Glow Engines Discuss RC glow engines

UMS Evolution Radial Care and Operation

Reply

Old 10-01-2018, 07:18 AM
  #2376  
Linkan2
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Haninge, SWEDEN
Posts: 203
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

[QUOTE=Mark Bartley;12467100]Hi Guys:

I guess it doesn't matter anymore.
I was trying a few more break in runs at 1/3 to 2/3 throttle when the engine abruptly stopped, and threw the prop, driver washers, nut, and "C" clip about 60' down my driveway.
The engine is now locked up solid and feels like something has mechanically let go inside and jammed the internals from rotating.
My dream of owning and running a radial has come to an abrupt end after investing $2,000+ in the engine, carbs, fuels, glow drivers etc.

Thanks to everyone on this forum for your support and efforts, but I'm tapping out. I've spent too much time and money on this, and lost lots of prime flying time this summer.
If I can't unload it as a parts engine then I'll just hang it by a noose in our club house.

Note to those reading this thread and considering the purchase of a 7-35:
- I've been running and flying glow engines for over 40 years without any problems;
- I'm a tinkerer and I admit to getting caught up in the romance of running a radial engine;
- I had no idea of the commitment to make this dream a reality;
- I have spent many many hours reading forums, buying all the required accessories, mixing fuels, lubing valve trains and judiciously following the break-in regimen; and
- I have lost uncountable flying hours and become very frustrated trying to be successful.

Please be absolutely sure that you're fully prepared for any outcome, and totally committed before putting down your hard earned cash.

Thanks again everyone and best of luck with your Evolution radials.

Mark[/Q Hi Mark
sad to read.
But is your engine so old you do not have warranty left.
Contact Horizion or UMS directly
That's not how it should be.
Lars
Linkan2 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2018, 12:32 PM
  #2377  
bpotter
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 3
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Mark:

How frustrating and sad! I like BobH's comment - it would be interesting to know why the engine siezed. I would also be interested in see what Horizon and UMS have to say about this situation.

Brad
bpotter is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2018, 09:09 AM
  #2378  
Maxam
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (62)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 1,015
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

To Brad, the carb is the OS for the FF240/ 320. Mark, that is tragic. I have put so much of my time in these engines over the years and I have witnessed a steady decline in the quality of these engines and yet the company has been dismissive with my concerns. Too bad,,,,,,,,,Tom
Maxam is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2018, 05:09 PM
  #2379  
bpotter
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 3
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Tom:

Thank you!

Brad
bpotter is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2018, 07:47 AM
  #2380  
okcrcpilot
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 3
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by Maxam View Post
Many of you might be interested that UMS is sending me a newly redesigned 260 gas radial. Yes this is a glow thread but the gas thread has been inactive for over a year. If promising I will initiate a new thread for the redesigned radials. Like before it is a 7 cylinder engine. -Tom
Greetings Tom,

I just found this tread today and am interested to know about the redesign of the UMS 260 gas radial. I assume you have received the new radial and have had time to check it out properly. Are you able to explain what was is new/redesigned with this engine. I look forward to hearing from you.

Regards,

Gary
okcrcpilot is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2018, 06:43 AM
  #2381  
Maxam
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (62)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 1,015
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Gary, check your PM's -Tom
Maxam is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2018, 07:21 AM
  #2382  
okcrcpilot
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 3
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by Maxam View Post
Gary, check your PM's -Tom
Tom,

PM replied to. Thanks!

Gary
okcrcpilot is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2018, 07:33 AM
  #2383  
EQ1
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Verden, GERMANY
Posts: 61
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by okcrcpilot View Post
Tom,

PM replied to. Thanks!

Gary
Mary, found your socks. Thanks!
EQ1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2018, 05:12 PM
  #2384  
Hyjinx
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 43
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Hi All
New to forums and this one. I have a radial collection from Morton to Moki (soon on the Moki). I dont fly them as they are older and parts availability can be scarce. Just love staring at them on stands. I just traded a UMS 7_35 for a UMS 7-77. The 7-35 flew a 1/5 scale Stearman ok, but i felt it a little underpowered, nice scale flight but not a lot left for emergencies.
Mine was hungry for the glow driver and ran superior with it, not so much without, but the 9000 mah cad battery was a boat anchor. Question is, Lars mentions a glow driver from Microsens that runs a lipo. Major improvement in power and weight and obviously run time. Havnt seen any 7 or nine cylinder units running on lipo power till this. Does any one know where to get one (or more) of these things? My net searches havnt found this Microsens lp7 driver anywhere in the States, but have found a smattering of Microsens products on European sites, just not the Glow 7 LP mentioned.
Anyone in the states using one and where did you get it?
Hyjinx is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2018, 11:41 PM
  #2385  
cymaz
 
cymaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 681
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Have a look at this thread from a few years back.

Microsens glow question

I have never had a problem from buying either in the US, Europe or direct from China. I either pay by credit card or PayPal for some piece of mind in case anything should go wrong.
cymaz is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2018, 12:11 PM
  #2386  
BernardW
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 13
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Hi guys, I'm only an occasional user of RCU. I'd very much like to be using radials in RC models, I have been tending towards Saito but I've also been interested in the Evo's. But I've seen some posts talking about a gradual decline in quality and reliability and Mark Bartley's post is just a recent example (very sorry to hear of this Mark). Are the current production engines just a big risk or are they OK? ie does it depend first and foremost on the user, or are some of them just bad? And I hear that it's generally the practice to ditch the carb's and substitute Saito. BTW I'm particularly thinking of the Evo 7-35. None of that is very encouraging. A Saito glow 3-cyl FA-200 sounds like a safer bet, but for scale and interest's sake I'd really hoped to run at least a 5 cyl and a 7 would match some of the projects I had in mind. But is it safe to spend money on, for someone like me who has to save hard to buy something like this? I do not have the kind of disposable income to buy these engines on a whim. I've been running Saito singles and a couple of twins with great results (all glow, maybe I'll do gas one day... don't really care), and I'll eventually convert my FA-182TD to spark, still methanol.
Is the complexity of a 7- or 9-cylinder simply too much for Evo's quality standards nowadays? As I understand it Evo licenced the Siedel designs for their radials, but I don't understand the relationship to UMS... sorry guys I don't have time to study 2000+ posts in this thread and a ton of others to find out about this, I'm new here. If I understand the current situation, UMS equals EVO equals this is who is making the Siedel designs now, and people got burned when Siedel collapsed. Are people getting burned by Evo now too? Doesn't sound like when you get one with mfg problems that the maker is real big on after sales support... I would only go for it through local distribution if I had a good guarantee of repair or replacement. I like the idea of the design, but can I trust it? Any guidance gratefully received... Bernie
BernardW is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2018, 01:34 PM
  #2387  
Linkan2
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Haninge, SWEDEN
Posts: 203
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by BernardW View Post
Hi guys, I'm only an occasional user of RCU. I'd very much like to be using radials in RC models, I have been tending towards Saito but I've also been interested in the Evo's. But I've seen some posts talking about a gradual decline in quality and reliability and Mark Bartley's post is just a recent example (very sorry to hear of this Mark). Are the current production engines just a big risk or are they OK? ie does it depend first and foremost on the user, or are some of them just bad? And I hear that it's generally the practice to ditch the carb's and substitute Saito. BTW I'm particularly thinking of the Evo 7-35. None of that is very encouraging. A Saito glow 3-cyl FA-200 sounds like a safer bet, but for scale and interest's sake I'd really hoped to run at least a 5 cyl and a 7 would match some of the projects I had in mind. But is it safe to spend money on, for someone like me who has to save hard to buy something like this? I do not have the kind of disposable income to buy these engines on a whim. I've been running Saito singles and a couple of twins with great results (all glow, maybe I'll do gas one day... don't really care), and I'll eventually convert my FA-182TD to spark, still methanol.
Is the complexity of a 7- or 9-cylinder simply too much for Evo's quality standards nowadays? As I understand it Evo licenced the Siedel designs for their radials, but I don't understand the relationship to UMS... sorry guys I don't have time to study 2000+ posts in this thread and a ton of others to find out about this, I'm new here. If I understand the current situation, UMS equals EVO equals this is who is making the Siedel designs now, and people got burned when Siedel collapsed. Are people getting burned by Evo now too? Doesn't sound like when you get one with mfg problems that the maker is real big on after sales support... I would only go for it through local distribution if I had a good guarantee of repair or replacement. I like the idea of the design, but can I trust it? Any guidance gratefully received... Bernie
hello Bernie
I bought my UMS-Seidel 7-35 2010.
and certainly they have been a lot to make the engine run well.
The first carburetor is just junk, then an updated carburetor arrived.
It's a lot better, but not completely satisfied.
After I switched to the Saito FA 120r3 carburetor, there was a good engine.
The engine is very reliable now, and I do not need to adjust the carburetor every flight now.
Now, UMS has come with a new serial engine Both methanol & gasoline http://umstech.in/radial-engine-7-35.html
I can also see that I have many Saito an FA182 with CDI & methanol.
And the FA170r3 sitting in a greate lake runs very well
Lars
Linkan2 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2018, 01:48 PM
  #2388  
BernardW
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 13
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by Linkan2 View Post
hello Bernie
I bought my UMS-Seidel 7-35 2010.
and certainly they have been a lot to make the engine run well.
The first carburetor is just junk, then an updated carburetor arrived.
It's a lot better, but not completely satisfied.
After I switched to the Saito FA 120r3 carburetor, there was a good engine.
The engine is very reliable now, and I do not need to adjust the carburetor every flight now.
Now, UMS has come with a new serial engine Both methanol & gasoline UMS 7-35cc Glow Radial Engine
I can also see that I have many Saito an FA182 with CDI & methanol.
And the FA170r3 sitting in a greate lake runs very well
Lars
Hi Lars, thanks for the reply. That is good, helpful information. So the reason your 7-35 UMS is so reliable now is because you switched to the Saito 120r3 carburettor, or is it a new type of UMS carburettor? It does sound like you had to invest some time and effort to make the engine run well.I have heard other people say the same. Some people have a hard time with their UMS or EVO, most say they are fine. I will probably get an FA-200r3 instead of the 7-35, but later when I have the Saito I would like to try the UMS too. I would really enjoy any 7 cylinder engine. The price difference to the 7-77 is only about 15% here.
Now, sorry if this is a stupid question, but is UMS the same as Evolution? I still don't understand this. Are they the same design made by different companies, or are UMS and Evo the same company?
Really looking forward to using the FA-182, and later adding CDI. This engine, then later an FA-200r3, will go in a Black Horse Sea Fury 35cc, but also models I build myself. Probably just scaled up versions of an Ugly Stik modified like an Ultra Stik, so I have something to fly them in while I work on a scale project. Ideally I would love to use two radials in an F7F. A guy here built a beautiful 3.8 meter DC-3 with 2 FG60r3's, that sound was fantastic with 2 Keleo exhausts.
EDIT -
. The video is a little confusing, but TAA was an old Australian airline, now gone. Notice "Sasha" standing sidewars to the camera This is the field near me where I go, WAMASC. It's excellent.

