Webra Speed .12?
03-28-2008, 11:20 PM
#26
Senior Member
My Feedback: (12)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Superior,
MT
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Webra Speed .12?
ORIGINAL: Dan Vincent
George,
Yup, you're right on the three K&B Conquests all having the same cylinder part number. I found my .15 book tonight and it appears that although Cox had two distinct liners for their RC and FF/Speed engines, K&B settled for just one for all three of their offerings. Don't know where I got the idea there were three separate cylinder liners.
Looks like the only difference was a choice of RC Carb or two venturis, standard finned head with std glo plug or the button type glohead. There was also a choice between spinner or standard prop nut and mini pipe or muffler.
George,
Yup, you're right on the three K&B Conquests all having the same cylinder part number. I found my .15 book tonight and it appears that although Cox had two distinct liners for their RC and FF/Speed engines, K&B settled for just one for all three of their offerings. Don't know where I got the idea there were three separate cylinder liners.
Looks like the only difference was a choice of RC Carb or two venturis, standard finned head with std glo plug or the button type glohead. There was also a choice between spinner or standard prop nut and mini pipe or muffler.
Now I'm gonna have to find my degree wheel & see where my stuff stands as compared to that magic 155 deg exh timing figure that I don't know the source of. I'm mildly surprised that just the mention of this old, heavy, obsolete, beast has spured this much interest. ......... George K.
03-29-2008, 06:45 AM
#27
RE: Webra Speed .12?
George,
I agree that if a .15 racing class, such as the old Quarter-Midget, was to be started most guys would jump on the latest and greatest .15 high-performance engines that are currently used for Speed, FF or maybe combat.
With the light radio gear available today and the super .15 engines a modern racer could be an awesome performer. Maybe even a little scary.
That's why I would lean towards a .10 class to keep flying ability within the limits of most mortals. Australians consider a .10 legal for 1/2A pylon racing.
I agree that if a .15 racing class, such as the old Quarter-Midget, was to be started most guys would jump on the latest and greatest .15 high-performance engines that are currently used for Speed, FF or maybe combat.
With the light radio gear available today and the super .15 engines a modern racer could be an awesome performer. Maybe even a little scary.
That's why I would lean towards a .10 class to keep flying ability within the limits of most mortals. Australians consider a .10 legal for 1/2A pylon racing.
04-07-2008, 01:29 PM
#28
Senior Member
My Feedback: (20)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ashtabula ,
OH
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Webra Speed .12?
Duane,
What's the status on the Webra, did you get it. If not, could you let me know the name of the shop and a phone number if possible.
Thanks,
Rick
What's the status on the Webra, did you get it. If not, could you let me know the name of the shop and a phone number if possible.
Thanks,
Rick
04-07-2008, 04:29 PM
#29
Senior Member
RE: Webra Speed .12?
ORIGINAL: Dan Vincent
George,
I agree that if a .15 racing class, such as the old Quarter-Midget, was to be started most guys would jump on the latest and greatest .15 high-performance engines that are currently used for Speed, FF or maybe combat.
With the light radio gear available today and the super .15 engines a modern racer could be an awesome performer. Maybe even a little scary.
That's why I would lean towards a .10 class to keep flying ability within the limits of most mortals. Australians consider a .10 legal for 1/2A pylon racing.
George,
I agree that if a .15 racing class, such as the old Quarter-Midget, was to be started most guys would jump on the latest and greatest .15 high-performance engines that are currently used for Speed, FF or maybe combat.
With the light radio gear available today and the super .15 engines a modern racer could be an awesome performer. Maybe even a little scary.
That's why I would lean towards a .10 class to keep flying ability within the limits of most mortals. Australians consider a .10 legal for 1/2A pylon racing.
The problem with hot 15's is that they cost Real Money. Like most other forms of racing it becomes a money game. It's easy to spend $400++ dollars on an FAI .15!
I'd be more inclined to say that 1cc racing with a 175sq. in. minimum. The planes might be too fast for most folks, but the glow racers would eat that up.
04-07-2008, 09:46 PM
#30
RE: Webra Speed .12?
DeviousDave,
It's been my experience that they will be happy to charge you just as much for a racing 1.0cc engine as they would for a .10 or .15.
For an engine maker racing engines have tight tolerances and quaity parts. Only difference is more or less metal.
Check out the prices of FORA and Cyclon or whatever the latest and greatest contest FF and speed 1.0cc engines go for.
