Yes, it is for side exhaust engines In order to make a real firewall exhaust exit, you must either make a crossover piece between cylinder and muffler, or duct the two outlets together. It would be nice to still have the choice of side/rear exhaust, but alas, the gas engines do not have that convenience!
_____________________________
Pe, Dealer for MVVS, MTW and Mejzlik; www.mvvs.nl There is sanctuary in analisys.
Posts: 1127
Joined: 2/18/2003 From: Humble, TX, USA Status: offline
Ok, to all you guys sho replied to my question, My MVVS 1.60 SUCKS. I started it here at home and ran a tank of gas thru it. Seemed to run just great. Finally got my Edge 540 ready with the 1.60 in it and flew it Saturday, ONCE. That engine did not produce enough power to pull a dish rag out of the sink. It barely would get the plane airborne and keep it there. After a few circuits around the patch I set up for a landing and on approach it stalled and fell out of the air from about five feet. Now come on, I've been flying for years so I know how to land but this thing really sucked. Wound up breaking the landing gear plate out, breaking the fuselage sides in three places, ripping the bottom of fuselage loose, breaking the right wing in several places, etc., etc.
This engine is going in the Ain''t gonna use it no more basket. I've got a real nice 25cc conversion that will fit nicely in the plane and I know it hauls butt.
Pe: This is the older style engine with the round black ignition module, no red head, no graphited piston, and the small 7mm (I think) carb. At any rate, as soon as I get the Edge fixed it will fly again with a better engine.
Later, Jim Ross
_____________________________
No matter where you go, there you are. Of All the people I know, you're one of them.
Posts: 141
Joined: 7/2/2003 From: newport,
NC, USA Status: offline
The reason you had the trouble is because of that older engine. I flew my new redhead mvvs 1.60 yesterday for the first time. It is on a desert aircraft funtana. The plane weighed 11lbs 5oz ready to fly full of gas. On 40:1 gas the plane jumped into the air and ran great. It had enough power right out of the box to go almost unlimited vertical. I am almost positively sure that after a few gallons of fuel and when I switch to 50:1 it will be a rocket. So in my opinion you should buy The NEW engine . It really is a performer, I had an 18x6 pro zinger on it also. It was loaded down and still turning 7750 rpm right out of the box. Well just my opinion.
I flew my new redhead mvvs 1.60 yesterday for the first time. It is on a desert aircraft funtana. The plane weighed 11lbs 5oz ready to fly full of gas Hello Jaync! Please, let us know if the MVVs can hover your Funtana and 3/4 or full throttle and witch prop? Do you have a link showing the spec of the plane, wing area, wing loading ... Scou
Posts: 141
Joined: 7/2/2003 From: newport,
NC, USA Status: offline
I dont know if they have the specs or not but go to www.desertaircraft.com go to the planes link and then it will say exlusive modellbau a german company. Go to that and you can see all of their planes. I dont think it can hover it yet but it should be able to once it is broken in and I find the perfect prop for it.
Jim, These old engines had a long way to go, and needed a long run-in as well. One tankfull was not nearly enough. Like asking a baby to lift a stoneweight. Yet you can do something about it. I burn-proofed every ignition, and added earth wires to keep it from harm. These little can ignitions are sensitive, but run sweet, if OK. The high tension cable must not be tampered with, and may not be removed from the can. It must be well protected from vibrations at the join. The carb can be drilled out to 8mm. That makes a world of difference. 7mm is good for a .21 engine, not for a 1.60. The engine is sensitive to back pressure from the exhaust system. Use the original muffler, and it is a lame duck. an extra stinger improves things; It comes to live with the MVVS tuned pipe. I flew circles around a Zenoah 38 equipped plane using the old type engine. It just took a little bit of tuning to which the engine responded very well The 2003 production engines have that tune standard, and are very powerful indeed. Certainly much better than a 1.20 glow as some want us to believe.
_____________________________
Pe, Dealer for MVVS, MTW and Mejzlik; www.mvvs.nl There is sanctuary in analisys.
Posts: 3534
Joined: 5/15/2002 From: Westerly, RI, USA Status: offline
Pe,
I don't think that the gas 160 is going to make more power than a glow 120. I will have to see it for myself. Hopefully I will have the chance in a week. If this engine can spin a 17X8 at 8000 with a large volume in-cowl muffler I'll be happy.
Do you have the dimension of the muffler bolt holes on center?
Thanks
P.S. I saw a Thunder Tiger 1.20 with a Bisson pitts muffler spin a APC 16X8 at over 9000. That takes more power than spinning the APC 17X8 at 8000.
< Message edited by Skypilot_one -- 10/21/2003 5:53:49 PM >
Posts: 1127
Joined: 2/18/2003 From: Humble, TX, USA Status: offline
This is a quote from Pe Reviers;
Jim, These old engines had a long way to go, and needed a long run-in as well. One tankfull was not nearly enough. Like asking a baby to lift a stoneweight. Yet you can do something about it. I burn-proofed every ignition, and added earth wires to keep it from harm. These little can ignitions are sensitive, but run sweet, if OK. The high tension cable must not be tampered with, and may not be removed from the can. It must be well protected from vibrations at the join. The carb can be drilled out to 8mm. That makes a world of difference. 7mm is good for a .21 engine, not for a 1.60. The engine is sensitive to back pressure from the exhaust system. Use the original muffler, and it is a lame duck. an extra stinger improves things; It comes to live with the MVVS tuned pipe. I flew circles around a Zenoah 38 equipped plane using the old type engine. It just took a little bit of tuning to which the engine responded very well The 2003 production engines have that tune standard, and are very powerful indeed. Certainly much better than a 1.20 glow as some want us to believe.
Pe; I understand what you are saying about the 160 engines needing to be run in quite a bit but even brand new this engine should produce sufficient thrust to fly an airplane. I have taken some photos of the engine so you can see what engine I have. I tried turning the prop shaft last night and it felt very hard to turn. I know I did not over heat the engine when I ran it so I can only think it must have ingested some dirt or something. I'll find out when I tear it down and clean it. The muffler I have is a wrap around Pitts style muffler with no name on it. You can see from the pics that the carb opening is very small. Appears to me that it is way below what is needed. The carb opening on my G-26 is nearly double that in size. Haven't measured it but I know it's large. Any how, here are the pics.
By the way, If someone wants to buy a 1.60, I have one for sale, complete with ignition, muffler, charge harness and even battery.
_____________________________
No matter where you go, there you are. Of All the people I know, you're one of them.
Posts: 1127
Joined: 2/18/2003 From: Humble, TX, USA Status: offline
Not really clean, just pushed all the stuff back to take the pics. Bench is sixteen feet of clutter. Matter of fact. the shop is 16 X 24 feet of clutter.
_____________________________
No matter where you go, there you are. Of All the people I know, you're one of them.
Printable Version
All Forums >> Glow Engines, Gas Engines, Fuel & Mfg Support Forums >> Gas Engines >> RE: mvvs 1.60 gasser 
RE: mvvs 1.60 gasser - 
