New Fox engines?
06-22-2013, 03:42 AM
#127
RE: New Fox engines?
ORIGINAL: iskandar taib
The ABC Combat Specials were the Marks VI and VII. Never did hear anything about peeling chrome. And chrome they definitely were (not ABN). These were made in the mid to late 90s.
Chroming CAN be done in the US, I know there were several people doing chroming work in their garages (that's where we sent Mark IVs and other engines off to to be rejuvenated. Yeah, they chromed steel liners. I know one person still doing this, he charges about $50 and up, depending on what needs to be done. Usually, chrome the liner, then hone until the piston fits. And then it needs a few runs for break-in. But he can also chrome the crank (for plain bearing engines) and crankpin, too, if you want that done.
Large scale manufacturing of chromed parts? Surely all those folks up in Detroit making car bumpers knew something or two - there definitely were ABC engines made in the US in the past, K&B made some IIRC. ABC engines were invented in the US. What you say about regulations is probably true today, but it wasn't 20 years ago.
As far as weird combinations - the first Mark VI engines had these weird aluminum pistons with a steel band around the crown. (Or it might've been the other way around - can't remember.) The problem was, over the next few months, every one of these engines had the band separate from the piston. No worries, he just sent everyone who bought one a new ABC piston/liner set.
Never seen these ceramic sleeves. As I recall, someone in Australia started selling them first, Fox started selling them afterwards, probably from same source. Are they real ceramic, or metal coated with ceramic, like Norvel parts?
Iskandar
ORIGINAL: earlwb
Fox did made a few ABC engines. The .40 Quickie, .46 ABC, and he did a .60 ABC as well, if I remember correctly.I think he did aABC combat .36 engine too. But if I remember right, some people were having problems with the liner's peeling on them. But Fox seemed to have a lot of trouble getting the ABC cylinder sleeve and piston fit just right. So he never really continued the ABC versions, more than likely due to the environmental loaws in place making it too expensive. He had tried some odd cylinder sleeve combinations too, such as a stepped sleeve where there was a noticeable step on the inside. But the standard tight fitting tapered sleeve was hard for him to do for some unknownreason. But nowadays makiing a ABC cylinder and sleeve in the USA is prohibitively expensive because of the environmental loaws and regulations in place. Actually getting anything chromed inside the USA is goint to be very expensive. Thus except for maybe some expensive government contract jobs no one does it anymore in the USA. If I remember some cost quotes had it running over $100 per engine to make a chromed sleeve ABC setup inside the USA.
Now then Fox did strike up some deals with some Russians to make ceramic sleeves for the Fox .35 stunt engine. So that might be something they could expand on with the other engines too. I think that ceramic sleeve setup might even be better than the ABC setup too. NV Engines uses something like that on their engines and it works good. So I could see some more Fox engines with ceramic sleeves in them.
Fox did made a few ABC engines. The .40 Quickie, .46 ABC, and he did a .60 ABC as well, if I remember correctly.I think he did aABC combat .36 engine too. But if I remember right, some people were having problems with the liner's peeling on them. But Fox seemed to have a lot of trouble getting the ABC cylinder sleeve and piston fit just right. So he never really continued the ABC versions, more than likely due to the environmental loaws in place making it too expensive. He had tried some odd cylinder sleeve combinations too, such as a stepped sleeve where there was a noticeable step on the inside. But the standard tight fitting tapered sleeve was hard for him to do for some unknownreason. But nowadays makiing a ABC cylinder and sleeve in the USA is prohibitively expensive because of the environmental loaws and regulations in place. Actually getting anything chromed inside the USA is goint to be very expensive. Thus except for maybe some expensive government contract jobs no one does it anymore in the USA. If I remember some cost quotes had it running over $100 per engine to make a chromed sleeve ABC setup inside the USA.
Now then Fox did strike up some deals with some Russians to make ceramic sleeves for the Fox .35 stunt engine. So that might be something they could expand on with the other engines too. I think that ceramic sleeve setup might even be better than the ABC setup too. NV Engines uses something like that on their engines and it works good. So I could see some more Fox engines with ceramic sleeves in them.
