Register

If this is your first visit, please click the Sign Up now button to begin the process of creating your account so you can begin posting on our forums! The Sign Up process will only take up about a minute of two of your time.

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 166

  1. #101
    drac1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Romaine, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    714
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by blw View Post
    Bearings take stresses from a lot of places. Incorrect and crooked installations. (using an arbor press or drill press can fix that) Inner race size mismatch either over sized or under sized to the crankshaft after normal engine heating is a top cause. Dirt and engine debris are hard on bearings.

    A lot of metal passes through engines (and bearings) during its lifetime from wear.
    I have always mixed my own fuel and used the same mixing/filtering system from my first YS 140 14 years ago to now.

    The only thing that has changed is the engine size and reduced oil content on my cdi's. This is what is making me think that it is the extra load on the bearing, reduced oil or a combination of both.
    There is no such thing as too much power.

  2. #102
    MTK's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Whippany, NJ
    Posts
    4,762
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by drac1 View Post
    I don't call 1 bearing failure in 18 years a constant ill.

    As for comparing the 175 to the 33, you have to remember the 33 is specifically designed to run on 50:1. The YS cdi's are using bearings that are from designs originally using 20% oil. The low oil may not be the problem. It is just my observation.

    What size rear bearing is in the 33. I wouldn't be surprised if it is bigger.

    Even though the 33 may spin the same size prop and is cheaper to run, I feel overall the YS is still a better pattern engine.

    Cost isn't everything.
    I see that the YS propaganda machine has you snookered too. My point is that lower cost is just one thing favoring the 33. There are also other issues such as no maintenance over years not just 100 flights. Reliability is much better and I compare to friends that use YS 175 and smaller.

    The 185 and 200 may be different cats entirely...we'll just have to wait and see
    Regards,
    MattK
    (Rcmaster199@aol.com)

  3. #103
    drac1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Romaine, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    714
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by MTK View Post
    I see that the YS propaganda machine has you snookered too. My point is that lower cost is just one thing favoring the 33. There are also other issues such as no maintenance over years not just 100 flights. Reliability is much better and I compare to friends that use YS 175 and smaller.

    The 185 and 200 may be different cats entirely...we'll just have to wait and see
    You call having success with YS's propaganda. So by your own
    theory, you are sprouting the GT33 propaganda which apparently has you snookered as well.
    You don't see any GT33's in the top level of pattern. I doubt that you will. I have nothing against the GT. I have one myself. But a future in pattern is doubtfull.
    Also as this is a thread about YS's, the GT33 debate belongs elsewhere.
    There is no such thing as too much power.

  4. #104
    MTK's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Whippany, NJ
    Posts
    4,762
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by drac1 View Post
    You call having success with YS's propaganda. So by your own
    theory, you are sprouting the GT33 propaganda which apparently has you snookered as well.
    You don't see any GT33's in the top level of pattern. I doubt that you will. I have nothing against the GT. I have one myself. But a future in pattern is doubtfull.
    Also as this is a thread about YS's, the GT33 debate belongs elsewhere.
    Engine came out 3 years ago, right in the middle of the electric craze. The fact that it has all the right stuff for Pattern would have become obvious 10 years ago when everyone was using only glow, split 50:50 between 2 and 4 stroke. As far as the future, bipes are power hungry and I think you would be surprised how well one of them will fly with this particular 2 stroke.

    As far as the underlying hint of OS support....hardly... I buy all my own stuff at Tower discount pricing when I can get it, and figure out how to use it. Then I report on same, good, bad and ugly, here on RCU....No factory tuning here. Nobody gives me anything..... Propaganda? nobody put me up to developing a perfectly fine sport engine into a even finer Pattern engine when piped. I figured my 45 years in the hobby might be useful to others, so why not report findings?.

    I agree on only one thing,,,,talk of the 2 stroke in this thread is not right, but thanks to the moderator for obliging 2 posts on this. All I have to say on this subject
    Last edited by MTK; 12-04-2013 at 04:37 PM.
    Regards,
    MattK
    (Rcmaster199@aol.com)

  5. #105

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    ToowoombaQLD, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    816
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by drac1 View Post
    bogbeagle, I tend to agree with that theory. The bearing has been ok on engines up the the DZ160, but imo the bearing is being overloaded on the 170/175.
    Hard to say Drac1,

    cage failures aren't really caused by radial loadings or lubrication issues, the balls and races are usually the victim in those situations. After reading around I'd place my money on a torsional vibration issue ie the aceleration and deceleration of the cranksaft as it rotates fatiging the bearing cage.