Performance costs and racing is expensive. "Stock" classes only stay stock until guys figure out how to modify them.
It's been my experience that they will be happy to charge you just as much for a racing 1.0cc engine as they would for a .10 or .15.
For an engine maker racing engines have tight tolerances and quaity parts. Only difference is more or less metal.
Check out the prices of FORA and Cyclon or whatever the latest and greatest contest FF and speed 1.0cc engines go for.
Performance costs and racing is expensive. "Stock" classes only stay stock until guys figure out how to modify them.
04-07-2008, 10:20 PM
#31
RE: Webra Speed .12?
Racing costs a bit, that is true. It is also a huge rush to participate in, that is why we do it.
Some clases try to keep the costs down and there are classes for all out. I love it and I get the same rush from 1/2a as I do from club class q-500
In 1/2a I can go all out and almost can afford it. LOL
WWW.toadsrc.com for the adle minded racer
Some clases try to keep the costs down and there are classes for all out. I love it and I get the same rush from 1/2a as I do from club class q-500
In 1/2a I can go all out and almost can afford it. LOL
WWW.toadsrc.com for the adle minded racer
04-07-2008, 10:50 PM
#32
RE: Webra Speed .12?
It is simple to enforce stock class racing. Agree on one brand and size of prop. Use club supplied fuel. Have a single brand of unmodified engine. Establish a claimer price so that any guy can buy the winners' engine. Set an upper rpm limit and tach the planes before the first heat. Depending on the group of racers you are dealing with, it is also a proven tactic to settle on just one design of plane if you are after a true pilots' event.
04-08-2008, 07:12 PM
#34
Senior Member
RE: Webra Speed .12?
ORIGINAL: Dan Vincent
DeviousDave,
It's been my experience that they will be happy to charge you just as much for a racing 1.0cc engine as they would for a .10 or .15.
For an engine maker racing engines have tight tolerances and quaity parts. Only difference is more or less metal.
Check out the prices of FORA and Cyclon or whatever the latest and greatest contest FF and speed 1.0cc engines go for.
Performance costs and racing is expensive. "Stock" classes only stay stock until guys figure out how to modify them.
DeviousDave,
It's been my experience that they will be happy to charge you just as much for a racing 1.0cc engine as they would for a .10 or .15.
For an engine maker racing engines have tight tolerances and quaity parts. Only difference is more or less metal.
Check out the prices of FORA and Cyclon or whatever the latest and greatest contest FF and speed 1.0cc engines go for.
Performance costs and racing is expensive. "Stock" classes only stay stock until guys figure out how to modify them.
I've got 3 cyclons-they run $160, unless you buy direct in a group buy like we did. Top of the line .15's are double and triple that, depending on how serious you are. And that's the problem with open racing, someone else always has more money. I like the idea of a cost limit and claiming rule.
08-29-2011, 08:57 AM
#38
Senior Member
RE: Webra Speed .12?
ORIGINAL: mtntopgeo
Lots of ''word of mouth'' info, on the Conquests, out there, but no telling what is real, & what ain't. Stuff that comes up most often; ''trimed'' 7x3.5 prop, 15% nitro, 21 to 23K. Cox instruction manual says 30 to 70% nitro for CL engine, & props from 6x7 to 8x4. RJL list same nitro for CL engine, & 5 to 15% for RC, depending on prop. (needs 155 deg exh timing to run ''right'' (had that in my notes, but don't know where I got it from, probably from RCU forums) Found one comment that the ''early'' CL engines had a more wild port timing than the RC version. Don't know if this is fact, or just an old wive's tale.....My #s; ......All my Conquests are RC version with the conventional head, & glow plug. All have the same carb (approx .229'' ID), no pressurized tank needed. Only tached one of them. All props listed were/are unaltered, pre G3, MAS.. Fuel was 10% nitro, & 20% castor. 8x4 = 17,000.............7x5 =18,400..................... 7x4 = 21,400 . ............................. George K.
Lots of ''word of mouth'' info, on the Conquests, out there, but no telling what is real, & what ain't. Stuff that comes up most often; ''trimed'' 7x3.5 prop, 15% nitro, 21 to 23K. Cox instruction manual says 30 to 70% nitro for CL engine, & props from 6x7 to 8x4. RJL list same nitro for CL engine, & 5 to 15% for RC, depending on prop. (needs 155 deg exh timing to run ''right'' (had that in my notes, but don't know where I got it from, probably from RCU forums) Found one comment that the ''early'' CL engines had a more wild port timing than the RC version. Don't know if this is fact, or just an old wive's tale.....My #s; ......All my Conquests are RC version with the conventional head, & glow plug. All have the same carb (approx .229'' ID), no pressurized tank needed. Only tached one of them. All props listed were/are unaltered, pre G3, MAS.. Fuel was 10% nitro, & 20% castor. 8x4 = 17,000.............7x5 =18,400..................... 7x4 = 21,400 . ............................. George K.
