Konrad

Back on a philosophical note. The loss of the founder in any business can be very challenging. For example all we have to look at is what happened to Apple computers when the MBAs pushed Steve Jobs out. Then within months of his return the company turned around from being within 90 days of bankruptcy to being on top as measured by market valuation.

As for Duke I never got the feeling that the R/C engine took a back seat to any engine type. He spent a lot of energy designing carbs that worked and worked great (if you bothered to read the manual). His flag ship engine the Fox 1.20 twin was never offered as a C/L engine. True he was one of the few that build C/L specific engines, the Fox 35 stunt and many models of the 36 combat. And he made and marketed a lot of C/L support equipment. But in my talks both engine types were well discussed.

All the best,

Konrad

Konrad

I loved the Eagle I, but it never was a power house even in its day. I think any of the Super Tigers 60 of the day could out perform it. Even my non PDP non pumped K&B 60 could out run it. I don't want to set false expectations. It was and is a great light sport 60.

w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

A 60 is/was my limit on Control line planes. The line pull is too great on sizes above a 60. Maybe that is why there was never a 120 control line engine?

Konrad

Can you imagine the work out! There would be no doubt as to calling this hobby a sport.
But Duke made the 1.20 in fact it was what was to become the basses for the Eagle II through IV all rather heavy for C/L but great R/C sport engines.
My point is Duke loved most of his engines, be then C/L of R/C.

controlliner

It's a Christmas present to me.

controlliner

I really want it for a slow flyer swinging a big stick . You know just for Sunday flying in a lawnchair.

Konrad

See if you can get it assigned as a treat for your Halloween bag

All the best,

Konrad

You probably already know this. But that baffle tends to cause detonation (hot spots) if run too slow at load. The schnuerle ported engines actually have better low speed performance potential. As much as it pains me to say this in the light weight low rpm class of 10cc engine the OS FP might be a better engine.

Ok, where the bar of soap to wash out my mouth[:@]

All the best,

Konrad

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

My Eagle .60 was so slow turning that I couldn't get my Kaos 60 (over seven lbs.) off of our grassy field on a hot summer day using any prop less than an 11x8. She'd run around mowing the grass while spinning an 11x7, but no takeoff. However, once airborne, she flew like a model Diesel. That is, you could pull into a loop and the engine would keep on running at the same speed. No sag, no slowing down. Just like a McCoy .09 Diesel that I used to fly in control line.


Ed Cregger

jessiej

Any body know how much of Fox mfg. Co.s' business is model engines as opposed to other products?

jess

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

I don't know, but I doubt if model engines is anywhere close to what they earn making government items.


Ed Cregger

earlwb

probably 5% or thereabouts.
their government contracts have been quite successful.

hsukaria

So who is running the ship at Fox nowadays? Has there been any new glow engine development recently? I know they have newer gas engines, but that is way beyond my price range. I heard from this forum that Fox has acquired CNC machining, so that makes me think that they have a lot of potential to do new work on glow engines. They definitely have the legacy and knowhow.

cutaway

Variation on existing designs. ex. the ABC and ceramic P/L for the stunt .35. The ceramic P/L stunt .60 looks to be fairly new design.

The thing I've always liked about Fox is they don't "fix it" if it isn't broke. Designs don't change arbitrarily just for the sake of cosmetics.

w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

http://www.foxmanufacturing.com/inde..._page=about_us

Ralph Fox is the step son of Duke. he is more or less the oldest of the originals in charge since 1998 but he wasn't always at the factory as he worked on Wall Street for some years.

Fox has been blessed with talented and dedicated employees who've continued to improve the older models and bring new hobby engines into production. A lot of you have met Charles Thacker, our plant manager, and Harold Wille, the lead salesman, at the air shows. When you call in you've spoken to Sharon Shawkey, our office manager. (How many great grandmothers can tell you how to re-shim your engine?)

"To keep up with current technology and production, I've bought new computer-numerically controlled mills and lathes to ensure the highest quality on all our products. As well as our big new Haas CNC machines, we've found continued work for our 19 automatic screw machines. We do a fair amount of outside contract work making precision military parts, parachute rings, and oil rig components. You name it, we can make it! We like to say, "We can make anything!"

earlwb

Well technically, the 2 cycle glow engine has not changed since the early 1980's. So the FOX engines are still quite contemporary.
Another good example of a engine design that hasn't changed for many years now is the Super Tigre brand too. I do not remember them coming out with anything "new" in a long time either. I used to fly a biplane with a beat up old Super Tigre G51 on it for years, that my best friend gave me, as he was tired of it. I eventually sold it to someone else.