    This is an interesting read, but they are dealing with roller bearings, not the ball bearings we use.
    http://reliability.com/industry/articles/article30.pdf

  6. #106
    Moderator blw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Opelika, AL
    Posts
    8,550
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    What would cause accel-decel twice (or more) per rotation as in the article?
    The ultimate responsibility of pilots is to fulfill the dreams of the countless millions who can only stare skyward...and wish.

    "It's a new day for Auburn" - Gus Malzahn

  7. #107

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    ToowoombaQLD, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    816
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by blw View Post
    What would cause accel-decel twice (or more) per rotation as in the article?
    The article was fairly clear for that specific case, the elasticity of the coupling allowed torsonal oscilations to build up at certain frequencies. It would be an interesting excercise to monitor the instantaneous angular velocity of the crankshaft of the DZ170's and up to see if anything funnny is happening although it's not like broken cages are being reported worldwide like their pump issue was, and I've only had one in 4 years.

    Among many things, the engine is driving the prop for only 1/4 the time (power stoke), the remaining time the prop (flywheel) is driving the engine and slowing down before getting another kick in the pants. The cranksahft is also just a very stiff torsion spring joining the crank disk to the propdriver which can set up funny oscilations which is one reason why car engines have harmonic balancers, the damp the oscilations.

    Getting way off topic but sort of interesting none-the-less....

    Here's my last three rear bearings over the past 4 years, "move on nothing to see here"
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	P1300077.JPG 
Views:	41 
Size:	389.6 KB 
ID:	1944871  
    Last edited by bjr_93tz; 12-04-2013 at 10:05 PM.

  8. #108
    drac1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Romaine, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    714
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by MTK View Post
    Engine came out 3 years ago, right in the middle of the electric craze. The fact that it has all the right stuff for Pattern would have become obvious 10 years ago when everyone was using only glow, split 50:50 between 2 and 4 stroke. As far as the future, bipes are power hungry and I think you would be surprised how well one of them will fly with this particular 2 stroke.

    As far as the underlying hint of OS support....hardly... I buy all my own stuff at Tower discount pricing when I can get it, and figure out how to use it. Then I report on same, good, bad and ugly, here on RCU....No factory tuning here. Nobody gives me anything..... Propaganda? nobody put me up to developing a perfectly fine sport engine into a even finer Pattern engine when piped. I figured my 45 years in the hobby might be useful to others, so why not report findings?.

    I agree on only one thing,,,,talk of the 2 stroke in this thread is not right, but thanks to the moderator for obliging 2 posts on this. All I have to say on this subject
    I agree. 10 years ago it may have been a different story with the GT33 in pattern. But alas it is not 10 years ago. 2 strokes were on the decline even then as pattern engines and now with the electric progress, there are less and less people using IC engines. We are in the minority.

    I have no doubt about the performance of the 33 and i'm sure it would make a great engine for pattern. But in reality i just don't see it has a future at the top. That's not saying it wouldn't being successful if it had the following that YS's and electrics have.

    OS support?? I didn't hint at anything of the sort and i didn't say that anyone put you up to developing the GT. My comments were no different than the ones you made to me. So if my passion for YS's is propaganda, then you are guilty of the same with the OS. I haven't been in the hobby as long as you, but i have been using YS 4 strokes for 14 years and have gained alot of experience with them. Like you if my experience is helpful to others, then why not report it? 99% of what i know about YS's is from my own experiences with very little useful advice from elsewhere.


    I definitely don't get anything for free. Never have. Everything i get i buy myself.

    I am following your development of the GT33 and it prompted me to buy one. My intent was to put it in no.3 Valiant for experimenting, but with the recent demise of no.1 (due to battery failure) i will now be fitting a YS again.
    There is no such thing as too much power.

  9. #109
    drac1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Romaine, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    714
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by bjr_93tz View Post
    Hard to say Drac1,

    cage failures aren't really caused by radial loadings or lubrication issues, the balls and races are usually the victim in those situations. After reading around I'd place my money on a torsional vibration issue ie the aceleration and deceleration of the cranksaft as it rotates fatiging the bearing cage.

    This is an interesting read, but they are dealing with roller bearings, not the ball bearings we use.
    http://reliability.com/industry/articles/article30.pdf
    One cause of cage failure is lack of lubrication. Not saying that IS the cause in this case, but i am a bit suspicious it may be a contributing factor.

    I can't really see acceleration/deceleration being the cause. Smooth and steady throttle management is what we do, so i think that is an unlikely cause in this case. If it was, i think it would show up in the 160 as well.

    I am still going with the theory that the larger diameter props are the main contributing factor.
    There is no such thing as too much power.

