News:


  • June 26, 2025, 11:42:04 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Johnson "S" versus Johnson "SS"  (Read 1496 times)

Offline Bill Morell

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 956
Johnson "S" versus Johnson "SS"
« on: February 13, 2022, 09:57:03 AM »
Anyone know if there is much  difference in these 2 versions other than the case?
Bill Morell
It wasn't that you could and others couldn't, its that you did and others didn't.
Vietnam 72-73
  Better to have it and not need it than it is to need it and not have it.

Offline Bill Morell

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 956
Re: Johnson "S" versus Johnson "SS"
« Reply #1 on: February 13, 2022, 12:18:10 PM »
If I recall, the SS was for Stunt Supreme and S was Sport. CS was for combat special. D>K

The "S" is a designated stunt engine from combining a 29 crank in a 35 case. I am just curious as to how they compare? I can put either one in my new plane. Obviously the "S" is lighter due to the small case.
Bill Morell
It wasn't that you could and others couldn't, its that you did and others didn't.
Vietnam 72-73
  Better to have it and not need it than it is to need it and not have it.

Offline Steve Lotz

  • 25 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 224
Re: Johnson "S" versus Johnson "SS"
« Reply #2 on: February 13, 2022, 12:22:46 PM »
I suspect the SS would use more fuel than the S because of the big gas passage in the crank. It is probably heavier, too. Some people have criticized the SS as not really being a stunt engine as it has some of the run characteristics of the CS.

For what I do, I'd take an S over an SS.

Offline Steve Lotz

  • 25 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 224
Re: Johnson "S" versus Johnson "SS"
« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2022, 12:27:42 PM »
If you use the SS, make sure the prop is on TIGHT. That soft cast prop driver likes to egg out the D hole.

Offline Bill Morell

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 956
Re: Johnson "S" versus Johnson "SS"
« Reply #4 on: February 13, 2022, 01:27:16 PM »
Thanks Steve! You have pretty much answered my question. The weight factor I was already considering. I have several of each so now I'll be looking for the best one.
Bill Morell
It wasn't that you could and others couldn't, its that you did and others didn't.
Vietnam 72-73
  Better to have it and not need it than it is to need it and not have it.

Offline Tony Drago

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 710
Re: Johnson "S" versus Johnson "SS"
« Reply #5 on: February 13, 2022, 02:43:37 PM »
TY is correct.
S--Stunt. SS--Stunt Supreme. CS--Combat special
 Putting the 29 cranks in the 35 would give you a 32. Came out for free flight.

Offline Dennis Toth

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 4408
Re: Johnson "S" versus Johnson "SS"
« Reply #6 on: February 13, 2022, 03:23:14 PM »
The S is a little heavier than the Fox and the SS a bit more. If you run the SS with a current high rpm/ low pitch set up it will haul the mail!! The Johnsons had lots of power and back in the day some considered them too much power for stunt. Others know how to work them and would let them have their head and power through any conditions. Larry Scarinzi was one of them with the Grey Ghost. Bring the pitch down to around 4 and push the diameter up to 10 1/2 - 11" and run 10% N, 25 -27% total oil (50/50 castor/syn ok) and it will do great.

Best,   DennisT

Offline Bill Morell

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 956
Re: Johnson "S" versus Johnson "SS"
« Reply #7 on: February 13, 2022, 04:11:19 PM »
TY is correct.
S--Stunt. SS--Stunt Supreme. CS--Combat special
 Putting the 29 cranks in the 35 would give you a 32. Came out for free flight.

As far as I know the "S" came about from Hi Johnson helping Bob Palmer at a contest. .33 in displacement.
Bill Morell
It wasn't that you could and others couldn't, its that you did and others didn't.
Vietnam 72-73
  Better to have it and not need it than it is to need it and not have it.

Offline Bill Morell

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 956
Re: Johnson "S" versus Johnson "SS"
« Reply #8 on: February 13, 2022, 04:15:24 PM »
The S is a little heavier than the Fox and the SS a bit more. If you run the SS with a current high rpm/ low pitch set up it will haul the mail!! The Johnsons had lots of power and back in the day some considered them too much power for stunt. Others know how to work them and would let them have their head and power through any conditions. Larry Scarinzi was one of them with the Grey Ghost. Bring the pitch down to around 4 and push the diameter up to 10 1/2 - 11" and run 10% N, 25 -27% total oil (50/50 castor/syn ok) and it will do great.

Best,   DennisT

Dennis, you nailed it on what it is intended for.
Bill Morell
It wasn't that you could and others couldn't, its that you did and others didn't.
Vietnam 72-73
  Better to have it and not need it than it is to need it and not have it.

Offline Steve Lotz

  • 25 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 224
Re: Johnson "S" versus Johnson "SS"
« Reply #9 on: February 14, 2022, 04:20:04 AM »
The story I heard involved Hi Johnson and George Aldrich.

Offline Bill Morell

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 956
Re: Johnson "S" versus Johnson "SS"
« Reply #10 on: February 14, 2022, 08:34:34 AM »
That might be correct. My occasional "senior moment". I knew it happened at a contest.
Bill Morell
It wasn't that you could and others couldn't, its that you did and others didn't.
Vietnam 72-73
  Better to have it and not need it than it is to need it and not have it.

Offline Phil Spillman

  • 2017
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 806
Re: Johnson "S" versus Johnson "SS"
« Reply #11 on: February 20, 2022, 12:14:35 PM »
Both engines exhibit sub-piston induction which means that if you run or have to run mufflers their running may not be up to par. By all means check to see if the bottom of the piston skirt comes above the exhaust port you'll have sub-piston induction which may not be as spiffy as you'd like!

Phil Spillman
Phil Spillman

Offline Bill Morell

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 956
Re: Johnson "S" versus Johnson "SS"
« Reply #12 on: February 21, 2022, 07:30:17 AM »
Both engines exhibit sub-piston induction which means that if you run or have to run mufflers their running may not be up to par. By all means check to see if the bottom of the piston skirt comes above the exhaust port you'll have sub-piston induction which may not be as spiffy as you'd like!

Phil Spillman

Thanks Phil. I'm contemplating switching it to the OS Max 35S. Haven't made a firm decision yet but giving it a fair amount of consideration. I can't do much of anything right now as I'm waiting for the control horn to arrive.
Bill Morell
It wasn't that you could and others couldn't, its that you did and others didn't.
Vietnam 72-73
  Better to have it and not need it than it is to need it and not have it.

Tags: