mtntopgeo

My Feedback: (12)

Won this new toy on that there auction site, & it showed up in the mail this morning. Described as LNIB, I could see no mounting marks on the lugs, & no sign that it had been used/abused. Noticeable differences from the standard engine, to the eye, are the lack of venturi, installation of NVA in the engine case, & the turbo plug. The engine felt a bit loose, with no pinch near TDC, but compression was great, & would hold for a long, long time at TDC. Along with the factory instruction sheet was an informative sheet from D.G.. Said that this thing would run on 25 to 30% nitro as delivered, & up to 50% with another shim added. Recommended props were a 6x2, or 5.7x3. Started out with 15% nitro & the 5.7x3 APC prop. Couldn't hand start it but just a touch of the starter, & it lit off. Needle is very broad in adjustment, but soon as you go "over-center" (too lean) the engine quits before you can back off. Ran it a couple of min. just a tad on the rich side, then started to take some RPM readings. (Result below) The engine ran very cool with all props, & both fuels, but did sag a little after about 1&1/2 min of running. I expect some additional run time will take care of that. I expected more of a difference in performance between the 15% & the 33% nitro content fuels, so until I'm ready (if ever) to try out the 50% stuff, I'll probably stay with the 15% nitro content. ..................... I'll probably use my "Simple 400" (which somehow survived this summer) for the first flights. It did quite nicely with the .061 Norvel spining the 5.7x3 at 19.000 RPMs. I've got a Dominator 200 kit, but I realize that I'm not ready for that, yet. Probably should get something a little tamer once I get accustomed to the Simple 400, with it's expected performance boost. Oh yes, according to D.G. this thing should spin the 5.7x3 at 26,000 when everything is set up for "fast". All in all, a pretty nice toy. ..................... George K.

fizzwater2

My Feedback: (61)

Are you using a pressure fuel system with it? With that large bucket for an intake, it might be required once you start flying it. I know the Stels I had didn't run well without a pressure system, and the intake was very similar.

mtntopgeo

My Feedback: (12)

I have a very large tank for my engine test stand, & only put a small amt. of fuel in it, considering the small size of the engine. Had to bring the level up to within 3/8" or 1/2" of the NVA, in order for the fuel draw to be consistant. Yeah, I imagine that the air flow velocity is pretty low, through that large opening. Probably end up pressurizing the tank. ......... George K.

ffkiwi

I have two of these, modded by Doug Galbreath around 1995 or 96 from memory. They are extensively modified from standard, including: (i) increased transfer area by machining passages in the crankcase to match those in the liner
(ii)liner is shimmed to increase exhaust timing
(iii)piston is extensively lightened
(iv)crankshaft balance altered to match (iii)
(v) crankshaft bearing preload set
(vi) new cylinder head insert and chamber to take Nelson plug
(vii) custom fine thread NVA

Doug was originally quoting 27-28,000 on an APC 6x2 prop, on 50% nitro fuel. These were figures that at the time would match the AD 061, which was the pre-eminent F1J engine of the era [this was before the Cyclon 061 appeared on the scene]

It was always intended to run on pressure in this set up, so a bladder is probably the best option. There was/is a pressure backplate available from Carlson, but reports elsewhere suggest MP Jets are bit tricky to run on this set up, and a bladder seems easiest.

You're actually ahead of me-10 years after purchase and I still haven't run mine-I'm tempted to and see ghow my figures match with yours. They are ferrous metallurgy, after all, so I would expect them to take at least 30 -60 minutes running in before coming right.

I've made a couple of backplate mounts for mine, replacing the standard backplate. Incidentally, MP Jet decided-probably after hearing about Doug's success in modding them, to produce an F1J variant of their own. This retained the MP Jet head button, but had the bearings set up, (possibly better quality than std), a large bore intake, and a rear mounted remote needle assembly. This was tested in 'Aeromodeller' and produced better than 0.32BHP on 40% nitro at around 27,000 if memory serves me correctly. On that basis, the Galbreath one-which is significantly more highly tuned, should be capable of around 0.35 BHP+ at a guess.