All one can do is maybe change the port timing a little for different purposes like with or without a tuned pipe, or to turn a larger prop more slowly to help reduce noise levels. Now some companies are notorious for changing the outward appearance almost every year to make a engine look new, so that they have some marketing advantages in sales. As far as I can tell, except for cosmetic changes, the engine manufacturers only made changes to make it more inexpensive to manufacturer a engine or to improve a deficiency of some sort.
Fox has done this too, like with the Eagle II, III, and IV engines. they changed the design to improve it and make it easier to manufacturer (fewer machining steps, or better more accurate ways to machine it). Fox did change the carb design a few times, from the older designs they had too.

One has to watch out as some companies come out with new engine designs, seemingly, every year. But in reality they haven't really done anything, just change the cosmetic appearance mostly. the basic design parameters for a 2 cycle glow Schnuerle ported engine has been pretty much set in stone since the early 1980's. They really haven't changed anything since then and nothing revolutionary has come out since then either. So the engine changes is primarily marketing driven. They come out with something new, stop making parts for the older version, and start forcing people to buy the new version instead.

The only thing I would like to see is for FOX to bring out those quiet mufflers again. I miss those nowadays.

it would be fantastic if Fox could have come up some 4 cycle engine designs of some sort. i could see something rather refreshing like a rotary valve 4 cycle engine or rotating sleeve design, I sorta like those myself. But I'll settle for their new small gasoline ignition engines, the .50 is a good start.

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

earlwb said, "But I'll settle for their new small gasoline ignition engines, the .50 is a good start."


Hear! Hear!

I agree wholeheartedly, Earl.


Ed Cregger

earlwb

I saw someone that had a Fox .15 ignition conversion on Ebay. A classic old style conversion using ignition points.
I wonder what prop and how many RPMs it would turn. Say a 9x4 at 7,000 rpms maybe?
I am still trying to decide whether to bid on it or not.

http://img.inkfrog.com/click_enlarge...&aid=908265631

Sport_Pilot

The fact they bought new CNC machines doesn't mean they were not using them before. They have had them since the 70's or so, but they initially did not use them on the older designs. In fact I have heard that there first CNC machines were used for their contract work, not model engines.

Cougar429

My Feedback: (3)

I finally had the chance today to test out the motor with the adapter graciously supplied by Hobbsy and an OS carb. I had to modify the barrel retainer and boss on the carb body to clear the head, but everything works fine. I also had to fab a new remote HS needle bracket as none had the proper bolt spacing.

Had to use the stock muffler for now as I have a block of 7075, but have not had a chance to mill the adapter yet.

Runup was a bit rough at first. Had fuel burping out the carb with no high speed power at all. Only realized after it quit I had failed to remove the exhaust cap. That's what I get for having both the same colour!

Once I removed that it was a question of needle settings. Took some work, but the engine provides lots of power with only slight midrange richness. Unfortunately I was alone and had no way to hold the plane and tach at the same time.

At least now I can have a baseline to use when I finally mount the OS muffler. One change at a time is the best as you can check each mod for performance.

carddfann

I wonder how long Fox will keep up the Spring sale. Till this coming Spring??

earlwb

Maybe longer. They could stop advertising it though, or change it to the XMAS or Holiday sale or something too.
They had for several years sent out a flyer with anything you bought from them showing something like 40% off all the engines.
So they had a unadvertised sale for a long time going on anyway.

Konrad

What is the carb model or more to the point its choke area (throat size)? Is it possible to tune the midrange of this carb (the Fox Mk X offers this ability)?
As you said you have access to a mill, I have to ask why you didn't mill the base of the adapter about 7° to allow the carb to slant forward a bit for clearance. Fox did this a lot but angled the carb mounting platform on the engine case.

Cougar429

My Feedback: (3)

I probably will tilt the adapter later. This was an interim test to see if the carb change would even work.

The carb is an OS 40B, with a throat diameter of 0.302". The stock Fox carb, (E-Z, without the midrange adjustment) has a diameter of 0.323". I have a TT carb with a dia of 0.314", but I was worried about flow speed at lower throttle settings, so went slightly smaller to start.

Once the muffler mod is complete I will do more experimenting with the possibility of checking different carbs and/or needle profiles. Don't know how that would work with the OS/remote needle, though, as the barrel/HS needle are not physically linked. The TT is integral and with the adapter should not be difficult to change.

Cougar429

My Feedback: (3)

Had to wait till I was back from a few days off, but I did as suggested and shaped the bottom of the adapter to tilt the carb forward. Was not too aggressive as I was worried about removing too much material from the threads and losing structural strength, causing the base to warp. Still, enough to allow different carb installations without having to do the carving necessary on the 40B. Only addition was to fab a new gasket, as the original was decidedly crushed and past its prime.

Thanks, Konrad. Wish I had thought of that before[&o].