The problem with comparing Conquests is that they were used for different applications across CL and FF competition. Different props, different needs. Sometimes the way to better performance means propping past peak hp, so when people bandy about how fast they were running their engines it may not have been the best the engine was able to give, just the best setup for what they needed at the time.
08-29-2011, 08:58 AM
#39
Senior Member
RE: Webra Speed .12?
ORIGINAL: MJD
Well that's a start - thanks. I wonder if the port timing is really the same between the balls-out venturi version and the R/C. If you are clocking 21,400 on a stock 7x4, that's not too shabby. The big jump in rpm from 7-5 to 7-4 may be normal but it seems to say high-rpm port timing to me. Good numbers any way.
MJD
ORIGINAL: mtntopgeo
Lots of ''word of mouth'' info, on the Conquests, out there, but no telling what is real, & what ain't. Stuff that comes up most often; ''trimed'' 7x3.5 prop, 15% nitro, 21 to 23K. Cox instruction manual says 30 to 70% nitro for CL engine, & props from 6x7 to 8x4. RJL list same nitro for CL engine, & 5 to 15% for RC, depending on prop. (needs 155 deg exh timing to run ''right'' (had that in my notes, but don't know where I got it from, probably from RCU forums) Found one comment that the ''early'' CL engines had a more wild port timing than the RC version. Don't know if this is fact, or just an old wive's tale.....My #s; ......All my Conquests are RC version with the conventional head, & glow plug. All have the same carb (approx .229'' ID), no pressurized tank needed. Only tached one of them. All props listed were/are unaltered, pre G3, MAS.. Fuel was 10% nitro, & 20% castor. 8x4 = 17,000.............7x5 =18,400..................... 7x4 = 21,400 . ............................. George K.
Lots of ''word of mouth'' info, on the Conquests, out there, but no telling what is real, & what ain't. Stuff that comes up most often; ''trimed'' 7x3.5 prop, 15% nitro, 21 to 23K. Cox instruction manual says 30 to 70% nitro for CL engine, & props from 6x7 to 8x4. RJL list same nitro for CL engine, & 5 to 15% for RC, depending on prop. (needs 155 deg exh timing to run ''right'' (had that in my notes, but don't know where I got it from, probably from RCU forums) Found one comment that the ''early'' CL engines had a more wild port timing than the RC version. Don't know if this is fact, or just an old wive's tale.....My #s; ......All my Conquests are RC version with the conventional head, & glow plug. All have the same carb (approx .229'' ID), no pressurized tank needed. Only tached one of them. All props listed were/are unaltered, pre G3, MAS.. Fuel was 10% nitro, & 20% castor. 8x4 = 17,000.............7x5 =18,400..................... 7x4 = 21,400 . ............................. George K.
MJD
Timing on the sport version is different than the FF/CL model. Both are very hot.
08-29-2011, 09:29 AM
#40
RE: Webra Speed .12?
I am pretty sure the Conquest had its own shim set for raising and lowering the cylinder base. Three different thicknesses were in the pack, they are called a gasket set in this case according to Cox. You raised and lowered your own port timing on it, however no words are mentioned about it in any of the instructions as to any of it.
I wish I knew the baseline setup on it for each version. There's even two different size venturi's offered for control line. A very tunable engine.
I wish I knew the baseline setup on it for each version. There's even two different size venturi's offered for control line. A very tunable engine.
08-29-2011, 09:47 AM
#41
RE: Webra Speed .12?
I believe there were a few changes in the Conquest when they went from Cox to K&B. The K&B versions has shims under the cylinder and the manual states that one should not alter the number of shims, but doesn't tell how many there should be, presumably there was a different amount/thickness for the Sport and CL/FF versions. K&B are also listing the cylinder shims on their parts list.
08-29-2011, 09:54 AM
#42
RE: Webra Speed .12?
I think I'll check out K&B question and answer forum on this because I have one ready to go together for a future project. It came with a fresh 3-gasket set and the ones I took off the motor cannot be compared to the one in question because its used and compressed. No printing or watermark to see in it either.