'ffkiwi'

mtntopgeo

My Feedback: (12)

Thanks for the additional info., & for the history on this engine. ..................... George K.

gcb

These were distributed by Carlson Engine Imports. I have the BB diesel version with both venturi and carb. It runs very well. Mine does not have the needle valve running through the intake. Mine has the needle in both the venturi insert or the carb insert.

George

gkamysz

My Feedback: (19)

George, I was watching that one and didn't enlarge the images to see the letter from D.G. It looks like a nice one. I own a diesel but haven't run it. I ran one of my buddy Dave's MP Jet .061 RC diesels and it was a screamer.

mtntopgeo

My Feedback: (12)

Greg, I had a .061 MP Jet ordered from Carlson Imports, so not really wanting to bid on this one. It was the D,G, letter which convinced me to bid on the auction engine. Glad that I did, now. Not only is it a good runner, but I've waited for 7 weeks, & made 2 inquiries, & still no engine, & no word from Carlson. The site appears to be up; got an invoice #, just no response. ..... George K.

DeviousDave

My Dad and I have several of the glow versions as well-I haven't run my MP Jet glow motors yet (wanted to get spares, which I did-from Carlson), but I have run my Dad's .06 glow a bit. He built a HOB P51 for it and tried to maiden it with a 6-3, crashing it on the takeoff. He complained of a lack of power which seemed odd considering the airplane and engine, so when he got it patched back together I took a look at it and tried to get it to run properly. For some reason, it needles fine but just doesn't come into the power very well-I'd guess it's only spinning 16-17k on 1/2A (25%?) fuel. There wasn't time to take the carb apart or check for air leaks, but it may just be a matter of break-in time... Dunno without having run another. Someone here said they have ferrous pistons and liners... I could have sworn mine have a chromed liner..

mtntopgeo

My Feedback: (12)

If you were using the MAS 6x3, that RPM # sounds about right. A couple of years ago I did a lot of prop & engine swapping on a Mini Super Sportster, while comparing a Norvel .074 vs. an Enya .09 . Thought that I had gotten a mislabeled prop, when the Norvel couldn't swing the MAS 6x3 as fast as the MAS 6x4. Changed out both props, & results were the same. Same results on the Norvel .061, & the MP Jet .061. The MAS 6x3.5 also loads the engine(s) down a bit more than the MAS 6x4. Here are some results that I've gotten with various props on a stock MP Jet .061...............APC 6x4 =16,200..................MAS 6x4 = 18,100................
MAS 6x3 = 16,100........................ APC 6x3 = 18,700 ................ APC 5.7x3 = 20,800 ........... Mas 5.5x4 = 19,400.........
I'll mention that the engine (a stock MP jet .061 with carb) was giving me fits when I first started it. Folks on this forum told me to add a shim or two. I did (one extra shim), & the thing settled in. All RPM #s on 15% nitro, with 20% castor. I increased nitro up to 33% with little or no increase in performance. Hope this helps. .................. George K.

ffkiwi

Sounds like there may be an error with the MAS 6x4 prop-its not unknown for manufacturers to miscalculate on pitch figures,and if the master mould is in error then they're stuck with the result. There were a few UK made props (Frog springs to mind) where a higher nominal pitch was turned faster than the same brand's lower pitch of the same diameter. Usual explanation is that the quoted pitch is a long way from the real pitch as measured.
16-17K on a 6x3 is still good performance for a motor still running in. One thing I can reiterate-these engines do take a lot of running in before they are nice and settled. till that is achieved, you won't get top revs-and the R/C versions will not throttle reliably.
18700+ on an APC 6x3 is very good performance-especially on 15% nitro-a std TD won't give you that.
I can confirm they are all ferous metallurgy-to clarify that, I mean a cast iron or steel piston running in a steel liner. I'm looking at a spare diesel piston liner as I write-it looks like cast iron for the piston and contra under a magnifying glass but I'm not 100%. The liner is ground to a very fine finish both internally and externally-and could be mistake for chrome! They are not ABC, ABN or AAC technology. MP Jet manufacture to very fine levels of precision-a pity they're more into electrics these days.

