Author Topic: Let's Talk Mouse Racing (Read 2245 times)

Wayne Foster · « **on:** February 03, 2008, 02:11:13 PM »

Hi Guys,

I guess I did get off topic to Larry's original post. Sorry, I didn't know Larry was the head of Black Hawk Models. This was not mentioned in the original posts and I thought I was just letting Larry and everyone else know what I was flying. Again, sorry.

I am posting a copy of Paul's last entry here to start up the discussion. I hope that is OK.

I would certainly like to hear what everyone is doing and how they are going about it in Mouse Racing. In the 80's and early 90's, this was by far the most popular racing in the Southeast and held it own in number of constantents at the NATS.

I think the Cox engines are still the ones to beat in the majority of contests and would love to see some renewed interest in Mouse Racing. Any and all ideas and comments concerning Mouse Racing are welcome.

Wayne Foster – Old Mouse Racer Who Still Feels Young

Gentlemen (& Karyn),

Very interesting discussion. Please DO join us back in the mouse racing circle!

In terms of cox engines & rework, etc. the total compendium of published info can be found on the " 049collectors" web site. Sorry, I don't know how to hypelink it. Other than the Venom cylinder porting, there has been essentially NO real technical improvement in coxes in the last 15 years. The (Larry Renger designed) Venom sleeve might give one perhaps, maybe a 4 second heat improvement as far as I can ESTIMATE. My current AMA record holding cox venom is stock, but uses a TD piston as the original lightweight pistons all failed.
I believe your speeds are top notch, especially with your lower nitro fuel. My Streakers top speed is 75mph burning 65% nitro fuel W/ prop oxide.
On 40% fuel, my Streaker has hit 67 mph timed under 1/2A proto conditions. All these with good sea level weather.
Wayne is quite right about the range of a cox being marginal in the final sometimes...the record engine has only ~30 laps on 40% fuel, but up to 38 laps on 65% fuel....HMMMmmm...?? I own one prototype venom that although not as fast has 40+laps on the same fuel. I'm not sure exactly why though.
One Mouse strategy might be to blaze through the heats with the 'guzzler' & fly the final with the 'miser'...? Personally, I can't be bothered & stay with one engine unless I (often) blow it. ( The Venom /Killer Bee cranks have a short life at 21,000+ rpm & are currently the 'achilles heal' of an otherwise reliable engine. I DO NEED to reset my ball socket joints every 200 laps though....( i.e. after EVERY race)

One question that remains unanswered to me is: are your model(s) airframe faster than my standard Streaker mouse racer? Are any of the flying wing models faster? the log models? the Goodyears? Such curiosity I have!! I would be interested in trading models if you want to experiment...
The Bob Fogg version Streaker with the flat stab, CNC cut airfoil, & titanium L.G. is only 4 seconds faster thru the heat than the standard basic plan model.
So....improvements are very small, very subtle & often hard to notice unless you're really observant. But....it's still LOTS of fun!

Best of Luck!

Paul

PaulGibeault · « **Reply #1 on:** February 03, 2008, 05:35:36 PM »

Hello Wayne,

I don't think I've talked to you (or Karyn) since we raced at an AMA Nats some time ago. Great times...! How are you doing? My fading memory seems to recall that you often officiated racing at the Nats for which I'm eternally grateful for. It's hard to get volunteers like yourself these days. Although there was a comment about homebuilt & hybrid engines used in Class I Mouse, none of them were ever any better than a well set up Cox.
Easier to use & more reliable, yes, faster...no. You are also so very right that top speed really has no value in mouse racing, rather the elapsed heat time is what counts.
To demonstrate that no technical progress has occurred for 17 years. At the 1991(Lawrenceville) Nats, I set the heat record at 2:18:16 using a plan built Streaker w/ a cox Golden Bee w/ TD top end & 60% fuel, 4.75 X 4" F/G prop. At the 1999 (Muncie) nats, I upped the record to 2:14 flat. Changes to get that extra 4 secords were:
1. Use of a Venom engine
2.Nitro content upped to 65% + prop oxide added (fuel bulb was kept in a cooler, except when pitting)
3. I used a "Bobby Fogg" version Streaker (straight stab, Ti LG, cnc cut semi-sym airfoiled wing)
4. APC 4.75 X 4 prop