Chroming CAN be done in the US, I know there were several people doing chroming work in their garages (that's where we sent Mark IVs and other engines off to to be rejuvenated. Yeah, they chromed steel liners. I know one person still doing this, he charges about $50 and up, depending on what needs to be done. Usually, chrome the liner, then hone until the piston fits. And then it needs a few runs for break-in. But he can also chrome the crank (for plain bearing engines) and crankpin, too, if you want that done.
Large scale manufacturing of chromed parts? Surely all those folks up in Detroit making car bumpers knew something or two - there definitely were ABC engines made in the US in the past, K&B made some IIRC. ABC engines were invented in the US. What you say about regulations is probably true today, but it wasn't 20 years ago.
As far as weird combinations - the first Mark VI engines had these weird aluminum pistons with a steel band around the crown. (Or it might've been the other way around - can't remember.) The problem was, over the next few months, every one of these engines had the band separate from the piston. No worries, he just sent everyone who bought one a new ABC piston/liner set.
Never seen these ceramic sleeves. As I recall, someone in Australia started selling them first, Fox started selling them afterwards, probably from same source. Are they real ceramic, or metal coated with ceramic, like Norvel parts?
Iskandar
The Fox .35 stunt uses a ceramic liner, but whether it is all ceramic or coated metal I cannot answer. I assume it is metal coated with a ceramic substance like the Norvel engine parts.
06-22-2013, 04:08 AM
#128
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Kuala Lumpur| Malaysia, MALAYSIA
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: New Fox engines?
What I was meaning to say was that environmental regulation related costs wouldn't have been the reason for Duke not doing ABC engines more than he did, because when all this was going on, there were no regulations in force. Those came maybe 10 years later than the time we're talking about. By contrast OS and others (especially those making competition engines) had gone to ABC in a big way by the early to mid-80s. They switched to ABN supposedly because of similar regulations in Japan, but this was later.
Iskandar
Iskandar
06-22-2013, 08:32 AM
#129
RE: New Fox engines?
Wonder if anyone would discuss why he was in jail? (Duke Fox)
06-22-2013, 08:37 AM
#130
RE: New Fox engines?
ORIGINAL: earlwb
Fox did made a few ABC engines. The .40 Quickie, .46 ABC, and he did a .60 ABC as well, if I remember correctly.I think he did aABC combat .36 engine too. But if I remember right, some people were having problems with the liner's peeling on them. But Fox seemed to have a lot of trouble getting the ABC cylinder sleeve and piston fit just right. So he never really continued the ABC versions, more than likely due to the environmental loaws in place making it too expensive. He had tried some odd cylinder sleeve combinations too, such as a stepped sleeve where there was a noticeable step on the inside. But the standard tight fitting tapered sleeve was hard for him to do for some unknownreason. But nowadays makiing a ABC cylinder and sleeve in the USA is prohibitively expensive because of the environmental loaws and regulations in place. Actually getting anything chromed inside the USA is goint to be very expensive. Thus except for maybe some expensive government contract jobs no one does it anymore in the USA. If I remember some cost quotes had it running over $100 per engine to make a chromed sleeve ABC setup inside the USA.
Now then Fox did strike up some deals with some Russians to make ceramic sleeves for the Fox .35 stunt engine. So that might be something they could expand on with the other engines too. I think that ceramic sleeve setup might even be better than the ABC setup too. NV Engines uses something like that on their engines and it works good. So I could see some more Fox engines with ceramic sleeves in them.
Fox did made a few ABC engines. The .40 Quickie, .46 ABC, and he did a .60 ABC as well, if I remember correctly.I think he did aABC combat .36 engine too. But if I remember right, some people were having problems with the liner's peeling on them. But Fox seemed to have a lot of trouble getting the ABC cylinder sleeve and piston fit just right. So he never really continued the ABC versions, more than likely due to the environmental loaws in place making it too expensive. He had tried some odd cylinder sleeve combinations too, such as a stepped sleeve where there was a noticeable step on the inside. But the standard tight fitting tapered sleeve was hard for him to do for some unknownreason. But nowadays makiing a ABC cylinder and sleeve in the USA is prohibitively expensive because of the environmental loaws and regulations in place. Actually getting anything chromed inside the USA is goint to be very expensive. Thus except for maybe some expensive government contract jobs no one does it anymore in the USA. If I remember some cost quotes had it running over $100 per engine to make a chromed sleeve ABC setup inside the USA.
