Subtitled: Big Bear goes to engine school!

A conversation with a good friend (actually two separate conversations and two separate friends: YES I HAVE TWO FRIENDS! ) led me to write this.

We were discussing the fact that practice time can be at a premium most of the time.  Fighting an engine cuts into stick time.  I ain't gettin' no younger.  Yes, there was a time when I would go to the field and tinker all day with an engine.  It was ok, since we all know when we are young that we will live forever!  Now, I know I have already lived longer than what I got left.  And, I need to fly more and tinker less.

So, our conclusion??  Find an engine guy you like, and run his stuff.  Take 99% of the wasted time out of the equation and get on with the program.  Doesn't matter which guy it is, as long as he's well know for what he does.  And just because a guy is a hot shoe pilot, it doesn't mean he knows a ton about engines (though a LOT of them do! )  There are several out there, and they will tell you how to get the engine to work right.  Listen to him and learn.  Things will be a lot easier!

I have learned and when it comes time to fly, I fuel up, plug up the battery, and go fly.  Sometimes I touch the needle just so I know it is still there. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 was ok, since we all know when we are young that we will live forever!  Now, I know I have already lived longer than what I got left.  And, I need to fly more and tinker less.

Bill,
You know the old saying that 'only the good die young. Well if you made it this far your over the hump, go fly. You have lots of time left. ERRR does that mean that your THAT bad!!!!!
Dennis

            

I should reply to this thread since I am probably one of the guys Bill is talking about.  Let me put this into context.

When I was young, I didn't have a lot of money to burn on model airplanes, but I had a lot more time to fiddle around. Now that I am older, I find the reverse is true. I'm not rich by any stretch of the imagination, but I have a very understanding wife who lets me spend whatever I need on model airplanes and I have two great sponsors (MasterCard and Visa  ) who encourage me to buy the very best.

BUT, I have a job that sucks away most of my time (and happiness).

It's the old saw: what's more valuable, your money or your time?  For me it's now time by a lot, so I would rather invest some good money in a decent CL Stunt engine and be able to spend my limited time getting some decent practice. I find this far more enjoyable now instead of sitting around, @#$%@^ with some RC engine that's been "converted" for our use. Yes, there are one or two decent engines that can be easily adapted for CLPA - and I have tried them as well. But now I prefer to simply pick up the phone, call one of the premiere engine gurus, and leave my troubles behind.

Oh BTW - Even if I bolt on the latest and greatest "PARO-JettRetroDoubleStar" engine, I still have to go practice -- a lot. Money can buy a lot of things, but it still cannot buy happiness or excellence in the stunt circle. That still takes time. 

This is merely my experience and preference. I've been playing with these toys for a long time and I'm having more fun now than when I was younger. Go figure. 

Ron

Ty, ya just gota be as smart as a Fox......mine are all 2 or three flip starters, even my .15.....and some of them are so well trained that all I gotta do is put fuel in the tank and just get the glo clip close and they will start...but then, I use Fox plugs also..... ....Oh, and Fox Super Fuel to...... Regards, PHil

So what is your setup?

I agree whole heartedly.  *NO ONE* has run more high zoot setups than me.  Not one added points to my pattern.  The bigger engines were just that, BIGGER.  They pulled harder, cornered worse, and weighed more. 

I have gone "old school" and I am loving it.  4-2 break and 6 pitch on PA!!!  With a $3 prop no less.

Wow... What happened to my post? Did I ruffle someones feathers?

I have posts go missing on a constant basis...

I assume it is Sparky, since Bill will PM you if he deletes a post.  Sparky does not.  He just deletes it.

I have posts go missing on a constant basis...

I assume it is Sparky, since Bill will PM you if he deletes a post.  Sparky does not.  He just deletes it.

Just would like to know what I said that wasn't allowed.. Wasn't even talking BOM or PAMPA, just opinions on engines. Sheesssssss  someone must be really sensitave...

I don't even remember what the post under discussion said.  I have had several conversations with Bob, so I have no problem.  I do know there have been spells of  the software burping (Sparky has told us of those) so I can't say what happened.

Either way, it happened, so let's move on.

MY POINT in beginning this post is that I have seen, on NUMEROUS occasions (I was even guilty of suffering the "problem" for a while!), where guys were fighting with one aspect or another of their engine during contests.  This just doesn't have to happen!  No matter WHAT type or size of engine you prefer, there is SOMEONE who has the knowledge for that engine.  Or at least can get you a "comparable" engine that will be basically worry free.

