Club Enya
#2226
That is true, George. AFAIK, the IV muffler will still fit the III. But I found it to be an advantage to my OK Models Pilot 30" Cessna 177 Cardinal semi-scale build with inverted 09-III. It puts the exhaust outside the circle.
#2228
About those old 09s and 15s, they do fine on amazingly big props. Peter Chinn found both the 09 and 15 III would run and idle well on a TF 10 x 3 1/2 prop. As a practical matter, the 15 III and IV run great on a 9x4, and the 09 III and IV do well on an 8x4.
The 15 IV is heavier than the 15 III; I assume, as someone said, it's a little more powerful, but I have not done a comparison.
The 19 IV also handles large props very well, "diesel-like" as someone said. I've only tried a 10x4 and it handled that just fine. But my 19 V ran poorly on a 10x4 and was not happy till I put on a 9x4. That seems like the right prop for that engine. I assume the same is true of the later 19s.
Jim
The 15 IV is heavier than the 15 III; I assume, as someone said, it's a little more powerful, but I have not done a comparison.
The 19 IV also handles large props very well, "diesel-like" as someone said. I've only tried a 10x4 and it handled that just fine. But my 19 V ran poorly on a 10x4 and was not happy till I put on a 9x4. That seems like the right prop for that engine. I assume the same is true of the later 19s.
Jim
#2229
They will turn bigger props, but I found a caveat to that. You may have to go to wood props, as the plastic ones have too much inertia. My Enya .09-III TV was difficult to adjust the needle valve with an APC 7x4 prop. I went to wood, and it was a completely different animal. It put out quite a bit of thrust on older Top Flite wood 7x6, IMO give the sport plain bearing Schneurles a run for their money. I haven't tried a wood 8x4 yet. I'm thinking a wood 8x3 would be a good ticket, but I don't know of anyone who still makes such a prop in wood.
#2230
Interesting comments about props. Brodak carries a new version of the Rev-Up 8x3, sometimes. The Rev-Ups seem to come and go from the website. I suppose they make batches periodically and then they sell out, and eventually they do it again.
The old TF 8 x 3 1/2 wood props are not uncommon on ebay. I got a bunch myself in a batch of wood props.
I've flown the MA 8x3 on an Enya 09 IV and it seemed OK, but I wasn't comparing it to wood.
Jim
The old TF 8 x 3 1/2 wood props are not uncommon on ebay. I got a bunch myself in a batch of wood props.
I've flown the MA 8x3 on an Enya 09 IV and it seemed OK, but I wasn't comparing it to wood.
Jim
#2231
Interesting comments about props. Brodak carries a new version of the Rev-Up 8x3, sometimes. The Rev-Ups seem to come and go from the website. I suppose they make batches periodically and then they sell out, and eventually they do it again. The old TF 8 x 3 1/2 wood props are not uncommon on ebay. I got a bunch myself in a batch of wood props. I've flown the MA 8x3 on an Enya 09 IV and it seemed OK, but I wasn't comparing it to wood. Jim
Lesson learned? Sometimes, going to a lighter inertia prop does wonders on a plane engine. OTOH, my Enya 15-III TV's have no problems turning plastic props. Go figure ....
And thanks for pointing out a source for the 8x3 props. If that is wood, I may give it a shot next time I need to order something from Brodak.
Last edited by GallopingGhostler; 08-01-2014 at 11:00 AM.
#2232
They will turn bigger props, but I found a caveat to that. You may have to go to wood props, as the plastic ones have too much inertia. My Enya .09-III TV was difficult to adjust the needle valve with an APC 7x4 prop. I went to wood, and it was a completely different animal. It put out quite a bit of thrust on older Top Flite wood 7x6, IMO give the sport plain bearing Schneurles a run for their money.
An APC 7x4 is a little too light load for the Enya 09, in my experience. Try an APC 7x5 or 7x6 for a better comparison to your wood prop.
The 8x3 might be good for the engine but you'll have to find a plane where a pitch of only 3" will be useful too.
