Fuel manufacturers. . .

Fuel manufacturers. . . (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Glow Engines, Gas Engines, Fuel & Mfg Support Forums] >> RC Fuels

Message

Juice Man -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/18/2003 10:11:59 PM)
Initially I had planned on building a trainer with an OS .65LA. . .But to save money I've decided to just build a 40 size kit with a .40LA I already have. You guy's replies to my earlier [URL=http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/tm.asp?m=848337]post[/URL] about fuel choices convinced me that a 20% castor/synthetic blend would run best in .65's, so I'm assuming the same applies to .40's. . . But I can't find any manufacturers that make a fuel with 5 or 10% nitro with 20 or 22% (80-90% castor, rest synth) oil. . .Anyone know of any?? I've made up my mind and I'm ready to break my engine in. . .Just need to find the fuel I'm looking for use. :) btw: I plan to follow OS's break-in procedure, use MA 11x5, 5% fuel mentioned above, and an electric starter. When I start flying I'll use a 10oz tank with 10% fuel, 10x6 APC, and I'll flip start it, cuz I hear electric starters are hard on engines. :stupid::

RS4RACER -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/19/2003 4:18:34 AM)
ummm...If im getting you right,you could use wildcat,which is 10%,but it has 18% oil.I use it with no troubles.....

hauckf -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/20/2003 2:18:02 AM)
Juice Man: I followed your link to your previous thread and found some mis-information. The only manufacturer that I have found that blends by weight is Byron (not Morgan). Since oil (both synthetic and castor) is heavier (denser, actually) than methanol, blending by weight results in less oil in a gallon than blending by volume using the same percentages. The same is true of nitro; it is also heavier than methanol. Bottom line, Byron's Premium Sport 20% oil (castor/syn), 10% nitro fuel actually contains about 17.2% oil and 7.5% nitro by volume, not 20% oil and 10% nitro as you might expect. All the other manufacturers I checked, Morgan, PowerMaster, Red Max, Wildcat, Cooper's, and S&W claim that they blend by volume , and I have no reason to doubt it.

JWN -> Re: Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/20/2003 2:19:08 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Juice Man But I can't find any manufacturers that make a fuel with 5 or 10% nitro with 20 or 22% (80-90% castor, rest synth) oil. . .Anyone know of any?? ....................... and I'll flip start it, cuz I hear electric starters are hard on engines.[/QUOTE] I think you have your oils backwards. Generally, you want the majority to be synth with a little castor thrown in, not the other way around. Also, the starter is hard on engines is an old wives tale. They don't harm the engine at all. John

downunder-RCU -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/20/2003 7:52:53 AM)
Juice Man...the nearest thing I know of to what you want is the Powermaster GMA 5/22 or 10/22 fuels. Both of these have an equal blend of castor/synthetic. http://www.powermasterfuels.com/control.htm JWN...if used correctly an electric starter doesn't harm an engine. But this means with an engine that's ready to start quickly by hand if you want to. You have to be especially careful with a plain bearing engine like the LA's that the shim thrust washer is adequately lubricated before you use the starter. I've seen an LA with a completely frozen crank from misuse of a starter. I hate to think what the piston and liner were like :(

Steve Guinn -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/20/2003 8:10:31 AM)
If you would like to use 20% oil content and can't find it, get a bottle of castor oil (Byron's Lube Booster and Klotz BeNOL are 2 that I use) and add 2 & 1/2 ounces to 18% fuel to bring the total oil content to 20%. A little extra Castor oil will not do any harm.

JWN -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/20/2003 7:16:43 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by downunder JWN...if used correctly an electric starter doesn't harm an engine. But this means with an engine that's ready to start quickly by hand if you want to. You have to be especially careful with a plain bearing engine like the LA's that the shim thrust washer is adequately lubricated before you use the starter. I've seen an LA with a completely frozen crank from misuse of a starter. I hate to think what the piston and liner were like :( [/QUOTE] I would imagine the piston and liner were fine since there is zero fore/aft load on those parts. I've seen a number of models which have had LA type engines used in pusher configurations. None ever had a problem. John

downunder-RCU -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/20/2003 10:49:59 PM)
JWN...in this case the misuse was thinking that spinning over with the starter would draw fuel to the carb. It didn't. So this engine was hammered with no oil for several minutes. It wasn't just the thrust washer that was frozen, the entire crankshaft was seized in the bush from lack of oil. Now imagine what was happening to the piston running an interference fit near the top and scraping what oil remained off the liner.