Hi Bill,
I think your main point is a perfectly valid one.  In 30+ years of judging I do believe that I have seen more bad scores created by flakey, bad and inconsistent motor runs than were created by "poor flying" alone. Several of the early modified engines of 20+ years ago that I saw didn't seem to be much better than a stock engine while some like a "Big Art- OS 35-s" worked well , but today, is the "Golden Age" of stunt engines whether modified engines or a ground up dedicated stunt engines. The variety and options for available quality stunt power is unmatched in history.
 
The bottom line is that Bill is right you don't have to put up with lousy , inconsistent and aggravating motor runs , anymore !
  
If you insist on doing engine setups yourself, then you are still better off today, because forums like this one, let guys share their expertise and experience, so you aren't stuck doing it the hard way, on your own.

                                                            Pat Robinson

On the other hand, I've seen many folks who would have a problem, no matter who reworked their engine, or if it was box stock. It really wouldn't matter, they'd still have crappy engine runs, if they could even get it started. Attention to details is the key to consistency. Breakin, fuel, engine mounting, needle valve assembly, venturi, tank, fuel hose, filter, prop, solid construction, hot battery, & on & on. Lots of places for gremlins to hide. Do your homework, get the details fixed at home, so you don't have problems at the field.    Steve

The truth is that 90% of the equation for a *reasonably* good engine run is not the engine.

50% tank
35% prop
5% fuel
10% engine

I have OS 40LA-S and 25LA-S engines that have plastic backplates.  Does anyone know where I can get metal replacements? I couldn't find them at Tower Hobbies.

Hi Bob,

You ARE right.  But, from listening to NATS Champions and World Champions, a *Stunt* Run* seems to be defined where the engine does not allow the plane to measureably slow down when you go vertical, and the engine doesn't let the plane measureably speed up when going down hill (in fact it *seems* to "put on the brakes"). 

Would you agree with that definition?  Your mention of constant airspeed seems to fall into that category, pretty much.  And, it doesn't equate to constant engine speed.  Constant engine speed would not affect the airspeed in those ways.

Bob, the best (stunt run) that I saw all summer was a litle Saito .30 in an Argus... Sat there and never changed its song no matter the attitude of the plane...I have decided that any serious stunt ship that I build will be 4 stroke powered....Regards, Phil

Bob, the best (stunt run) that I saw all summer was a litle Saito .30 in an Argus... Sat there and never changed its song no matter the attitude of the plane...I have decided that any serious stunt ship that I build will be 4 stroke powered....Regards, Phil

Ya, when I finally managed to get the Saito 40 on my TwistMaster singing the right song I was hooked. Funny what a high pitch prop and a silly 10-32 nylon screw will do. When the 56 on my Score worked just as well with the same setup I was really hooked and decided then (that for me) everything stunt except old time and maybe classic will be 4 strokes.

We saw a big 4 stroke bubble some time ago then it seems most went back to high dollar two strokes. I wasn't messing with 4 strokes at the time but would almost bet that most that tried 4 strokes and wrote them off were running lower pitch props with a wide open or fairly large venturi.

First time out with the 56 I had a Bolly 13-6 prop, stock Dixon venturi and was running 10% nitro. Bad combination, it would sag overhead and was doing about 90 on the down legs of the verticals. If I hadn't listened to Brad Walker and moved to higher pitch, choke down the venturi and run YS 20-20 fuel I would have given up on 4 strokes, sure glad I didn't..

I believe Saito missed the mark with the CL engine by not providing a means to easily adjust the venturi choke area. This is an essential item for CL and the RC carb isn't the answer..

Ya, when I finally managed to get the Saito 40 on my TwistMaster singing the right song I was hooked. Funny what a high pitch prop and a silly 10-32 nylon screw will do.

We saw a big 4 stroke bubble some time ago then it seems most went back to high dollar two strokes. I wasn't messing with 4 strokes at the time but would almost bet that most that tried 4 strokes and wrote them off were running lower pitch props with a wide open or fairly large venturi.

First time out with the 56 I had a Bolly 13-6 prop, stock Dixon venturi and was running 10% nitro. Bad combination, it would sag overhead and was doing about 90 on the down legs of the verticals. If I hadn't listened to Brad Walker and moved to higher pitch, choke down the venturi and run YS 20-20 fuel I would have given up on 4 strokes, sure glad I didn't..

Bob,

Please explain the 10-32 nylon screw.

Also, higher pitch props? A 13-6 sounds pretty high pitched for me on a stunt ship.

I was one of those who tried the four strokes a few years ago and I still have them in the basement. I will not blame the engine, I think the PILOT simply wasn't ready for the different "type" of engine performance. Now that the pilot has become better, he may be ready to pull one of the big Saitos out and try it on his ARC Strega.

Thanks,

Ron

Followed Bobs advice