Brit Taurus is 68" span with 850 square inches, and flies well. It won ignition at VSC three years in a row for me with an Anderson Spitfire.

Jim Kraft · « **Reply #19 on:** February 18, 2019, 03:36:09 PM »

The Humongous is 650 square inches with a Spitfire.

Jim Kraft · « **Reply #20 on:** February 18, 2019, 03:39:46 PM »

This is a Marvin Miller repro Spitfire I picked up new in the box on e bay. I have three other originals.

IdRatherBeBuilding · « **Reply #21 on:** February 18, 2019, 07:52:44 PM »

Yup. I gotta try Ignition.
I'll look up Larry when I'm ready. Probably in a couple months.
I like that sandcast look on the Spitfire repo.
I saved that pic of your Taurus That is a perfect shot.

David