On a previous post from gcb-re the needle through the intake.This was only done on the Doug Galbreath modded version-the factory ones all have the needle in the plastic moulded venturi or the carb. The single exception being the factory F1J special, where it is attached to the backplate-much the same as many of the newer R/C engines, and the fuel line leads from there to a fixed jet in the venturi. This model DID have a bigger venturi however, so if we could lay our hands on some spares, and fit them in place of the existing standard one, a useful increase in power might result-but not much help to you R/C fliers, without a carb. I think from memory it would be possible to fit a conventional MP Jet NVA to the big bore venturi.

Just for the record-and from memory, as I can't be bothered looking them all up again, the tested ('Aeromodeller') performance figures for the MP Jets were as follows:.....actually I did check them again........

diesel 061 BB 0.21 BHP @ 17,100rpm [Model Technics D3000 fuel,tested with silencer fitted]
glow 061 BB 0.25 BHP @ 27,500rpm [25% nitro, open exhaust]
glow F1J Special 0.32 BHP @ 28,000rpm [40% nitro, open exhaust]

no performance figures however on the 061 diesel and glow plain bearing versions, however

To put this in perspective, AMI tested the Norvel 061 and obtained 0.225 BHP @ 21500rpm [though I personally find the stated peaking speed a bit lower than I would expect]-yet the Norvel 049 peaks around 0.19BHP @ 27,000 (by another AMI test!)

From these figures on the MP Jets (well you need the BHP curves to see) a couple of things fall out-first the diesel does very well on a 7x3-and the MAS is a nice light load allowing the engine to turn up to its peak power band in flight(my BB ones turn an APC 6.5x2.9 at over 18,000-the PB one on the same prop does about 16,500), whereas you need to prop the glows very lightly to get them up to theirs
-something like an APC 5.5x2, or one of the Russian glass or carbon props. So on a 6x3 or 6x4, the glows are running way way below their potential performance.......that being said, how well they fly your model at 25-27,000rpm on those tiny props is another matter.

'ffkiwi' [who will eventually get motivated to test all his versions and get some hard data for you]

DeviousDave

Something else I had not considered at the time is that the motor my be timed a little too wild to expect great performance on a prop that large. The Diesel version wakes right-the-heck--up on props in the 4.5-5" range-it easily blows my Dad's motor on the 6-3 away in terms of revs on these smaller sizes of props. Think: More like an AME than a Big Mig... Diameter has a much greater bearing on load than pitch does-your numbers support that. Methinks that these little guys are really meant for small props... IIRC, I once read an article about the Glow variant saying that it should be treated like a miniature F1C motor and that big hits of nitro don't faze it. This motor is new enough to have been designed after the rest of the world got away from 1950's prop sizes in the quest for more speed/climb/etc.

Odd thing is that the MAN test of the .061 showed it giving the TD. 09 a run for it's money on some props...

Thanks for the numbers-I think I'll try to get it sorted next time I go over.

gcb

One additional thought. With the needle up on the CL venturi, it is very close to the prop. I have buzzed my fingers with the back of the prop a few times. Makes ya be more careful...

George

cjshaker

Same here. I hope Mr. Carlson is ok. You'd think there would be a message on the web page or on the
voice mail if he was on vacation.

I ordered some engines from Carlson Engine Importers, via their web page, on Oct 3, 2007. Got an email
with an invoice# from my order. Nothing since then. No response to my emails nor web mails. I've left a
voice message, too. It's been over a month with no response.

I'm wondering if it is time to call my credit card company about the purchase.

Chris Shaker