"All the reworked versions I have seen were incredibly gutless, like, less-than-a-Fox-35 gutless. In fact I think you were present at the NWR where we were trying to work on a Pathfinder profile with a reworked 46LA that could barely get over the top in a wingover. And I was looking around for a stock Fox and a can of 25%.
Brett"
Hi Brett
You must be finding some that have been improperly done, NONE of my reworks are "gutless" just ask anyone who has them, you keep telling people this and they assume it is all of them.
And I never mentioned that it was one of yours. I see your point, however. I don't mean Randy.
But what gets me on this topic is that I see the same scenario over and over. There are plenty of good stunt engines that can be run straight out of the box with essentially no mods, if you put the right prop on it.
But, every beginner thinks they need a good "simple" 4-2 "stunt run" (IOW, a "stunt run" from 1975) - that has for the most part been superceded for the past 25 years - and that they either need some "expert" to breath on it to ensure it is right, or that having a "Joe Blow 46LA" sounds cool and will get them credibility at the field. They get it, usually for twice the price of the stocker, and sure enough, it will do sort of a 4-2 at low revs. And they put their super-duper LA in a Nobler and it will barely get out of it's own way. Darned if that doesn't replicate Fox 35 performance, with only 30% more displacement. This happens with half-a-dozen various engines, from various sources, now that guy doesn't come out anymore.
And the way the engine is set up, there's no way to fix it aside from getting a new stock piston/liner and frequently, new stock cylinder head, a stock muffler (which won't fit, and was thrown away "cause it's too heavy", and some 12.75-3.75 APCs. So here we are, in some soybean field or otherwise out in the boondocks, or 10 minutes before official flights at a contest, no spares, no alternatives, sorry, buddy, you're out of luck.
I have seen this play out literally dozens of times. It also happens repeatedly with the various iron-curtain stunt engines. One example - the same guy got various versions of the Stalker 35 and 40, and the Double Star 40, RE, SE, whatever. Try one, runs smoothly enough, but not enough power for a Nobler clone. And it's essentially unfixable without expert help because it was overcompressed to run on FAI fuel. Get one, gutted out lean in level flight for 5.5 laps on a 10-6, even at sea level, sorry, get another one. Repeat 5x. OK, that didn't work, so I will get a GMA ST56 to put in a bigger airplane. Starts up, sounds OK on the ground, release, the engine dies on the takeoff roll because the compression is so low that it needs a gigantic venturi that won't suck fuel well enough to make it through the takeoff acceleration. Different guy, a GMA ST60 in a Shark 45. Worked pretty good with Veco 45 and an ST46, 60 should make it sit up and talk. Sags on the takeoff roll but makes it through, squeaky lean in every maneuver, falling out of the sky overhead. Check the head clearance and it's about 1/16". Run 18% nitro, it start flying pretty good - about like Lew's flew with an ST46.
All of that could have been solved with one box-stock 46LA, or an Aero-tiger, for a fraction of the price. That's the frustration.
These are just a few examples and these are the cases with at least good workmanship. But the above scenario is so rampant and so damaging that I can't just let it go.
I don't think anybody intentionally screws it up, and I think most of those engaged think they are doing people a favor by making a "simple" engine. But most of them also either have no idea what has been going on in stunt at the high levels for the last quarter of a century, think it's "too complicated", or in a few cases, trying to prove some sort of a half-assed point about how they knew the "right way" and " I am going to show them all" . There's also 5 guys in every region who fancy themselves "engine experts".
Brett
Topic: Kit and Motor questions (Read 6865 times)