Today, the record stands at 2:12 with a hybrid engine. I don't personally accept that record because that race was not flown 3 up (like all mine were). Flying in traffic can eat up those 2 seconds pretty quick I think. I've also flown with all versions of homemade & hybrid engines & have not been passed.....The current 4:22 final record was flown 3 up against 2 hybrid/homebuilt engines. I ENVIED them, for their technical excellence but wasn't worried by their performance... ( I'd sure like to mess with one though....)
So, that simply means it can be done with stock cox equipment if it's set up & fueled right, coupled with a decent airplane & prop. Something you probably already know... Don't let anybody tell you otherwise. I have not done any further research, nor engine development for the last 10 years because I only fly once or twice a year. From the Nats results you can determine that nobody else has done any development either. I often lend out my other models (& engines) just to have people to fly against. I've also cut my fuel back to 40%, because it's a lot more reliable & easier on the engine & plug. I've sheared 8 Venom cranks now & probably will try the DDD HD killer crank someday...
Sadly, the real kicker is the demise of cheap cox engines & Joe Klause who offered custom mouse versions for awhile. There are still (& always will be)unlimited engine & parts supply on ebay, but it seems nobody wants to pay $100 for a good mouse engine anymore....Not withstanding, more than ever, a clean race with basic equipment still gets you in the final pretty much anywhere. Some things just don't change...& THAT's what I like about mouse!
All the best of luck, cheers

Paul

don Burke · « **Reply #2 on:** February 03, 2008, 06:09:45 PM »

Paul,

IMO the users of Cox engines have so far been very lucky to keep winning.

I remember parallels to what going on with Mouse. When I was in go-kart racing in one of the modified classes there was one tuner who had dynamite engines but always seemed to have trouble finishing a race. Turns out he was just developing things, when he got it right he obsoleted everyone else's stuff!

I think the same applies to M-I and M-II. It's just a matter of time till those playing with the non-Cox stuff get it right. Then those who have hung on until now will have to find out how to do themselves or maybe the classes will just fade into the sunset. Cox being essentially out of business doesn't help anything either, getting stuff from swap meets and e-bay can only last for a while.

For the same reason I think any "spec engine" class can only last as long as the engine in use is in production, or a much better one comes along, re: FOX versus plain bearing 25s.

Wayne Foster · « **Reply #3 on:** February 03, 2008, 09:43:04 PM »

Hi Paul, Don,

Good to hear from you guys. At the moment I have to agree with Paul on most all the points of what it takes to win. Maybe the New Stuff will come on some day but my guess is if the rules don't change, the Cox Engines will still be in the hunt.

I probably have at least 12 -15 complete engines that are race ready or almost so. Plus I have a ton of spare parts. Most of my stuff is geared toward being very consistent. I have lost some races in my time, but seldom get beat. I usually manage to screw up something when I lose. For large contests like the NATS, I usually took 6 -8 engines that were running perfectly at home with me. Never have I have more that 4 that would run good enough to win once I got there. I have no idea why that was, it was just something I excepted and learned to live with.

Once I got to the NATS, I would run my equipment to see what was getting enough laps for a two pit stop final and had total time of 5:00 minutes or less. The rest I usually just put away for another day. I very seldom changed fuel once I got to the NATS. I would change plugs or head gaskets and props, but not fuel.

There is one thing I don't know about and only testing will tell the tale. Paul, since you were running when I was with .008 lines, how much did your times change when you had to go to .010. Also, did you have to change wingtip weight much. I never ran much weight anyway (1 penny in wingtip), so I guess I will probably have to add a little.

As I said in an earlier post, I don't run high RPM's compared to most. I try to release at no more than 17,500 and certainly no more than 18,000. I also think I probably run more prop than most people do. I do rework my props and if we get to the NATS this years we can talk about that.

Paul, I like your idea about trying each others equipment. After I have had a chance to fly some on .010 lines and get the tip weight right, maybe we can see about an exchange.