Now then Fox did strike up some deals with some Russians to make ceramic sleeves for the Fox .35 stunt engine. So that might be something they could expand on with the other engines too. I think that ceramic sleeve setup might even be better than the ABC setup too. NV Engines uses something like that on their engines and it works good. So I could see some more Fox engines with ceramic sleeves in them.
I called them and they said they could no longer get chroming done at a good price. They said they were trying to get ceramic sleeves at a price cheaper then they are now doing for the Fox Stunt and 60 stunt engines but only competitors will pay the price, so they will not do this unless they get the right price for them. So it may be a while.
06-22-2013, 08:47 AM
#131
RE: New Fox engines?
ORIGINAL: JPMacG
I fly the only Fox engines at my field. Most of our members are newcomers to the hobby (within the last 15 years). Fox just doesn't advertise like the major brands. Tower and the LHS don't carry Fox (except the control line 35). So everyone at our club flies either OS or Satio and no one in our club knows much about Fox other than me. Same goes for Enya. Few in our club know of Enya. Advertising works!
Another problem is that the stock Fox mufflers are not baffled and our field has a sound limit. So anyone at our field who got a Fox would have to work out something for the muffler. That is enough of a hassle to discourage some members from bothering with Fox.
I fly the only Fox engines at my field. Most of our members are newcomers to the hobby (within the last 15 years). Fox just doesn't advertise like the major brands. Tower and the LHS don't carry Fox (except the control line 35). So everyone at our club flies either OS or Satio and no one in our club knows much about Fox other than me. Same goes for Enya. Few in our club know of Enya. Advertising works!
Another problem is that the stock Fox mufflers are not baffled and our field has a sound limit. So anyone at our field who got a Fox would have to work out something for the muffler. That is enough of a hassle to discourage some members from bothering with Fox.
The Fox mufflers meet the 98 DBA limit at most clubs. Some might squeak buy 96 if you are not using high nitro and with a lot of oil. But for clubs with limits below that you need an after muffler or adapt another muffler.
BTW many of the high volume expansion mufflers that are popular are as loud or sometimes louder than the Fox muffler so I do not think this is a huge disadvantage. The fact they are bolt on rather than bolt through is a larger disadvantage.
06-22-2013, 08:49 AM
#132
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: no city,
AL
Posts: 2,613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: New Fox engines?
I am often bemused as to the amount of emotion some grown men invest in their favorite or, conversely, disliked brands of their toys!
Some of the questions seem easily answered. One party to the discussion questioned how the Fox .35 attained such popularity. I would suggest that took place simply because it was the absolutely dominant power plant of control line stunt for a number ,of years. If the Fox was a poor engine the competition must have been abysmal indeed.
Other events were ruled for a time by K&B, Dooling, The McCoy 60' etc.
One Fox product that seems to have escaped mention is the little . 15 BbRC. I have had excellent results with several of these as well as the OS engines of the same displacement.
Jess
Some of the questions seem easily answered. One party to the discussion questioned how the Fox .35 attained such popularity. I would suggest that took place simply because it was the absolutely dominant power plant of control line stunt for a number ,of years. If the Fox was a poor engine the competition must have been abysmal indeed.
Other events were ruled for a time by K&B, Dooling, The McCoy 60' etc.
One Fox product that seems to have escaped mention is the little . 15 BbRC. I have had excellent results with several of these as well as the OS engines of the same displacement.
Jess
06-22-2013, 08:51 AM
#133
RE: New Fox engines?
Although Cox Engines makes 1/2a engines they are now in Canada.
06-22-2013, 08:55 AM
#134
RE: New Fox engines?
ORIGINAL: iskandar taib
Ohlsson, believe it or not, are still around. If you use K&B, Thunderbolt or McCoy glowplugs, Ohlsson made them.
Iskandar
Ohlsson, believe it or not, are still around. If you use K&B, Thunderbolt or McCoy glowplugs, Ohlsson made them.
Iskandar
06-22-2013, 11:22 AM
#136
RE: New Fox engines?
ORIGINAL: blw
The processes used to make chrome bumpers/auto parts involves many steps and is most certainly different than doing piston liners. My dad used to chrome parts in our basement shop.
The processes used to make chrome bumpers/auto parts involves many steps and is most certainly different than doing piston liners. My dad used to chrome parts in our basement shop.
