hllywdb

It was 13 and change on fee bay, and you can get Blendzall down under $40 a gallon by the case.

Hemikiller

My Feedback: (125)

Comes out to about $20/qt shipped no matter where I look. I only know of one LHS in my area that carries it, so try a local karting or motorcycle shop to skip the shipping

psgugrad

My Feedback: (2)

Thanks guys for the info on the glow plug. I guess I need to revise my question as it seems that there are differences besides the glow plug. So my question now is:

Is there something proprietary and/or patented (able) about this engine besides carb-porting-compression that enables it to run on gasoline? Or to put it another way: could, next week, OS make a few minor revisions to their 55ax , pop in that hot plug of theirs and have their own gas burner? If the answer is yes then I'd hold off on this motor because if norvel hasn't patented anything then in a few months there will be a dozen comparable engines on the market. This industry is getting more and more competitive and the other players aren't going to just sit back and let norvel have an enormous competitive advantage.

Phoenex

My Feedback: (1)

Can you please provide some links to these low price vendors on fleabay?

David DeWitt

My Feedback: (289)

Here is a source for the Klotz

http://www.rockymountainatvmc.com/p/...r-2-Stroke-Oil

hllywdb

Summit Racing has it cheaper. They have an e-bay store. Plus they have free shipping on additional items, so if you order 4 quarts it ends up being $1 shipping each

earlwb

If you buy a gallon you can get free shipping too. Not bad actually.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/221204506559...84.m1497.l2649

Phoenex

My Feedback: (1)

PowersportSuperstore has it for pretty good price. Shipping can be a bit expensive, but it appears you can order several units with the same shipping charge.

Klotz Oil Benol

iskandar taib

My Feedback: (5)

My guess is everyone who makes sport RC glow engines is working on their version of this even as we speak.

More importantly - how easy would it be to convert, say, a ASP .40, or even a OS .46 FP yourself? The main problem would be getting another head made, these engines don't use a button-and-clamp like Norvels do. If you wanted to rework the original head, while there's no way to drill it out to use a turbo plug, but you should be able to do so for a Nelson - and these days there are one or two "hot" Nelson plugs available (and I think Al Kelly could be persuaded to make a few test samples of a "super hot" Nelson).

Iskandar

hllywdb

Perhaps, but you would still be left with designing a new carb. If you had the means to do that, you would need a piston/cylinder design that would be able to deal with the high heat and compression, as well as expansion rates. Even the NV 40 needed a new cylinder to do this, and their nitro 40 is well beyond the current crop of nitro engines as to heat dissapation and expansion control. I am thinking most others would be starting with a clean sheet of paper as even the helicopter engines do better with the heat, but the compression, expansion, cylinder wall, and fuel mix is a whole nother animal to deal with. This is why the current crop of "conversion" motors are relativley low performers to keep from becoming a paperweight. But no doubt it is on their drawing boards.

hsukaria

I keep thinking that the ceramic coating in the NV engines has some significant contribution to the ability to do this gas version. Without having to use a cylinder liner helps with heat conduction from the cylinder walls to the cooling fins. The cylinder cooling fin area is also quite large. I think that and the other factors permitted NV Engines to plow ahead with this development. IMHO.

Sport_Pilot

I doubt the demand is great enough for most manufactures to bother. Idoubt I would try gas on a 40 sized plane.

psgugrad

My Feedback: (2)

I couldn't disagree more...I'm sure that every glow engine manufacturer is kicking themselves for not thinking of this one. This technology is to RC engines what the Windows Operating System is to personal computers.

Sport_Pilot

Not very many people with 40 and smaller engines will want to give up power to save money on fuel.  Especially when you simply need to mix the fuel yourself.  Unless the engine has rod bearings, you still need a lot of oil so the fuel is almost as expensive as self mixed FAI fuel.  So I really don't see a market.  At least not in the states.

psgugrad

My Feedback: (2)

OK...THAT"S what I was wondering. If their proprietary cylinder technology makes this possible then I guess they have the market cornered, at least for a while. If not, I'm sure that by this fall we'll see a dozen or more competing offerings. As soon as I started reading this thread from page one I started cobbling together a fuselage to fit a 40-sized wing I have from a trainer. I want this to be thr real deal!!!! My only concern is seeing the pics the guy posted of the muffler/muffler screw interface. This strikes me as a rather stupid mistake to make.

