stunthanger.com
Engine basics => Engine set up tips => Topic started by: frank mccune on January 14, 2015, 10:43:38 AM
-
Hi All:
I dug out a couple of old McCoy engines today and I am wondering if they would be good to use for sport flying.
I have a new .19 and a .29 rear intake Sportsman that I could break in and mount in a ready built airplane. Both of these engines have two rings on the piston and seem to have good compression. Would these engines start and run well or am I in for many disappointments?
I have a few Sterling Ring Master and P-51 Mustang kits that I could use if I wished to build. I also have a new Flite Streak that I could build. Perhaps the .19 would be a good fit for the Sterling Mustang The Flite Streak would work well with the .29.
Thoughts or comments?
Tia,
Frank McCune
-
Frank if they are new and in good shape I'd run 'em. These early Macs were well made engines built by or under the watch of Dick McCoy. The second generation of Red Heads is where the cart got ahead of the horse some (mostly the slant or offset plug .35 and later Custom). They really aren't worth much as collectors items so yeah... Run them after a careful breakin and use plenty of oil in the fuel like a Fox. Should make fun sport engines.
Dave
-
Frank, while there are many on the forum who seem to abhor old engines and will recommend only OS .20/.25 FPs and such- fine engines no doubt- for older .35-size models, your McCoys will do as well as they did in the '50s/'60s.
There are also a few who love the old engines, including McCoys, and fly them regularly.
Perhaps they'll pipe in with helpful insight.
Meantime, be sure to run 25-28% oil (preferably 50% castor) and, they being iron/steel, "heat-cycle" break in carefully.
Sure, you won't win contests, but sure, you can have lots of fun. :)
regards,
Terry Caron
-
Frank, while there are many on the forum who seem to abhor old engines and will recommend only OS .20/.25 FPs and such- fine engines no doubt- for older .35-size models, your McCoys will do as well as they did in the '50s/'60s.
You are incorrectly characterizing the points we make. They do work just as well as ever for sport flying. It's absolutely not a matter of "abhorring" them. There are a lot better alternatives, but no one said they don't work.
For stunt competition, they are hopelessly obsolete. So's a Supertigre 46 - so I couldn't recommend one for someone attempting to compete in today's event.
Brett
-
You are incorrectly characterizing the points we make. They do work just as well as ever for sport flying. It's absolutely not a matter of "abhorring" them. There are a lot better alternatives, but no one said they don't work.
Brett
Mea culpa.
Terry
-
You are incorrectly characterizing the points we make. They do work just as well as ever for sport flying. It's absolutely not a matter of "abhorring" them. There are a lot better alternatives, but no one said they don't work.
For stunt competition, they are hopelessly obsolete. So's a Supertigre 46 - so I couldn't recommend one for someone attempting to compete in today's event.
I look at these old engines in stunt planes the same way I view a flathead Ford V-8 in a Deuce or model A roadster -- they look cool, they're nostalgic, but in a head to head race with just about anything with overhead valves, they'll lose.
I can see the logic of competing with a McCoy or a Fox 35 in a Classic plane -- but I'd do so with the expectation that the engine would be holding me back.
-
Hi All:
I dug out a couple of old McCoy engines today and I am wondering if they would be good to use for sport flying.
I have a new .19 and a .29 rear intake Sportsman that I could break in and mount in a ready built airplane. Both of these engines have two rings on the piston and seem to have good compression. Would these engines start and run well or am I in for many disappointments?
I have a few Sterling Ring Master and P-51 Mustang kits that I could use if I wished to build. I also have a new Flite Streak that I could build. Perhaps the .19 would be a good fit for the Sterling Mustang The Flite Streak would work well with the .29.
Thoughts or comments?
Tia,
Frank McCune
If you have them and they run well, use em ! , I have a RingMaster with a McCoy 35 and sometimes 29 Redhead on it, the plane engine combo works amazing well, and it does a near perfect 4/2 break. the sound is great , as others have said make sure to use lots of oil in your fuel.
I wouldn't use the 19 in a P-51 Yak 9 or Ringmaster, build a Shark 15 or another close to that size. The Shark 15 work really well with the 19 you have.