I'd assume that the chrome plating inside a cylinder liner would be hard chrome and not shiny chrome. Two totally different animals altogether. Also to note: the piston wears out, not the liner.
I'm done with my off-subject rant now...[8D]
06-22-2013, 05:47 PM
#137
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Kuala Lumpur| Malaysia, MALAYSIA
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: New Fox engines?
ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot
Since they are selling NOS they are made in the USA. No one is presently manufacturing Cox engines.
Although Cox Engines makes 1/2a engines they are now in Canada.
Iskandar
06-22-2013, 05:49 PM
#138
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Kuala Lumpur| Malaysia, MALAYSIA
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: New Fox engines?
ORIGINAL: blw
The processes used to make chrome bumpers/auto parts involves many steps and is most certainly different than doing piston liners. My dad used to chrome parts in our basement shop.
The processes used to make chrome bumpers/auto parts involves many steps and is most certainly different than doing piston liners. My dad used to chrome parts in our basement shop.
Iskandar
06-22-2013, 05:55 PM
#139
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Kuala Lumpur| Malaysia, MALAYSIA
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: New Fox engines?
ORIGINAL: 1QwkSport2.5r
And to add; Shiny chrome is nowhere near as corrosion resistant nor as hard as hard chrome. Hard chrome has a dull appearance much like brushed nickel doorknobs or kitchen faucets and lasts a very long time. It just doesn't look ''blingy'' like shiny chrome does.
I'd assume that the chrome plating inside a cylinder liner would be hard chrome and not shiny chrome. Two totally different animals altogether. Also to note: the piston wears out, not the liner.
I'm done with my off-subject rant now...[8D]
And to add; Shiny chrome is nowhere near as corrosion resistant nor as hard as hard chrome. Hard chrome has a dull appearance much like brushed nickel doorknobs or kitchen faucets and lasts a very long time. It just doesn't look ''blingy'' like shiny chrome does.
I'd assume that the chrome plating inside a cylinder liner would be hard chrome and not shiny chrome. Two totally different animals altogether. Also to note: the piston wears out, not the liner.
I'm done with my off-subject rant now...[8D]
It's been suggested elsewhere that you can rejuvenate a worn ABC/AAC piston/liner set by anodizing the piston (which makes it bigger). I'm itching to give it a try - I have a pair of well-used Foras and new piston/liner sets cost $80.
Iskandar
06-22-2013, 06:33 PM
#140
RE: New Fox engines?
Hard chromed liners look shiny after a break-in run. I agree. But shiny "blingy" chrome wouldn't last long in our ABC or AAC engines I don't think. I think a Nickel plating would outlast a shiny chrome plating, but probably because the nickel plating is thicker.
Nonetheless, IMHO, I like Iron piston engines. Other than a lengthy break-in, they just don't wear the same as an ABC does. Now an Iron piston in a chromed steel liner....OR a nitrided steel liner - better yet. Now we are getting somewhere.
Are current Fox steel liners hardened or nitrided or are they just mild steel? My old '83 Fox .40 liner isn't hardened. It was out of round when I got it, but it was and had been disassembled for some time before I got my hands on it [and subsequently wrecked it unbeknownst to me until it was too late... Doh!]
Nonetheless, IMHO, I like Iron piston engines. Other than a lengthy break-in, they just don't wear the same as an ABC does. Now an Iron piston in a chromed steel liner....OR a nitrided steel liner - better yet. Now we are getting somewhere.
Are current Fox steel liners hardened or nitrided or are they just mild steel? My old '83 Fox .40 liner isn't hardened. It was out of round when I got it, but it was and had been disassembled for some time before I got my hands on it [and subsequently wrecked it unbeknownst to me until it was too late... Doh!]
06-22-2013, 08:48 PM
#142
RE: New Fox engines?
ORIGINAL: iskandar taib
They are. They're assembling them out of old parts. The parts were made in the US, the engines in Canada. They've even got some new parts (mainly tanks and tank backplates) made.
Iskandar
ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot
Since they are selling NOS they are made in the USA. No one is presently manufacturing Cox engines.
Although Cox Engines makes 1/2a engines they are now in Canada.
Iskandar
06-23-2013, 12:38 AM
#143
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Kuala Lumpur| Malaysia, MALAYSIA
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: New Fox engines?
ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot
Assembling old parts is selling NOS, not manufacturing. Kiss Cox goodby.
Assembling old parts is selling NOS, not manufacturing. Kiss Cox goodby.
Iskandar
06-23-2013, 12:44 AM
#144
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Kuala Lumpur| Malaysia, MALAYSIA
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: New Fox engines?
ORIGINAL: AMB
As posted the fox 15 is a great little engine Davis sells quite a few diesel heads for them thus glo or diesel your choice martin
As posted the fox 15 is a great little engine Davis sells quite a few diesel heads for them thus glo or diesel your choice martin
I've got three or four (of the Schnuerle ones) myself. Have to think of something appropriate to build to put them in. Maybe the "Force" that Tom Fluker used to win the WC. He used Foxes for that. But I don't know if plans exist. One of those models is in a display case in the AMA museum at Muncie. To get them up to speed you needed 50% nitro, a special head, and a bored out venturi. They were up against ST G15s and Rossi .15s at the time. Duke actually made a special version for the US team - got rid of the front bearing and put in a crank from the .36 Combat Special (de-stroked, of course). But the team went back to the old engines, the new one didn't seem any faster and made strange noises in the turns which made them think the crank was binding momentarily.
I don't know how many people know this engine came in a plain bearing version. I've got one Marvin Denny gave to me - he was using it in a local sport race class.
Iskandar
06-23-2013, 04:12 AM
#145
RE: New Fox engines?
We used to use the little .15 baffled piston engines in QM pylon racing many years ago. They worked fine at the time. But QM pylon racing was evolving though as people came up with ever faster engines. I eventually went with the K&B .15 engines for racing later when they came out with their hot .15 way back then. But at the time, the Fox .15 engine worked well until something better came along. I flew the Fox .15's in RC planes a long time ago too. But at the time Schnuerle .15's didn't exist yet. So it was in good company with the other .15's available to us at the time. I do not remember it being anemic or weak in comparison to the other .15s then either. That was back in the early racing days when we used a fixed fuel pickup and to kill the engine after a race, you flew the plane inverted for a few seconds to kill the engine. Later we had to have a servo controlled fuel cut off device of some sort or use a RC carb as a engine kill device. We had our best races with the baffled .15 engines before the hot Schuerle .15's came out. A lot of the heats were exciting neck to neck almost photofinish events at the time.
I have two of the early model Fox .15 Shnuerle engines in planes at this time, a .15 combat plane and a .15 sport plane. The engines work well for that purpose. So I have no issues with them today.
Here is a excerpt from the 1965 instructions that came with the Fox .15X engines. I still have a couple of the .15X engines around here someplace. The modified engines did work well for me, but for RC QM racing the prop was larger and a higher pitch so I wasn't getting 30,000 rpms out of them at the time. We did have a couple of guys running SuperTigre .15's and the little Fox .15 in my plane stayed right in there with them. Now then the hot Schnuerle .15's would leave all of these baffled .15's in the dust of course. But they made good sport engines in any case.
I have two of the early model Fox .15 Shnuerle engines in planes at this time, a .15 combat plane and a .15 sport plane. The engines work well for that purpose. So I have no issues with them today.
Here is a excerpt from the 1965 instructions that came with the Fox .15X engines. I still have a couple of the .15X engines around here someplace. The modified engines did work well for me, but for RC QM racing the prop was larger and a higher pitch so I wasn't getting 30,000 rpms out of them at the time. We did have a couple of guys running SuperTigre .15's and the little Fox .15 in my plane stayed right in there with them. Now then the hot Schnuerle .15's would leave all of these baffled .15's in the dust of course. But they made good sport engines in any case.
06-23-2013, 08:21 AM
#146
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Kuala Lumpur| Malaysia, MALAYSIA
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: New Fox engines?
To be fair, I've never owned one. I've seen one on a Flite Streak, it seemed to run OK. But the Stunt people seem to dislike them for some reason, or at least they pretend to, hence the Fox .;15 Hurl. If it's anything like a Fox .35 Stunt I don't think I'd want one unless it was already broken in.. From reading the instruction sheet, it seems like Missile Mist was the default fuel for most applications. I like the instructions for Speed. Replace the piston with a special one, replace the CRANKCASE with a special one. What's left? I suppose the crank's still the same, and there's the rod and the head.. and needle valve. I'm surprised they didn't offer a special Speed crank with more open porting, to get to 30,000 RPM.