#2233
I think there is a tendency to over-estimate the amount of pitch needed to fly most of our models. The usual rule of thumb seems to be based on the angle of the flat back of the blade, but of course the blades are airfoils that "lift", or produce thrust, at negative angles of attack, when measured from the flat bottom. People often get the impression that with a low pitch prop their plane will reach too low a speed to fly, or at least fly well. But even though there are also losses from slippage and drag on the airframe, still, I have often been surprised by how fast a plane will go on very low pitch.
For example, I flew a Sig Little Extra on an 8x3 prop and it was quite fast. My Sig 4 Star 60 flies very well on a 14x4 prop. Both of these planes could be throttled down to 1/2 throttle or less and still fly. If you do the usual math, an 09 throttled down to, say, 8000 rpm in the air, should not be able to go much more than 24 mph using a 3 inch pitch. Yet it flies well, which should not be possible at such a low speed. I fly my 4 Star throttled well back, maybe around 5000 rpm in the air. Again, it should not be possible.
I don't measure these rpms in the air, so I can't be sure, but I do think people get unnecessarily scared off from low pitch props by a poor rule of thumb.
I see the same thing with RCV engines geared 2:1. They caution that you must use much higher than normal pitches because the rpm is only about 4-5000. Obviously this is true, but by how much? One guy flies his 1/4 scale Nieuport 17 on an RCV 120 using a prop with only 6 inches of pitch. He says he rarely goes above 3/4 throttle and it will fly at 1/2 throttle. This is way less pitch than RCV says is necessary.
So I think there are misconceptions about this. Jim
For example, I flew a Sig Little Extra on an 8x3 prop and it was quite fast. My Sig 4 Star 60 flies very well on a 14x4 prop. Both of these planes could be throttled down to 1/2 throttle or less and still fly. If you do the usual math, an 09 throttled down to, say, 8000 rpm in the air, should not be able to go much more than 24 mph using a 3 inch pitch. Yet it flies well, which should not be possible at such a low speed. I fly my 4 Star throttled well back, maybe around 5000 rpm in the air. Again, it should not be possible.
I don't measure these rpms in the air, so I can't be sure, but I do think people get unnecessarily scared off from low pitch props by a poor rule of thumb.
I see the same thing with RCV engines geared 2:1. They caution that you must use much higher than normal pitches because the rpm is only about 4-5000. Obviously this is true, but by how much? One guy flies his 1/4 scale Nieuport 17 on an RCV 120 using a prop with only 6 inches of pitch. He says he rarely goes above 3/4 throttle and it will fly at 1/2 throttle. This is way less pitch than RCV says is necessary.
So I think there are misconceptions about this. Jim
#2234
That makes a lot of sense, Jim, I have to agree. My use of the greater diameter 8x3 would be for my Sureflite Cessna 180. Having an inch more diameter would provide greater thrust and would allow the Enya .09-III to operate optimally within its power band.
Regarding use of wood props versus plastic, I tried both APC and Masters 7x4 plastic props. Given the extra inertia of the plastic, I had a difficult time getting them to tick over by hand flipping. I had to set the needle richer, and it was finicky. After a while, one gets a little frustrated, figuring there must be a better way.
Then I tried wood props, it ticked over right away. The needle setting was less sensitive. It was easier starting and adjusting. The one caveat I found was per observations by Peter Chin:
http://www.sceptreflight.net/Model%2...-III%20RC.html
Props less than 7x4 are not worth running on the Enya, as they are beyond the power curve. Power falls off at the higher RPM's. I flew using a 7x3 wood prop, it flew very .049 like, with not much power. Wnen I went to a 7x6 prop, it became a totally different airplane, now flying with speed I expected. I would have loved to use an 8x3 on the plane, as I have more prop disk area for thrust. I don't have any wood 8x4 props, otherwise I would have tried them. It is just too bad that there are no wood props with pitch greater than 6 in 7".
Regarding use of wood props versus plastic, I tried both APC and Masters 7x4 plastic props. Given the extra inertia of the plastic, I had a difficult time getting them to tick over by hand flipping. I had to set the needle richer, and it was finicky. After a while, one gets a little frustrated, figuring there must be a better way.