JWN -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/20/2003 10:52:25 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by downunder JWN...in this case the misuse was thinking that spinning over with the starter would draw fuel to the carb. It didn't. So this engine was hammered with no oil for several minutes. It wasn't just the thrust washer that was frozen, the entire crankshaft was seized in the bush from lack of oil. Now imagine what was happening to the piston running an interference fit near the top and scraping what oil remained off the liner. [/QUOTE] Gotcha. In that case, it sounds like they got exactly what they deserved. Didn't most of us learn that a starter is used for starting an engine? That's kinda what the name implies doesn't it? :) John

Eagle Flyer -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/20/2003 10:55:22 PM)
If there is less lube in a fuel mixed by weight then that means you are getting more fuel (alcohol) for longer runs. Six of one or a half dozen of the other.

JWN -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/20/2003 11:03:22 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Eagle Flyer If there is less lube in a fuel mixed by weight then that means you are getting more fuel (alcohol) for longer runs. Six of one or a half dozen of the other. [/QUOTE] No, it means there is less oil present than most people would expect to be in the fuel. Mixing by weight is a marketing ploy to save a few $'s on the oil which costs far more than methanol. If the nitro is also measured by weight, then your really getting the raw end of the deal since it too weighs more than methanol for a given volume. So, do you really know what's in that jug of store bought fuel? John

FrancisPerson -> castor fuel (6/21/2003 11:56:52 PM)
Sig fuel comes in 20% oil with 50/50 castor/synth or 20% pure castor. Francis

hauckf -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/22/2003 4:56:57 AM)
Steve Guinn: To increase the oil percent in a gallon of fuel from 18% by volume to 20% by volume you add 3.2 fl. oz of oil to a gallon of fuel, not 2.5 fl oz. I don't care what the table on the Byrons oil bottle says, the correct amount to add is 3.2 fl. oz. The math is simple: 20% * 128 = 23.04 oz oil in the original gallon. Add 3.2 oz. and you now have 26.24 oz oil and a total volume of 131.2 oz in the jug. 23.04/131.2= 20% by volume. Adding 2.5 oz will bump it up to 19.57% by volume.

Dr Nitro -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/23/2003 8:58:14 PM)
You could try "Cooper's" Control line blends which are high in oil content. He has three different ones. Looking at his disclosure sheet they are: 5% nitro / 29% all castor 5% nitro / 11.5% synthetic / 11.5% castor 10% nitro / 11.5% synthetic / 11.5% castor I use and have used the above synthetic / castor blends in many bushing engines, control line, LA series and other 2-strokes, they perform very well. Its (above blends) great ABC / ABN / Lapped Iron engine break in fuel too. Like mentioned in a previous post, Sig makes a good 50/50 oil blend fuel that would work good too. Just my two cents guys.

Steve Guinn -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/23/2003 9:02:23 PM)
I knew that (post #13) was coming. :D

Juice Man -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/25/2003 1:29:48 AM)
I think I'll look more into Powermaster and Cooper's blends. . .I've heard good things about them, so they're probably worth a try. I'll let you guys know how it went when I start up the engine for the first time. :D Oh, about the starter hurting the engine. . .I guess I'll use one all the time, and just make sure the engine is cleaned and lubed well before starting. Thanks for clearing that up for me Downunder and JWN.

yard-dart -> fuel selection (6/26/2003 8:30:12 PM)
I am relatively new to this hobby, right at 3 years, and i've learned a lot when it comes to care and maintanance of engines. most of it is common sense. I just got into four strokes and just learned that 100% synthetic is the way to go. This comes after the fact that I broke in my new saito 100 using cooper's castor/synthetic blend. Now, as someone stated earlier, it "could" be a good Idea to do this since there is a lot more friction and heat going on during the break-in process.That is where the castor comes in. I believe that this would give an engine a little more protection during this critical time. Now that my engine is broken in, I'm definately going to use 100% synthetic. I definately believe all of the talk about a castor/syn. blend gumming up an engine after a period of time. This should be a no-brainer to you veterans. I would bet that you have a box of old engines setting around the house that have engines so gummy and discolored that you can't even read the name or numbers on the case. This is what is happening to the inside of your four stroke, with all of it's tiny moving parts. In this age of high technology, even automobile makers are reccomending that you use synthetic oils in your new automobile after the first few thousand miles. That is why the new engines are lasting so long and going longer without tune-ups. Well, I just wanted to put my two cents in, and if anyone wants to dispute any of my statements, please do so. I'm always seeking more knowledge when it comes to this hobby. Good luck to all, John