I'd forgotten about the part where you're supposed to file the crossbar in the venturi - the version I heard was you filed the sides flat. That was one of the mods for the .15 Schnuerle for Combat.
Now, I do own a couple of used .36Xs - maybe I'll build another Big Iron or something of the sort.
Iskandar
From reading the instruction sheet, it seems like Missile Mist was the default fuel for most applications. I like the instructions for Speed. Replace the piston with a special one, replace the CRANKCASE with a special one. What's left? I suppose the crank's still the same, and there's the rod and the head.. and needle valve. I'm surprised they didn't offer a special Speed crank with more open porting, to get to 30,000 RPM. I'd forgotten about the part where you're supposed to file the crossbar in the venturi - the version I heard was you filed the sides flat. That was one of the mods for the .15 Schnuerle for Combat.
Now, I do own a couple of used .36Xs - maybe I'll build another Big Iron or something of the sort.
Iskandar
06-23-2013, 08:48 AM
#147
RE: New Fox engines?
Fox did make some duds over the years, but usually the duds ran pretty good still. Just not as much performance as expected. But unfortunately a lot of people would bad mouth a product even if they had never owned it. They would just pass along the same story they heard from someone else.
I think it hurt Fox to some extent when he was on a low nitro glow fuel thing and had the engines setup with high compression. A lot of people in the USA tend to use a lot of nitromethane in the fuel. I tend to use 5% nitro glow fuel most of the time so usually I didn't have a problem. But there were occasions where I had to use FAI fuel in a couple of engines. Then of course people don't have the patience to break in the engines good as it takes time. But the current Fox engines need less break in as they use CNC machines a lot now so they can manage the parts tolerances better. Of course the earlier Fox carburetors designs had the low speed needle interfere with the high speed setting and a lot of people not reading instructions got confused by that. But if you checked your high speed after tweaking the low speed then it wasn't a issue, no big deal. Also the earlier Fox carbs having the low speed needle so prominantly displayed tended to always get people to tweak it when they should just leave it alone.
Several years ago, I was at the flying field with several of my planes. There was a guy there spouting off about what he considered the best engines to own. Plus stating his opinion as to which engines were the worst to own. he went on about how bad Fox engines were and how they were all junk and slag engines, totally worthless. During this whole show, i was flying the heck out of my planes, I would fly one for four flights and then switch to a different plane (we were using nicads then and the 450mah to 600mah packs don't have a lot of capacity of course). Suddenly he involved me while I was refueling for another flight. He told the others around him that they should get engines like mine as you can see how well they were running. He then stated he didn't recognize the brand and if they were German or something. I told him it was a Fox engine, and those other planes all had Fox engines on them too. He looked shocked and surprised and quickly went quiet and stopped talking after that. Earlier he couldn't get his fancy Webra engine to work and had proclaimed that it needed a piston ring or something so he will need to repair it. The engine looked really new to me. Anyway he decided to quickly leave the field and I never saw him show up again after that. I also remember being the only guy at pattern plane competition events when flying with Fox .60 engines too.
I still have a Fox .60 Blue Head .60 engine with dual plugs from circa 1966-67 that I fly on a plane today from time to time still. It has a three needle carb on it, with low, mid and high speed adjustments and a idle stop screw too. I think it was the ultimate carb until Webra came up with their Dynamix carbs. I remember helping several people out years ago with adjusting their Fox three needle carbs on those .60 and .74 engines as they were just totally confused by it. But it was so simple really. it is just if there is a adjustment on the engine someone just has to mess with it.
I remember helping people adjust their glow engines before, not just Fox engines either, and I would set the engine to run fine for them and they would fly it like that for the day. Then the next day they would promptly mess up the settings again. They just couldn't leave it alone they just had to try to tweak it again.