Then I tried wood props, it ticked over right away. The needle setting was less sensitive. It was easier starting and adjusting. The one caveat I found was per observations by Peter Chin:
http://www.sceptreflight.net/Model%2...-III%20RC.html
Props less than 7x4 are not worth running on the Enya, as they are beyond the power curve. Power falls off at the higher RPM's. I flew using a 7x3 wood prop, it flew very .049 like, with not much power. Wnen I went to a 7x6 prop, it became a totally different airplane, now flying with speed I expected. I would have loved to use an 8x3 on the plane, as I have more prop disk area for thrust. I don't have any wood 8x4 props, otherwise I would have tried them. It is just too bad that there are no wood props with pitch greater than 6 in 7".
#2237
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Geraldton, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just scored a 60 2 stroke with some other engines.
This one is completely rebuilt except for crank and crankcase.
What are these engines like?
Only other Enya I have had was an ancient .25 with the bleed hole carb. That engine ran ok.
Lost the muffler though and cant find a replacement so it hasn't run in like 8 years.
This one is completely rebuilt except for crank and crankcase.
What are these engines like?
Only other Enya I have had was an ancient .25 with the bleed hole carb. That engine ran ok.
Lost the muffler though and cant find a replacement so it hasn't run in like 8 years.
#2238
Which 60 do you have? I have the 60 II with a CL crankcase, meaning no holes in the sides of the exhaust port. I also have a 60 III with a G8 carb. The latter is such a classic it has been re-issued by Enya and lots of people here have posted about what a great engine it is for its weight. Then there is the 60X, a whole different animal, and others. So you need to know what you have.
The 60 II and the early 60 III types for RC had holes in the sides of the exhaust for an exhaust baffle. The problem is it weakened the metal. I got a big box of old Enya 60 parts and there were four broken crankcases that all broke where the holes were. One was still intact, and broke on my test stand. Then I found a 60 II CL case on ebay with no holes. Now it is a good engine.
Jim
The 60 II and the early 60 III types for RC had holes in the sides of the exhaust for an exhaust baffle. The problem is it weakened the metal. I got a big box of old Enya 60 parts and there were four broken crankcases that all broke where the holes were. One was still intact, and broke on my test stand. Then I found a 60 II CL case on ebay with no holes. Now it is a good engine.
Jim
#2239
All of the RC 60-II and III had the holes for the exhaust baffle. These were dropped with the introduction of the 60-IIIB but there's a trap. Some of the early 60-IIIB's were built using the RC 60-III crankcase so they look like a 60-III. The only way to tell it's really a IIIB is that it'll only have a single ring instead of the twin rings of the earlier type.
#2240
Yes, I wasn't distinguishing the B; what I have is really a 60IIIB G8 (not all B's had G8 carbs).
The problem with the holes on the exhaust ports was that if you put on a muffler, the muffler strained the exhaust port and it would fail. And we all use mufflers now, so the holes are an accident waiting to happen. Plus you have to cover them up somehow or the muffler is useless anyway.
My 60 II, with a Perry carb, turns a Rev-Up 12x5 at 11,000 rpm, which is about the same as a typical 50-something four stroke. Weight with an old Enya muffler is 17 ozs, so it's a little heavier than the 50+ four stroke. Lengthwise it is shorter, and I like the sound, so it will be useful. Mine will go into an old VK Navajo, which is a nice way to use an engine like this.
My IIIB is slightly heavier and I will use my Bisson strap-on muffler. Total weight is about 18.5 ozs, but it will have much more power than the II. Haven't run it up yet. Jim
The problem with the holes on the exhaust ports was that if you put on a muffler, the muffler strained the exhaust port and it would fail. And we all use mufflers now, so the holes are an accident waiting to happen. Plus you have to cover them up somehow or the muffler is useless anyway.