Last edited by BernardW; 12-10-2018 at 02:09 PM.
BernardW is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2018, 02:12 PM
  #2389  
Linkan2
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Haninge, SWEDEN
Posts: 203
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by BernardW View Post
Hi Lars, thanks for the reply. That is good, helpful information. So the reason your 7-35 UMS is so reliable now is because you switched to the Saito 120r3 carburettor, or is it a new type of UMS carburettor? It does sound like you had to invest some time and effort to make the engine run well.I have heard other people say the same. Some people have a hard time with their UMS or EVO, most say they are fine. I will probably get an FA-200r3 instead of the 7-35, but later when I have the Saito I would like to try the UMS too. I would really enjoy any 7 cylinder engine. The price difference to the 7-77 is only about 15% here.
Now, sorry if this is a stupid question, but is UMS the same as Evolution? I still don't understand this. Are they the same design made by different companies, or are UMS and Evo the same company?
Really looking forward to using the FA-182, and later adding CDI. This engine, then later an FA-200r3, will go in a Black Horse Sea Fury 35cc, but also models I build myself. Probably just scaled up versions of an Ugly Stik modified like an Ultra Stik, so I have something to fly them in while I work on a scale project. Ideally I would love to use two radials in an F7F. A guy here built a beautiful 3.8 meter DC-3 with 2 FG60r3's, that sound was fantastic with 2 Keleo exhausts.
EDIT - this is the DC-3. The video is a little confusing, but TAA was an old Australian airline, now gone. Notice "Sasha" standing sidewars to the camera This is the field near me where I go, WAMASC. It's excellent.
The engine now runs with saito carburettors and they are the best altenatives.
UMS makes engines for evo and it's the same engine.
I think evo & UMS has separated now.
so if you are going to buy a 7-35 go for the new UMS 7-35
yes, it's nice engines and I now have 210 starts on it.
Linkan2 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2019, 01:28 PM
  #2390  
jeremyilj03
My Feedback: (12)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 62
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

I have an Evolution E999 Radial and am unsure if I am getting the proper RPMs out of the engine.