I think it hurt Fox to some extent when he was on a low nitro glow fuel thing and had the engines setup with high compression. A lot of people in the USA tend to use a lot of nitromethane in the fuel. I tend to use 5% nitro glow fuel most of the time so usually I didn't have a problem. But there were occasions where I had to use FAI fuel in a couple of engines. Then of course people don't have the patience to break in the engines good as it takes time. But the current Fox engines need less break in as they use CNC machines a lot now so they can manage the parts tolerances better. Of course the earlier Fox carburetors designs had the low speed needle interfere with the high speed setting and a lot of people not reading instructions got confused by that. But if you checked your high speed after tweaking the low speed then it wasn't a issue, no big deal. Also the earlier Fox carbs having the low speed needle so prominantly displayed tended to always get people to tweak it when they should just leave it alone.
Several years ago, I was at the flying field with several of my planes. There was a guy there spouting off about what he considered the best engines to own. Plus stating his opinion as to which engines were the worst to own. he went on about how bad Fox engines were and how they were all junk and slag engines, totally worthless. During this whole show, i was flying the heck out of my planes, I would fly one for four flights and then switch to a different plane (we were using nicads then and the 450mah to 600mah packs don't have a lot of capacity of course). Suddenly he involved me while I was refueling for another flight. He told the others around him that they should get engines like mine as you can see how well they were running. He then stated he didn't recognize the brand and if they were German or something. I told him it was a Fox engine, and those other planes all had Fox engines on them too. He looked shocked and surprised and quickly went quiet and stopped talking after that. Earlier he couldn't get his fancy Webra engine to work and had proclaimed that it needed a piston ring or something so he will need to repair it. The engine looked really new to me. Anyway he decided to quickly leave the field and I never saw him show up again after that. I also remember being the only guy at pattern plane competition events when flying with Fox .60 engines too.
I still have a Fox .60 Blue Head .60 engine with dual plugs from circa 1966-67 that I fly on a plane today from time to time still. It has a three needle carb on it, with low, mid and high speed adjustments and a idle stop screw too. I think it was the ultimate carb until Webra came up with their Dynamix carbs. I remember helping several people out years ago with adjusting their Fox three needle carbs on those .60 and .74 engines as they were just totally confused by it. But it was so simple really. it is just if there is a adjustment on the engine someone just has to mess with it.
I remember helping people adjust their glow engines before, not just Fox engines either, and I would set the engine to run fine for them and they would fly it like that for the day. Then the next day they would promptly mess up the settings again. They just couldn't leave it alone they just had to try to tweak it again.
06-23-2013, 08:51 AM
#148
My Feedback: (90)
RE: New Fox engines?
ORIGINAL: iskandar taib
To be fair, I've never owned one. I've seen one on a Flite Streak, it seemed to run OK. But the Stunt people seem to dislike them for some reason, or at least they pretend to, hence the Fox .;15 Hurl. If it's anything like a Fox .35 Stunt I don't think I'd want one unless it was already broken in.. From reading the instruction sheet, it seems like Missile Mist was the default fuel for most applications. I like the instructions for Speed. Replace the piston with a special one, replace the CRANKCASE with a special one. What's left? I suppose the crank's still the same, and there's the rod and the head.. and needle valve. I'm surprised they didn't offer a special Speed crank with more open porting, to get to 30,000 RPM.
I'd forgotten about the part where you're supposed to file the crossbar in the venturi - the version I heard was you filed the sides flat. That was one of the mods for the .15 Schnuerle for Combat.
Now, I do own a couple of used .36Xs - maybe I'll build another Big Iron or something of the sort.
Iskandar
To be fair, I've never owned one. I've seen one on a Flite Streak, it seemed to run OK. But the Stunt people seem to dislike them for some reason, or at least they pretend to, hence the Fox .;15 Hurl. If it's anything like a Fox .35 Stunt I don't think I'd want one unless it was already broken in..
From reading the instruction sheet, it seems like Missile Mist was the default fuel for most applications. I like the instructions for Speed. Replace the piston with a special one, replace the CRANKCASE with a special one. What's left? I suppose the crank's still the same, and there's the rod and the head.. and needle valve. I'm surprised they didn't offer a special Speed crank with more open porting, to get to 30,000 RPM. I'd forgotten about the part where you're supposed to file the crossbar in the venturi - the version I heard was you filed the sides flat. That was one of the mods for the .15 Schnuerle for Combat.
Now, I do own a couple of used .36Xs - maybe I'll build another Big Iron or something of the sort.
