BJ64

Neh - a Pyffon is only a pretend snake

BJ

SrTelemaster150

We are talking about CDI conversions, not glow ignition engines.

rm1963

I picked up a Saito FA65 at a garage sale, put a few drops of oil in the intake, down the pushrods,
and in the backcover vent. let set a while; if turns smooth and has compression.
I'm thinking of trying to start it, or should I or tear it down first.
Are these engines worth rebuilding, and are usable in today's world.

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

M, the Saito .65 is a fine engine, I'd say run it and if it turns a 13x6 at 9,700 or better it's a good one. Be careful that you didn't put enough oil down the carb to hydrolock it. Maybe ought to remove the glow plug and turn it upside down to make sure.

spaceworm

No, They are worthless. Just send it to me, I will pay the postage, And I will properly dispose of it.

PS, Don't listen to Hobbsy, but he does know what he is talking about.
Sincerely, Richard
Club Saito #635; Saito 56, 100, 120abc, 130T, 180

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Hey Richard, do you still have that 1.30? That's another great engine.

Charley

My Feedback: (2)

Glow or CDI, the engine needs to be lubed. I think a good point is that some of the lube carries heat out the exhaust. Seems to me it's better to have too much than too little oil.

CR

Quikturn

My Feedback: (12)

I still use a Saito 65 on my Kyosho P-40. It's on the heavy side for it displacement but it's a great running engine. It has the same power as a Saito 62 which I believe replaced it. Some airplanes balance better with heavier engines up front. Run it and enjoy it!

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

http://sceptreflight.net/Model%20Eng...20FA-130T.html

Here is Clarence Lee's test of the 1.30. interestingly the 1.30 a rather high 12.8 to 1 compression ratio.

blw

My Feedback: (3)

Dave- it was the Cruise-o-matic because it was a 3 speed. It's the only automatic he ever owned until he restored a suicide door Lincoln. My S-2000 is quicker accelerating to 130/140 mph but that Volvo would just keep accelerating past that. We never knew how fast it would go but nobody was going to catch it. Atlanta had a big race track at the time called the I-285 Perimeter. It was paved all the way around Atlanta, but not open yet. People would drive around the on ramp blockades at night and race wide open until tired of it. No rules, no traffic, no police, and no street lights.

That is funny about the Vega. I remember the 327/350 craze. That little car wasn't much more than a Coke can in the way of framework. No frame whatsoever with the Unibody build. Mine never burned oil, but the rubber timing belt was always off. I lived at the bottom of a slight hill. Every morning I would chug up the hill, stop, turn the distributor cap until it stopped pinging, and then drive it. I got to where I could retime it with a quick adjustment and leave the screw set snug, not tight on the cap.

Charley

My Feedback: (2)

Cruise-O-Matic was a Ford-marketed Borg-Warner tranny. Vega originally had a 2-spd Powerglide auto; a 3-spd stick & a 4-spd stick made by Opel. Later, a US-made 4-spd was std, along with a 3-spd Turbo Hydro automatic. I could tell you a story about a '74 Vega I bought on spec.

CR

spaceworm

Thank you Dave. Yes I still have it, and plan to fly it on a Sig 1/4 Spacewalker ll this spring, or sooner if I can fit skis to it. I had an invite from one of my VA clubs to fly Sunday as it is supposed to be 65 degrees F. We may hit the upper teens Sunday with snow here in CT.

Very best regards to You and Yours.

Richard

BJ64

Do those short stubby wings create enough lift?

BJ

Cougar429

My Feedback: (3)

Anything will fly with enough power. Just look to the F4 Phantom for a good example.

As for the Vagrant, that alloy engine never seemed to last long here. Funny thing, the same was true of the 2.6 Mits motor. Reliable in the States, but up in Canada burned more oil than gas. You could always tell what engine the Minivan had just watching the pipe.

Anyone remember the V8 Monza? Same basic frame as the Vagrant, (a LOT of stamped pieces all bolted together) but with all that weight the front fenders had a tendency to want to meet in the middle. I remember about the only way to set camber was a tow strap between the bottom ball joints to pull everything as close together before tightening all the bolts again. Unfortunately that did nothing about the fact the hood was now wedged shut!

I'll agree about the 65. If postage is less, send that worthless motor to me. I'll drop it in the box next to mine.

spaceworm

Oh yeah, that is the clipped wing racing variant. With the Saito FA-130t it really rips. Lands a little hot though, have to come in on mains and bleed of speed 'til the tail drops. I have plug-in wing extensions for sport flying.

Richard

Rudolph Hart

I think the 62 outperforms the old 65 as does the newer 82 compared to the old 91.It's like when you get older you want things to stay the same but they hardly ever do.

Rudolph Hart

Start it and see what happens.

BJ64

More like a brick then, huh?

BJ

spaceworm

Some things get smaller and don't perform as good

SrTelemaster150

So, the methanol engine of similar displacement & design will flow about 40% more fuel/lube mix than the gas engine.

To keep things simple lets say that:

The gas engine uses 100oz of 5% lube mix fuel in 100 minutes of running. 95oz of gas, 5oz of oil.

The CDI Methanol engine uses 140oz of lube mix fuel in 100 minutes of run time. It is also running much cooler than the gas engine, about 60° F cooler in my experiments. 133oz of methanol, 7oz of oil.

You're telling me that 95oz of gasoline itself has more lubrication properties than the additional 2oz of oil & will protect an engine better that is running 60° F hotter & more prone to detonation due to the lower octane?

As far as the detonation issue?

A gas engine will produce about 98% of peak HP @ 12.8:1 A/F ratio that it produces @ maximum 14:1 A/F ratio. Altough I don't know the exact A/F ratios for methanol, it will make the same peak RPM for a rather broad range of HSN setting suggesting a likewise scenerio. Methanol is also much higher in relative octane than gasoline so it is even less prone to detonation when set on the rich side of peak power.

Unlike CDI, W/GI, as soon as the engine leans out, the ignition timeing advances. W/GI there is a double whammy as far as detonation that doesn't exist for CDI.

Rudolph Hart

Listen pal i'm used to writing stupid funny and you are used to writing rude? if you don't stop it soon i'm going straight out the shed and handprop the big 220 single into life...your abcdef 180 will feel the vibrations all the way over there and be cringing in the cupboard,as it damn well should cheers pal

SrTelemaster150

If I could afford it right now, I'd purchase an FA-220, raise the CR to about 13:1 & convert it to CDI & run it on 30% nitro. Your GI FA-220 would run & hide behind the shed once I fired it up!

spaceworm

Very Interesting, but I have forgotten what this is all about. Is it Glow ignition vs CDI? Thanks.

Sincerely, Richard
Club Saito #635; Saito 56, 100, 120abc, 130T, 180

acdii

EGO's! LOL



I'll know when OF fires up his 220, there will be a disturbance in the Force!

SrTelemaster150

The original post was about reduced lube requirements for CDI (compared to GI) due to stable igntion timing & reduced likelyhood of detonation.