What do your planes weigh without engine and prop and then completely ready to fly less fuel. I have always tried to keep my weight at 5.00 ounce total or a little under if possible. The Natural Light is a very sturdy airplane and will take any normal abuse of contest flying.

I am getting ready to build a few new planes and would be glad to post construction pictures if anyone is interested. This is a very simple plane but all of the items on the plane have a purpose. I have tried to cut out anything that is not absolutely needed.

Paul, I'm sure you are right when you say you haven't done any development in the last ten years and neither has anyone else. Most CL racing is like that. Seems like we just get to a level and then we start a new class of racing. FAI is probably the exception to that rule, but then the whole world fly FAI.

I look forward to chatting about Mouse Stuff in the future.

Wayne

Dave Rolley · « **Reply #4 on:** February 03, 2008, 10:39:16 PM »

Wayne,

I think both Paul and Don are correct. One of the reasons the conversion engines haven't run away from the COX powered models is they are all using a Cox tank adapted to the engine. That by itself is a real limit because of the size of the venturi tube in a Cox tank, both length and diameter. Wayne Trivin was working on a different reed valve intake several years back but he passed on before he got it up to a reliable level.

One of the interesting things is what one gentleman is doing by converting product model reed valve Cox engines to rear drum and disk engines. He is starting to hit the performance numbers (RPM) that some of the AME engines displayed. That implies that more can come out of the Cox if there was a good intake tract for one. (Google hypercolor) That doesn't say the engine would live a day's racing.

Plenty of room to play, ranging from just a good fit job all the way to wild and hand built!

Dave

PaulGibeault · « **Reply #5 on:** February 04, 2008, 01:22:47 AM »

HI Wayne,

Great posts. Yes indeed, those of us involved in Mouse Racing have managed to accumulate really a horrendous amount of cox engines & parts. I have found Cox 049's in Leningrad to Shanghai & every other country in between. At 12,000 engines per production run, more Coxes were produced than all other engine types combined ! Therefore, we will NEVER (in our lifetime) see a shortage of Coxes. Ebay prices may rise, but that's about it as I see it.
I wish I could've taken over where Joe Klause left off & offer mouse engines. However, it's more a labour of love than anything, & nobody's willing to do it for cheap anymore if at all. This is why you didn't see Tim Gillott, Glen Dye, GMA, etc. offer the service. There's NO money in it. The good thing is that you just can't buy a super 're-worked engine', you gotta assemble it yourself. It keeps mouse from becoming too serious an event & lends little advantage to cheque book racers.
I cannot quite explain either why you never know what your best engine is at the Nats. With stock engines, you must live with it (I do) . A chromed
re-bushed engine (which I don't have) offers more reliablity in that regard. I do think perhaps castor varnish build up may be a big player as well as tank screws loosening/tank leaks. Still I agree, it's a bit of russian roulet (which I think is part of the fun) but some 'serious' racers have trouble with the concept.
Since '99, I've settled on the wonderful APC prop, & only go down in dia. if the RPM seems down due to weather conditions. (i.e rain!)
You seem to do well using torque to go fast. I prefer to rev (20-22,500) as you know, but I have a shorter crank & plug life because of it...both ways can be made to work.
- I'm sorry to report that I just don't remember the effect of going to .010" lines.
- I've always used a quarter for tip weight & must report that the fastest (Bobby Fogg) model uses so much tip weight that with the inboard tip down on the ground, the model will still rock back to the outboard tip. Bob Fogg feels this seemingly excessive tip weight is of no real consequence....So, I've never changed the tip weight, but will tape an additional dollar coin to the tip in real windy conditions when race survival is important. I've never timed my model with different tip weights, so I can't really comment on its effect , if any.
- I've never weighed my bare airframes bare if you can believe it. With engine & prop they weigh 6.75-7 oz, a heavyweight compared to yours, but it seems to work alright.
Agreed Wayne, I've been involved at the FAI world champs level for 25 years. The competition there is very serious indeed. The development is relentless, especially when some competitors full time living depends on it! Fortunately for us, nobody's livelihood depends on their mouse racing prowess, and that's a VERY GOOD THING.
You post very thoughtful comments Wayne, perhaps others have comments too?