Iskandar
Missile Mist is 17% oil. You well know that if you want to go faster then lower the oil content and up the nitro. By the time you made all of the mods to the 15X you had a Fox 15XX. The 15XXX is the combat version and I had heard that only about 100 or so were made and they didn't last too long. Pristine example also from what I read can command about $1k or better.
Buy a ST34CL it will out run the 36X unless you have a really reworked version
06-23-2013, 01:20 PM
#149
RE: New Fox engines?
Well if you read the engine reviews that were done for all of the different brand engines. The reviewer typically deliberately runs a small impractical size prop on the engine to get a peak RPM reading and horsepower figure. Usually they run 20% or 25% nitromethane in the glow fuel too. So they were doing it for all of the engines not just Fox. But I found it impossible to reproduce the performance numbers the reviewers were publishing for different brands, the numbers never came even close for the most part. So it makes one wonder what they were doing.
But in the last big 10cc engine shootout test review they did a number of years ago they had to run 5% nitromethane in the Fox .60 they tested as the compression was too high. But the Fox .60 outperformed all of the other engines though. The Tower Hobbies .61 also stayed right there with the Fox engine when the two engines outdid the other .61 engines. Unfortunately running a 11x6 prop on a .60 engine doesn't exactly make it practical for real world use. I guess if you had a Hangar 9 Jackal it might though.
Fox used to give a voucher to the engine reviewer to go and buy a Fox engine from the LHS. Other companies were notorious for providing the engine to the reviewer, but they would carefully make sure the engine was perfect before they sent it off to be reviewed. Fox just had them get one off the shelf so to speak, no special hand picked engines.
Fox also used store bought propellers with his engines, using more practical sized props as well, and you knew what the fuel was he used. Albeit it was typically Missile Mist though. But you could usually reproduce his performance numbers. But with other reviewers it made you wonder what in the heck did they do to get a engine to do that in their reviews.
But I still see extravagant claims from some people for a engine with RPMs that just seem to be totally out of place for that particular engine. So it makes one wonder. I much prefer realistic RPM figures along with practical sized props and fuel I can buy too.
But in the last big 10cc engine shootout test review they did a number of years ago they had to run 5% nitromethane in the Fox .60 they tested as the compression was too high. But the Fox .60 outperformed all of the other engines though. The Tower Hobbies .61 also stayed right there with the Fox engine when the two engines outdid the other .61 engines. Unfortunately running a 11x6 prop on a .60 engine doesn't exactly make it practical for real world use. I guess if you had a Hangar 9 Jackal it might though.
Fox used to give a voucher to the engine reviewer to go and buy a Fox engine from the LHS. Other companies were notorious for providing the engine to the reviewer, but they would carefully make sure the engine was perfect before they sent it off to be reviewed. Fox just had them get one off the shelf so to speak, no special hand picked engines.
Fox also used store bought propellers with his engines, using more practical sized props as well, and you knew what the fuel was he used. Albeit it was typically Missile Mist though. But you could usually reproduce his performance numbers. But with other reviewers it made you wonder what in the heck did they do to get a engine to do that in their reviews.
But I still see extravagant claims from some people for a engine with RPMs that just seem to be totally out of place for that particular engine. So it makes one wonder. I much prefer realistic RPM figures along with practical sized props and fuel I can buy too.
06-23-2013, 01:21 PM
#150
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: no city,
AL
Posts: 2,613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: New Fox engines?
ORIGINAL: iskandar taib
To be fair, I've never owned one. I've seen one on a Flite Streak, it seemed to run OK. But the Stunt people seem to dislike them for some reason, or at least they pretend to, hence the Fox .;15 Hurl. If it's anything like a Fox .35 Stunt I don't think I'd want one unless it was already broken in..
Iskandar
To be fair, I've never owned one. I've seen one on a Flite Streak, it seemed to run OK. But the Stunt people seem to dislike them for some reason, or at least they pretend to, hence the Fox .;15 Hurl. If it's anything like a Fox .35 Stunt I don't think I'd want one unless it was already broken in..
Iskandar
The easy way to break in a new Fox was to put it in a model and fly it at a rich 4 cycle doing long horizontal eights to cause it to break briefly into a two cycle. A few flights like that and your new fox was ready to bolt into a Thunderbird, Nobler, or Ares. And go win the Nationals.
Likewise with the Combat specials your greatest obstacle to the championship was Riley Wooten.