Juice Man -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/26/2003 9:46:10 PM)
I've been told 100% synthetic fuel in bushed engines (such as LA's) isn't a good idea. I've never heard of castor oil damaging an LA except mabye if the owner didn't take care of it well. I'll be disasembling the engine for cleaning often. . .So if castor does cause harm to the engine, it probably wont be for a long time. Just thinking out loud. . .:)

tiggerinmk -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/26/2003 10:09:14 PM)
When I first got my 65LA the hobby shop sold me Coolpower (green) for it. The engine hated it, and I wouldn't use that stuff again. The 65LA ran a lot better when I switched to SIG castor fuel. Since then I've run all my LA's on SIG semi synth fuel with no problems... BTW SIG also sells bottles of castor...

yard-dart -> fuel (6/27/2003 12:33:12 AM)
Evidently you have not checked around before deciding which fuel should be used with a particular engine. In almost every thread that someone posts, you'll read that your supposed to run a syn/castor blend in "nearly all" two stroke glow engines(18% minimal oil content with at least 2% of that castor). This is by no means set in stone. It is said that bushed engines, instead of BB engines should always run castor. It might pay to do do a little research before choosing a fuel. And please, don't bash cool power. If it is run in the right engine, especially four strokes, it is wonderful. Whoever sold you that fuel, for that engine, should have there ass kicked!

tiggerinmk -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/27/2003 9:37:19 AM)
I think I should point out that this was my first engine on returning to the hobby (after 20 years) two years ago. I had done a fair amount of research on which plane/engine/radio to get which is why I didn't buy one of the $300 specials. The hobby shop I got the plane/enginge/radio combo from is the best in the area, so I trusted their advice on the fuel selection. This was way before I found RCU BTW. You can't trust your fellow modelers either, when I first ran that engine at the club the so call 'experts' pulled the engine and tank out, inspected all the lines and even pulled the tank apart before deciding that my original instalation was fine. Not a dicky bird was said about the fuel. The engine did improve after I changed the fuel, the tank and the installation. These things I found out by trail and error. Not from the LHS, not from my fellow modelers and certainly not from RCU (I didn't know about it at the time, has it been going for 2 years?) Yard-dart, You made some rash assumptions about my 'not checking around'. Yes, sure there may be plenty of posts now about fuel formulas, but not when I first started. These posts come about as a result of experience, probably many people learned the hard way as I did, so people starting out now can have the benefit of that experience before spending a single penny on any RC equipment. As for the Coolpower, I wouldn't recommend for any bushing 2 stroke and would hesitate to even consider using it on any of my decent BB 2 strokes. As for 4 strokes, I might try it out on my ASP 52, but I wouldn't even think about running what I consider to be a sub-standard cheap fuel on an expensive Saito...

yard-dart -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/27/2003 5:09:04 PM)
I didn't mean to step on your toes, and if I did, I'm sorry. I am fairly new when it comes to choosing different fuels too, but, after reading dozens, and dozens of comments on fuels, I have sorta picked the fuel that the majority of rcu users say to be the best. Cool Power seems to be one of them. I'm using it now in my four stroke and it's great. But, I would never run it in my two strokes. As for this reputable hobby shop that sold you fuel that didn't belong in your engine, they should have known better if they know anything about model planes and engines. For future references, check out rcu's comments on "anything" you decide to try or change, I've found it to be very helpful. Most of the time, the more popular comment or advice is the way to go. Good luck to you and your endeavors in the hobby. John

JWN -> Fuel manufacturers. . . (6/27/2003 7:49:17 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by tiggerinva As for the Coolpower, I wouldn't recommend for any bushing 2 stroke and would hesitate to even consider using it on any of my decent BB 2 strokes. As for 4 strokes, I might try it out on my ASP 52, but I wouldn't even think about running what I consider to be a sub-standard cheap fuel on an expensive Saito... [/QUOTE] Just because you tried to use the wrong fuel for the job does not make it sub-standard, nor cheap. Coolpower has been around for more than just a few years and they know what they are doing. It's not only good fuel, it's excellent fuel. But YOU must match it to the proper application. It's not exactly Morgans fault you were given faulty advice and tried to run it in an engine that obviously has different fuel requirements. Would you call a prop cheap or sub-standard if you tried to run the wrong size on your engine? Rant mode off. John

Page: [1]

SITE MAP! : : FORUM RULES

© 2001 - 2007 24-7 RC, LLC, all rights reserved.

0.2773438