Cheers, Paul

PaulGibeault · « **Reply #6 on:** February 04, 2008, 02:25:12 AM »

Hi Don,

I think perhaps Mouse will be discontinued from the Nats sked before much if any more development happens. So, no point in developing a killer engine set up just in time to see the event die...Last 2 Nats showed abysmal attendance & will continue I predict, as long as the Nats are at Muncie which is the current game plan...
In my opinion Ebay will outlive both you & I....The only way for the masses worldwide to "buy back your childhood". 049 collectors will pay $500+ for a cox plastic model...so money is not an object there. (It is for me, but not for some, apparently)
CL racing is weird though. Take the relatively new TQR event, for example. You cannot buy a new engine for it. How's that event going to last?? Ebay, of course! Worse, many of the owners are not fit enough to hang on to a TQR. At least with mouse, pullforce will never be an issue, thankfully.
Mouse 2 tells me that there really is no interest in CL mouse racing left. There was the TD,Stels,AME,Shuriken,Norvel,C.S.,Cyclon,Profi, etc. to choose from. Sadly, I never saw much interst at all in the NW. Just as I got mine perfected, the event has been discontinued both locally & nationally.

This is why I feel anybody thinking about CL racing really ought to get out & DO IT, because the signs are it might not be around a whole lot longer...(hope I'm wrong though).

Cheers, Paul

PaulGibeault · « **Reply #7 on:** February 04, 2008, 03:04:35 AM »

HI Dave,

HAH! When I used to frequent California contests, I'd visit K&B & Cox. At Cox, Dale Kirn gave the very best of tours & was a wealth of info AND cheap parts. Dale would fill up my pockets with various bits, the neatest was the R/C Bee Tank. On the bench the R/C Bee engine would run a steady state 24,400 rpm on the std Cox 5 X 3 prop. I can also get my reedies to turn right up there (& more) with a small prop. So, I still think the reed valve is not the performance limiter....just yet. The Wiltse Disc valve is neat, but not as fast as my mouse reedies on a std prop. I think John McCollums research barstock reed engine has been the fastest to date (~80+ mph), but the inconsistent speed was thought to be perhaps cooling related as opposed to reed related. John only tinkers these days so it's hard to say if he'll carry the project any further. I would be pleased to lose to it in a race, as John taught me most of what I know.
If I had the interest, I'd convert one of my Cl 2 Shurikens to reed valve. I think one flight at 90+mph would....ahhhh, just dreaming...

Cheers, Paul

Wayne Foster · « **Reply #8 on:** February 04, 2008, 10:00:06 AM »

Hi Paul,

I agree that not much use trying to develop anything really new for Mouse. I do think I will plan on having a Mouse Racing, Speed Limit Contest this Fall. If any interest at all, go to a Spring and Fall meet in 2009.

If you have it they will come, or maybe not. Anyway, it's not much trouble to put on a small contest like that. You're right I use to do a little work at the NATS in Racing and Combat. Those were fun day.

One thing I don't have a stock of is Button Bellcranks and 1" Diameter Racing Wheels like Joe Klause use to sell. Does anyone have a source for any Mouse equipment like that these days. Who is the best person to buy .010 music wire line material from. I use to buy my stuff from Bear or MSC.

Wayne

Scott Jenkins · « **Reply #9 on:** February 04, 2008, 10:07:41 AM »

Wayne,
Send me a pm I will set you up with some bellcranks.

Scott

Dave Rolley · « **Reply #10 on:** February 04, 2008, 10:29:30 AM »

Paul,

Yes there is more available in the Reed engines. I have a couple of reed engines that are in the range of your engines. I don't think the limit is the reed. I think the current limit is in diameter and length of the intake tract with the 8cc tank. I'd go try my ideas on a 4cc tank (shorter intake) but I don't have any left in my collection.

Dale told me once that they never broke a large diameter car crankshaft. He said they put one on a flywheel and tach'd it in the 40,000 rpm range. Or maybe I'm mis-remembering that conversation. I think I remember him telling me that the difference between a truly outstanding engine and a run of the mill engine was so little that they could not consistently produce the truly outstanding one within the tolerances of the machining and manufacturing technology they were using.