Randy
-
Hi All:
Thanks for the replies:
Randy, I do have a new Shark 15 that is ready to be covered that I could put the McCoy .19 in for power. Tha Shark 15 is one of my all time favourite planes. In the past, I have used a ST 15 and a Fox slant plug 15 for power. With both engines, tha Sharks flew very well! I think tha the Shark 15 has 270 sq. inches for a wing.
Would the Sterling planes be too heavy for the McCoy .19? Perhaps the McCoy .29 would provide a better match for the Sterling Mustang.
Stay well my friends,
Frank McCune
-
Hi All:
Thanks for the replies:
Randy, I do have a new Shark 15 that is ready to be covered that I could put the McCoy .19 in for power. Tha Shark 15 is one of my all time favourite planes. In the past, I have used a ST 15 and a Fox slant plug 15 for power. With both engines, tha Sharks flew very well! I think tha the Shark 15 has 270 sq. inches for a wing.
Would the Sterling planes be too heavy for the McCoy .19? Perhaps the McCoy .29 would provide a better match for the Sterling Mustang.
Stay well my friends,
Frank McCune
HI
I used a Shark 15 with 1 FOX 25 and I had one with a FOX 19, I think the weight was about the same on both
The Sterling P-51 would be better with the 29
Randy
-
Point of interest: Paul Walker won the Classic Stunt event at a recent VSC with an unmuffled McCoy .40 in a very authentic Southwick 'Skylark'.
Of course, much of that had to do with who was on the handle. That said, the ol' McCoy really SANG.
-
Hello again:
I took another look at some of the old McCoy Sportsman engines and they remind me of the McCoy engines of my youth. I do not know how old these engines are but they have the cast venturi that is angled upwards with a rear disk or drum. They do have a number engraved on the left mounting lug. Is there anyplace where I may look up these numbers to determine when these engines were manufactured?
As I remember from my youth, despite these engines being NIB, they had very little compression despite having two rings on the piston I nor anybody else I saw, get one of these engines to run. This brings me to the next question. If there is so little compression when new, will these rings ever "seat" and allow hand starting? Right now, there is a lot of leakage between the rings and the cylinder. Perhaps these engines should take a trip to Arizona. Lol I remember the first "big" engine that I bought was a new McCoy .098 that I never got to run due to poor compression. That engine also had two rings on the piston.
Any suggestions or comments?
Stay well my rriends,
Frank McCune
-
Try a shot of Marvels Mystery Oil along with a good prime. The oil should give you a quick seal to fire. As the engine warms the rings will expand.
Dave
-
I grew up when those motors were common . Most did not have very good coptession but they did run . They were so weak compaired to the fox that ever one stopped using them. The ring man frank does not live in arizona. mw~
-
The Mecoa Museum archive list sometimes can help approximately date an engine, I just wouldn't take it as absolutely 100% accurate. http://mecoa.com/museum/archive1.html
I've frequently thought about running an older engines, the ones you don't often see being used. Generally what I've found is that the reason no one else is using them is because they don't work very well or have fatal flaws that make them inconvenient. Most of the older engines from the era when the Fox 35 came out +/- a decade aren't as durable, powerful, or easy to operate as the Fox. There are some exceptions, but generally the Fox survived while the others went away for good reason. The flaws might be lack of power, or poor durability, mediocre quality control, or just a run style that doesn't lend itself to stunt.
If you want to run them, go ahead and give it a go. If you want to get out and fly without fiddling, choose a modern engine and save the frustration.
-
Andrew,
I fly vintage designs with ignition engines from the late 4Os. They require less fiddling to run than some of the modern engines. Starting is usually first flick and you cant get much better than that!
Andrew.
-
Not being familiar with the McCoy Sportsman, I Googled it.
Found this.
-
hhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
whats' going thru my mind right now CAN'T be put here in words.................. VD~
-
Nice horn!! ;D
Too bad she'll only get sun screen on one leg! LL~ LL~
"Tight Lines!" H^^
Wes
-
Look like the real McCoys.
-
oh, yeah, I am pretty sure they are...................... LL~ LL~ VD~
-
I picked up a McCoy 29 w. 45* RR sportsman from George Aldrich some years back that had a lapped chrome piston and low time. I put it on a stretched Guillows Galaxy and it had more than enough power but ran inconsistently. I try to pick up the engine whenever I run into them, as in flea markets. So far all the others have been ringed.