Also, on a side note, I hate to say this, buy I really try to buy everything from Tower. People can say what they want to about Tower, but not only are their prices unbeatable, but their service is too. The few times I've had a problem, they've paid for shipping back to Champaign, IL and sent a replacement or refunded my money, NO questions asked. Sure they are hurting some local hobby shops, but if you thumb through an old RC mag from 30 years ago, everything we have now is half the price and three times as good and the giants are to thank for that. It's like WalMart: Some people hate WalMart, but 99% of those who do still want $39 microwave ovens and $9 khaki slacks. Oh well...I better get to work, it's 10 to 9!

jjrutter

The engine only uses about 15% oil compared to the usual 20 - 25% for methanol motors, the fuel air mix for petrol is much leaner (about 1 part fuel to 12 parts air, about 1:8 for methanol) and petrol is very much cheper in the UK than methanol as well as being much easier to buy. I've now put a few (small) tanks of fuel through my GX40, completing the initial half hour of running in prior to fitting it into a "hack" model (A Wot 4 if you've heard of it) for air running and I have to say I'm well pleased with it. It was nothing like so tight at TDC as the .15 and now feels silky smooth. Initial start was with an "electric finger" but subsequently I've found it hand starts easily enough in a similar way to any fairly big 2 stroke glow engine. I choke the carb a few times on full throttle, close the throttle to idle, attach the glow lead and tap smartly backwards against compression. If the engine's slightly "wet" from choking it'll immediately "backfire" forwards and usually fast enough to keep running, another choke or drop of fuel in the intake to get the "wet" setting is somtimes needed of course. Trying to flick past compression with the usual forward stroke can hurt if the engine coughs back and I'm not totally in favour of electric starters (as they say in the instructions, they can damage engines) so I've used the backfire method for years. The engine still drops rpm when removing the plug lead (even when leaving it for a while to warm up) but continues to run. It idles and picks up fairly well but the main needle isn't "peaked" yet, keeping the engine on the rich side of a clean 2 stroke at full power. I'd imagine idle and pick up will improve further when the needles properly set, perhaps with some adjustment to the idle needle which I haven't touched yet. It certainly isn't pulling the APC 11x6 at 14,000rpm but I'd think there's more than the 10,000rpm, slightly rich, to come when it loosens up a little more. Smooth, powerful, seems reliable (on the ground at least), easy starting, cleaner than usual exhaust, what more could a modeller want?

psgugrad

My Feedback: (2)

It's also the slop that you don't have to clean off of the plane when you're done. Anyhow, I guess time will tell who's right

hllywdb

People forget this is a 40, not a 46 or 50, so 12k to 13k on a 11X6 IS good power, most nitro 40's won't come near that, if they do it's much more weight and fuel burn. As to the cost of castor/fuel, I burn 3.5oz for a 12 to 15 min flight, so the cost is minimal. I got a firm reminder of this Monday when I flew my OS 55 and burned 11oz in a 10 min flight. Combined with the low wieght and smaller tank, like psgugrad said, it's the next step in model engines.

Ask anyone at your field running a 35-50CC gas if they would go back to running a 1.8-2.0 glow engine.

TampaRC

That is why I feel this technology should be applied to 1.20, 1.60, 2.10 and larger engines. I want large sized gas engines that do not rely on an ignition system. The ignition can fail during a flight or the battery can die during a flight. My entire fleet of large glow aircraft would completely convert to gas.

Sport_Pilot

Only the radios are half the price, maybe more. Probably more than three times as good. But models were about 1/5 the price 30 years ago and engines almost that low. The models were better and the engines worse. But not three times worse.

IMO Tower is not as low as they were back then. Their predatory practices and lack of competition allow them to operate at higer prices. This is the reason they are the last place I shop at.

Sport_Pilot

Methanol costs less than gasoline here. If you buy from a racing fuel company and if you provide the can.

Sport_Pilot

I would think 14% castor oil is actually more slop then 20% synthetic castor mix.

JimInCA

I have to disagree with you as well. Being someone who flies mostly 40 to 50 sized glow, I'm very interested in this engine. And I have friends who also have expressed an interest in the engine.
Jim...

iskandar taib

My Feedback: (5)

Umm.. check out Enya's web site..

Iskandar

misterpanda

Don't forget that\, luckily, there are sstill some magneto ignition engines out there, like Zenoah. Fly all day without worrying about recharging ignition batteries.