Like you said, you never really know which engine is going to work today. My son and I used to take 4 models to the contests (2 for each of us). That morning we would run all four, pick the best 2 for the day's races and flip a coin to see who got the best one. After a while we found the planes were so close you just picked one and go race.

My son and I got hooked on F2C, but we still love to race Mouse.

Dave

Dave Rolley · « **Reply #11 on:** February 04, 2008, 10:34:57 AM »

Wayne,

Melvin Schuette (Aurburn KS) for wire, eyelets, and line clips (Google MBS Model Supply).

Glen Lee (Chicago IL) for wheels. He has a cast urethane wheel with a 3/32 brass sleeve for the axle in a wide range of colors. Yellow wheels go faster than Red wheels!

Dave

Willis Swindell · « **Reply #12 on:** February 04, 2008, 01:08:01 PM »

Be careful with the 1/2A wheels . We lost 5 MPH one time and could not figure what had happened, finally snugged the wheels up and presto got our 5 MPH back.
Willis

Wayne Foster · « **Reply #13 on:** February 04, 2008, 01:48:30 PM »

Hi Guys,

Thanks for the info on Mouse Race Supplies. See Willis, if you had been running a real Mouse Racer (One Wheel Only), you would have only lost 2-1/2 MPH. When you race Mouse, it's all in the details.

Wayne

Willis Swindell · « **Reply #14 on:** February 17, 2008, 08:44:42 PM »

Here is a picture for Wayne and particular for Scott. This is a contest some where in1987. It might be Wayne's contest or Winston-Salem Looks like we did good. The guy holding the mouse is Scott’s pilot Mark Barrows wayne is second from left
Willis

Scott Jenkins · « **Reply #15 on:** February 18, 2008, 12:19:28 PM »

Willis,
Thanks for the photo I will save it away I would appreciate it if you would send me a full size scan.
Back when they held the last East Coast championships in Winston Salem is when Mark and I did our best in Mouse Racing if memory serves me we won Mouse 1 and came in second in mouse 2 only because the conrod gave up on us it was shaped like a "J" after the last race. We ended up taking home 3 trophys that day but I cannot remember what the other one was for maybe 1/2a goodyear. When you and John and I went to the Nats that was the best running engine I ever had you remember that cold day you showed up at the field one saturday as Mark and I were testing that engine and the only thing you said was put that engine away for the Nats. I really wished I had listened to you but being a butthead I didn't and have never duplicated that kind of engine performance with a reed valve again. Today I have worn out all my Cox parts and am not really interested in trying again we have a bigger win to shoot for

Scott

Willis Swindell · « **Reply #16 on:** February 18, 2008, 02:23:14 PM »

Scott
I’m sending Three more pictures of Mark. I’ll post them here also incase some one would like see or remember Mark. I miss his enthusiasm and such a sad day when we went to his house and picked up some of his old combat stuff,and that giant milling machine out back. I think that use to be yours?
Willis

Scott Jenkins · « **Reply #17 on:** February 19, 2008, 06:55:39 AM »

Willis,
Thanks for the pictures that was not my milling machine I still have mine.

Scott

John Tate · « **Reply #18 on:** February 21, 2008, 12:31:20 PM »

Here is a picture of Mark Barrows holding up a mouse racer. Mr. Ringo printed the picture in 1982.

John Tate

Author Topic: Let's Talk Mouse Racing (Read 2245 times)

Wayne Foster

Let's Talk Mouse Racing

PaulGibeault

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

don Burke

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

Wayne Foster

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

Dave Rolley

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

PaulGibeault

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

PaulGibeault

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

PaulGibeault

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

Wayne Foster

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

Scott Jenkins

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

Dave Rolley

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

Dave Rolley

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

Willis Swindell

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

Wayne Foster

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

Willis Swindell

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

Scott Jenkins

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

Willis Swindell

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

Scott Jenkins

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing

John Tate

Re: Let's Talk Mouse Racing