  10. #110

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    ToowoombaQLD, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    816
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by drac1 View Post
    I can't really see acceleration/deceleration being the cause. Smooth and steady throttle management is what we do, so i think that is an unlikely cause in this case. .
    I mean the speeding up and slowing down the crank does during each revolution either through the typical 4-stroke cycle or wierd rotational harmonics, not the very slow (by comparison) changes in average crank speed that we measure as RPM. Anyone who used to play records is familiar with the phenomenom and it's refered to as wow and flutter.

    I'd never bet the farm on it but it is a mechanism of cage failure.

  11. #111
    drac1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Romaine, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    714
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by bjr_93tz View Post
    I mean the speeding up and slowing down the crank does during each revolution either through the typical 4-stroke cycle or wierd rotational harmonics, not the very slow (by comparison) changes in average crank speed that we measure as RPM. Anyone who used to play records is familiar with the phenomenom and it's refered to as wow and flutter.

    I'd never bet the farm on it but it is a mechanism of cage failure.
    Ahh, ok.

    That is still the same as happens in the 160, but bearings weren't a problem.
    Hence why I still think the larger props have to have something to do with it.
    It sounds like I've nearly convinced myself. Lol.
    Last edited by drac1; 12-06-2013 at 05:22 AM.
    There is no such thing as too much power.

  12. #112

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Victoria, MN
    Posts
    3,889
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    I think he is saying that the 170-175 have more power; therefore, the slowing/accelerating is more abrupt.
    If you can\'\'\'\'t dazzle em with brilliance,baffle em with BS

  13. #113
    drac1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Romaine, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    714
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    I don't really think that would cause the cage to fail. My opinion of course.

    I'm still learning toward the larger prop load and low oil as a contributing factor.

    It would be interesting to hear from someone using 20% oil what there bearing condition is after 150 Flights.
    There is no such thing as too much power.

  14. #114

    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Apo, AP
    Posts
    205
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    dz 160 cdi conversion

    Hey any of you guys ever convert the 160 to ignition? I called CH this morning and he says he has everything needed for about $105.00. I have 2 160's that I would like to
    convert. If anyone has any info on how this is accomplished please chime in. I did see one on youtube and it ran very good.

    thanks

  15. #115
    drac1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Romaine, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    714
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by bigbuster View Post
    Hey any of you guys ever convert the 160 to ignition? I called CH this morning and he says he has everything needed for about $105.00. I have 2 160's that I would like to
    convert. If anyone has any info on how this is accomplished please chime in. I did see one on youtube and it ran very good.

    thanks
    A 160 conversion has been on my to do list for awhile. My plan is to use the 170 backplate, but I just need to make sure it fits the 160 case. I have parts, just need to take some measurements. If that is ok I will mill plug cap clearance in the 160 head.
    I'll measure up when I get home from work next week.
    There is no such thing as too much power.

  16. #116

    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Apo, AP
    Posts
    205
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by drac1 View Post
    A 160 conversion has been on my to do list for awhile. My plan is to use the 170 backplate, but I just need to make sure it fits the 160 case. I have parts, just need to take some measurements. If that is ok I will mill plug cap clearance in the 160 head.
    I'll measure up when I get home from work next week.
    The 160 comes in 2 different housings and and one will take the 170 back plate and the other will not. I think i could use the ch ignition and accomplish the same things. Like I said the
    one on youtube works great. Let me know what you are doing and i will do the same.

  17. #117
    drac1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Romaine, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    714
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by bigbuster View Post
    The 160 comes in 2 different housings and and one will take the 170 back plate and the other will not. I think i could use the ch ignition and accomplish the same things. Like I said the
    one on youtube works great. Let me know what you are doing and i will do the same.
    2 different housings. That's strange. What is the difference?

    If I'm thinking correctly, that would mean the bore in the back of the crankcase would be different diameters. That would also mean there would have to be 2 different backplates for the 160.
    There is no such thing as too much power.

  18. #118

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Victoria, MN
    Posts
    3,889
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by bigbuster View Post
    Hey any of you guys ever convert the 160 to ignition? I called CH this morning and he says he has everything needed for about $105.00. I have 2 160's that I would like to
    convert. If anyone has any info on how this is accomplished please chime in. I did see one on youtube and it ran very good.

    thanks
    C&H ignition is fantastic.. Would run perfect!
    He has all the right hardware to make a very clean install ( the pickup sensor ect) the only part that would need clarification is the placement.....

    Would you be able to use a nose ring after placement? That would be one question that may be important to some...

    How would you use a Backplate YS version?? Wouldn't you have to drill a hole on the crank end, to fit a magnet (trigger) ?????

    Not sure how YS does it on the "conversion kits" or there engines that are shipped with it...
    If you can\'\'\'\'t dazzle em with brilliance,baffle em with BS

  19. #119
    drac1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Romaine, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    714
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by kochj View Post
    C&H ignition is fantastic.. Would run perfect!
    He has all the right hardware to make a very clean install ( the pickup sensor ect) the only part that would need clarification is the placement.....