I purchased the engine about three years ago and performed the required break-in about two and a half years ago. At that time I didn't think to use a tachometer. After completing the break-in, the engine sat for approximately 20 months (in my house with after-run oil throughout the internals).

A few weeks ago I finally completed my Ziroli Dauntless and attempted to maiden the plane a week ago. Prior to the maiden I ran the engine on the plane at my house and thought the engine sounded good. However, once again I didn't think to use my tachometer. At the field, the engine was only producing 4,100 RPM on a 24x12 prop (2-blade) which sounded lower than when I ran it at my house. Using an IR Thermometer I was able to determine that two of the cylinders were not firing. After a few hours of starting and stopping the engine, I had completely drained the onboard glow system battery (McDaniels onboard glow systems with the recommended 4.8v, 5,000 mAh NiMH battery) and headed home.

Once home I performed a quick charge of the onboard glow system battery and ran the engine. This time, I was able to reach ~5,000 RPM. The only change I made to the engine was swapping out a glow plug on one of the cylinders which was previously identified as not operating. I used an O.S. "F" plug since I did not have any spare Evolution plugs on hand. At this point I figured I have eight out of nine cylinders running.

Two days later I obtained two new Evolution glow plugs and two O.S. "F" plugs. I ran the engine several times swapping plugs on the two cylinders which were thought to not be operating. Following this I was able to reach ~5,200 RPM.

I then performed the valve lashing procedure and found several of the valves to have slightly excessive valve lash. After performing the valve lash procedure I ran another tank of fuel (32 oz) through the engine and seemed to average ~5,250 RPM on the top end. Throughout these recent runs I have taken numerous temperature readings and find that the cylinders at the '4' o'clock and '8' o'clock position typically run 30F cooler than other cylinders (this is the case on the plane and on my test stand). It may be worth noting that these cylinders are closest to the exit pipes on my collector ring.

When I attempt to tune the engine, I get very little response when adjusting the needle vale. In fact I can open the needle valve 3, 4 or even 5 turns with little response from the engine. In fact, I once hit 5,300 RPM with the needle valve 4 turns open. However, if I lean the engine the engine quickly dies.

When I attempt the old trick of pinching the fuel line to the engine, the engine immediately looses RPM giving me the impression that it is lean. However, I'm not sure if this trick is applicable to such a large glow engine.

Having said all of this, does anyone know if the RPMs I am obtaining are normal for this engine? The manual states the RPM range as 1,000 to 6,000. However, the manual doesn't specify if this is ground RPMs. The manual recommends a 24x12 or a 26x10 prop of which I have tried a 24x12 (2-blade Menz), 23x10 (3-blade Biela) and a 26x10 (2-blade Mejzlick) all with similar results. Is there a possible obstruction in my carburetor or is the tiny carburetor inadequate for this 99cc engine? The carburetor is about the size of a Super Tiger 90 carburetor. Any help would be very much appreciated. (Additional info: I am running 7.5% nitro with 9% full synthetic oil)

Thanks,
Jeremy

Last edited by jeremyilj03; 01-09-2019 at 06:29 PM.
jeremyilj03 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2019, 06:08 AM
  #2391  
Linkan2
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Haninge, SWEDEN
Posts: 203
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by jeremyilj03 View Post
I have an Evolution E999 Radial and am unsure if I am getting the proper RPMs out of the engine.

I purchased the engine about three years ago and performed the required break-in about two and a half years ago. At that time I didn't think to use a tachometer. After completing the break-in, the engine sat for approximately 20 months (in my house with after-run oil throughout the internals).