My 60 II, with a Perry carb, turns a Rev-Up 12x5 at 11,000 rpm, which is about the same as a typical 50-something four stroke. Weight with an old Enya muffler is 17 ozs, so it's a little heavier than the 50+ four stroke. Lengthwise it is shorter, and I like the sound, so it will be useful. Mine will go into an old VK Navajo, which is a nice way to use an engine like this.
My IIIB is slightly heavier and I will use my Bisson strap-on muffler. Total weight is about 18.5 ozs, but it will have much more power than the II. Haven't run it up yet. Jim
#2241
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Geraldton, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I bought out a friend who is going from glow to electric so I have 16 engines on the way.
The Enya is in that lot.
Will try to figure out which one it is when it gets here and let you know.
The Enya is in that lot.
Will try to figure out which one it is when it gets here and let you know.
#2244
I just picked up a first model 7032 60 and have started to clean it up. The rings are still good and stuck after 3 days in Hoppe # 9 gun cleaner and 3 more days in the anti-freeze crock pot. If I catch the end of the ring with the tip of an exacto blade and give a push there is no hint of movement. It's the 2 ring piston.
I know I can probably break them out, but I don't want to damage the piston grooves. Any other ring removal options out there? I haven't tried the oven.
Jim
I know I can probably break them out, but I don't want to damage the piston grooves. Any other ring removal options out there? I haven't tried the oven.
Jim
#2245
All I can suggest is more heat...the oven might do it. The crock pot can't get as hot. You could also try PB Blaster overnight but I don't know if it will do any better than the Hoppe cleaner.
#2247
I'd be getting it to turn over and draw fuel and run the thing. Sometimes stuck rings will loosen up after running some fuel through it. That doesn't always work but it might. That way you get good heat where it's needed and plenty of lube to keep things loose. That is if you run it really rich initially.
#2248
I just picked up a first model 7032 60 and have started to clean it up. The rings are still good and stuck after 3 days in Hoppe # 9 gun cleaner and 3 more days in the anti-freeze crock pot. If I catch the end of the ring with the tip of an exacto blade and give a push there is no hint of movement. It's the 2 ring piston.
I know I can probably break them out, but I don't want to damage the piston grooves. Any other ring removal options out there? I haven't tried the oven.
Jim
I know I can probably break them out, but I don't want to damage the piston grooves. Any other ring removal options out there? I haven't tried the oven.
Jim
George
Last edited by gcb; 09-09-2014 at 05:15 PM.
#2249
Senior Member
I just picked up a first model 7032 60 and have started to clean it up. The rings are still good and stuck after 3 days in Hoppe # 9 gun cleaner and 3 more days in the anti-freeze crock pot. If I catch the end of the ring with the tip of an exacto blade and give a push there is no hint of movement. It's the 2 ring piston.
I know I can probably break them out, but I don't want to damage the piston grooves. Any other ring removal options out there? I haven't tried the oven.
Jim
I know I can probably break them out, but I don't want to damage the piston grooves. Any other ring removal options out there? I haven't tried the oven.
Jim
#2250
Thanks for all the suggestions. I had already taken the engine apart and dunked the parts separately. The rod is free on the pin, and I've cleaned the exterior of the piston with a used scotchbrite pad. It had obviously been run for a while with stuck rings because the was a LOT of burned on blow-by below the rings.
I haven't had a chance to do anything with it since the initial post - just one more day in the anti-freeze. I'll first give it a go with the heat gun, then switch to the acetone.
The rest of the parts have cleaned up pretty well. The case finish is different from what I have ever seen on an Enya; it's very shiny, almost chrome-like. No sign it had ever been polished or messed with. That is usually pretty easy to see in the crevices and on the corners. It is the first version 60 7032.
Jim
I haven't had a chance to do anything with it since the initial post - just one more day in the anti-freeze. I'll first give it a go with the heat gun, then switch to the acetone.
The rest of the parts have cleaned up pretty well. The case finish is different from what I have ever seen on an Enya; it's very shiny, almost chrome-like. No sign it had ever been polished or messed with. That is usually pretty easy to see in the crevices and on the corners. It is the first version 60 7032.
Jim