    Would you be able to use a nose ring after placement? That would be one question that may be important to some...

    How would you use a Backplate YS version?? Wouldn't you have to drill a hole on the crank end, to fit a magnet (trigger) ?????

    Not sure how YS does it on the "conversion kits" or there engines that are shipped with it...
    The conversion kits use the same parts as the factory versions.

    The trigger is in the rotary valve which is part of the backplate assembly. It comes pre assembled ready to bolt straight in.

    Fitting a pick up to the front would make it difficult to use a nose ring. You would have to custom make one.
    Last edited by drac1; 12-12-2013 at 12:50 PM.
    There is no such thing as too much power.

  20. #120
    drac1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Romaine, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    714
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    I have just checked and the 170/175cdi backplate is 0.4mm bigger diameter than the 160, so i have 2 options.

    1. Bore the 160 case out to accept the cdi backplate.
    2. Turn the 170 backplate down to fit the 160 crankcase.

    It will be easier to set up the backplate and turn it down, than to set up the crankcase to bore it out. Also i think it will be better to leave the 160 as a standard case.

    As i have a backplate i replaced 'cause it had a slight miss, i will turn this down for the trial. Mill the cap clearance in the head and should be good to go.
    There is no such thing as too much power.

  21. #121

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    St. Cloud, FL
    Posts
    463
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Hello, All.. I posted this in the YS manufacturers support forum yesterday, but have had no responses, so I thought I should post it here where all the YS Gurus can see it and hopefully chime in..

    I have a YS FZ 140 S that I was flying, and suddenly I heard a, Shall we say "Abnormal sound" then the engine immediately stopped. After a safe landing, and getting the plane home and upon dis-assembly I found that the exhaust valve had snapped off of the valve stem, causing catastrophic Cylinder head damage. upon further examination of the engine, the only other damage was to the top of the Piston. there was no damage to the cylinder wall, it is still completely smooth! I have another complete head assy, so my question is will I have any problems running this engine with the Piston damage that it received? there is no obvious high spots, or rough spots or catches at all. all the pits seem to be pretty shallow, probably less than 1/64th of an inch (guessing depth, but very shallow none the less)..

    Check out the pics and let me know what you think! remember, the pictures look much worse than they look and feel, in person!

    One of the local flyers says that he thinks that the dents would cause "Hot Spots" that could lead to potential problems and possibly cause more damage to the rest of the engine, beyond the dents in the piston crown! What are your thoughts?

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	YS FZ 140 S piston a.jpg 
Views:	38 
Size:	190.8 KB 
ID:	1968326Click image for larger version. 

Name:	YS FZ 140 S piston B.jpg 
Views:	38 
Size:	224.2 KB 
ID:	1968327

    Thank you in advance for any help / info you might be able to supply..

    Craig..
    Ultra Sport Brotherhood #10
    Revver Bro #263
    Tiger Club #26

  22. #122

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    York, UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    1,222
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    This is what I would do.

    Polish out the dents, as best you can.

    Check the piston/rod etc for cracks.

    Re-assemble it and use it.


    Do you know why it dropped a valve?

  23. #123
    drac1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Romaine, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    714
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    The dents shouldn't affect how the engine runs. I would carefully rub a file across the top of the piston to knock off the high spots. Fit the new head and run the engine.
    I would guess the valve spring broke first allowing the valve to drop into the cylinder.
    There is no such thing as too much power.

  24. #124

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    St. Cloud, FL
    Posts
    463
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    BogBeagle and Drac1,

    Thank you for the quick reply and ideas.. If you take a close look at the Piston, you will notice that the outer edge of the piston is raised about 1-2 mm higher than the center of the piston, so No filing here, could use some wet or dry sand paper, to smooth it out more.. I didn't really want to take the engine apart, but it makes sense to check the on rod and crank, so I will do that..

    as far as the valve, it actually broke right at the base of the valve, the stem itself was still where it was supposed to be, everything was in place, except the valve face! Very strange.. I don't have the valve face anymore, but I do still have the stem, I will post a pic..

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Cylinder head A.jpg 
Views:	32 
Size:	246.6 KB 
ID:	1968328Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Valve stem a.jpg 
Views:	27 
Size:	117.1 KB 
ID:	1968329Click image for larger version. 

Name:	valve stem view B.jpg 
Views:	28 
Size:	94.0 KB 
ID:	1968330

    Craig..
    Ultra Sport Brotherhood #10
    Revver Bro #263
    Tiger Club #26

  25. #125
    drac1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Romaine, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    714
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    As long as there are no sharp raised edges it should be ok. Just polish it as next you can.
    There is no such thing as too much power.


Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:11 PM.

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.