A few weeks ago I finally completed my Ziroli Dauntless and attempted to maiden the plane a week ago. Prior to the maiden I ran the engine on the plane at my house and thought the engine sounded good. However, once again I didn't think to use my tachometer. At the field, the engine was only producing 4,100 RPM on a 24x12 prop (2-blade) which sounded lower than when I ran it at my house. Using an IR Thermometer I was able to determine that two of the cylinders were not firing. After a few hours of starting and stopping the engine, I had completely drained the onboard glow system battery (McDaniels onboard glow systems with the recommended 4.8v, 5,000 mAh NiMH battery) and headed home.

Once home I performed a quick charge of the onboard glow system battery and ran the engine. This time, I was able to reach ~5,000 RPM. The only change I made to the engine was swapping out a glow plug on one of the cylinders which was previously identified as not operating. I used an O.S. "F" plug since I did not have any spare Evolution plugs on hand. At this point I figured I have eight out of nine cylinders running.

Two days later I obtained two new Evolution glow plugs and two O.S. "F" plugs. I ran the engine several times swapping plugs on the two cylinders which were thought to not be operating. Following this I was able to reach ~5,200 RPM.

I then performed the valve lashing procedure and found several of the valves to have slightly excessive valve lash. After performing the valve lash procedure I ran another tank of fuel (32 oz) through the engine and seemed to average ~5,250 RPM on the top end. Throughout these recent runs I have taken numerous temperature readings and find that the cylinders at the '4' o'clock and '8' o'clock position typically run 30F cooler than other cylinders (this is the case on the plane and on my test stand). It may be worth noting that these cylinders are closest to the exit pipes on my collector ring.

When I attempt to tune the engine, I get very little response when adjusting the needle vale. In fact I can open the needle valve 3, 4 or even 5 turns with little response from the engine. In fact, I once hit 5,300 RPM with the needle valve 4 turns open. However, if I lean the engine the engine quickly dies.

When I attempt the old trick of pinching the fuel line to the engine, the engine immediately looses RPM giving me the impression that it is lean. However, I'm not sure if this trick is applicable to such a large glow engine.

Having said all of this, does anyone know if the RPMs I am obtaining are normal for this engine? The manual states the RPM range as 1,000 to 6,000. However, the manual doesn't specify if this is ground RPMs. The manual recommends a 24x12 or a 26x10 prop of which I have tried a 24x12 (2-blade Menz), 23x10 (3-blade Biela) and a 26x10 (2-blade Mejzlick) all with similar results. Is there a possible obstruction in my carburetor or is the tiny carburetor inadequate for this 99cc engine? The carburetor is about the size of a Super Tiger 90 carburetor. Any help would be very much appreciated. (Additional info: I am running 7.5% nitro with 9% full synthetic oil)

Thanks,
Jeremy
Hi Jeremy
try that with less oil mixture type 6 or 7%
Lars
Linkan2 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 05:15 PM
  #2392  
jeremyilj03
My Feedback: (12)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 62
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

I ran two tanks through the engine today with the fuel containing approximately 7% oil (~6% Nitro). I reached 5,300 RPM on average. My 26x10 Mejzlick resulted in the highest RPMs (~5380). All I can think to do now is take the carburetor off and make sure there are no blockages in the fuel path.

Last edited by jeremyilj03; 01-12-2019 at 01:06 AM.
jeremyilj03 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2019, 04:05 AM
  #2393  
Linkan2
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Haninge, SWEDEN
Posts: 203
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Hi Jeremy
I have 210 flight passes on my 7-35 with 7% oil
Sure I have had problems and those with the carburetor.
If you look back in the history of these engines.
where Maxam writes about the carburetor to 9-99 & 7-77.
I have written about 7-35 when fine carburetor took a fron saito FA120r3.
Lars
Linkan2 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2019, 07:00 AM
  #2394  
Maxam
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (62)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 1,015
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Jeremy, the stock carb on the 9-99 is not capable of delivering fuel. Get an OS FF240-320 carb for the pegasus flat four. Due to cam track wear I now will never run less than 10% oil. You will need to make an adapter for the carb to fit the engine. I hope you have a friend with a good metal lathe. -Tom
Maxam is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 03:25 PM
  #2395  
jeremyilj03
My Feedback: (12)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 62
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default O.S. Carb

Tom,

I just received the new carb that you specified and was surprised to see that it is even smaller than the stock carb in my 999. I take it though that this is nothing to be worried about as you have had luck with it?

- Jeremy
jeremyilj03 is online now  
Reply With Quote

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service