JetJoe OWNERS thread
10-25-2006, 09:01 AM
#727
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
ORIGINAL: dw_crash
ET,
You are right! Two years is too long to not work the bugs out. It must be incredibly expensive for JetJoe. Especially, when they had a template to work from.
I observe that most of the problems are related to quality control or material quality. JetJoe needs to understand that a turbine needs both to work properly and for a long time. Lets hope they get it sorted out.
DW_Crash
ET,
You are right! Two years is too long to not work the bugs out. It must be incredibly expensive for JetJoe. Especially, when they had a template to work from.
I observe that most of the problems are related to quality control or material quality. JetJoe needs to understand that a turbine needs both to work properly and for a long time. Lets hope they get it sorted out.
DW_Crash
And what of the 20 pound engine? Morne Zatimer had one for testing in South Africa...I'm ASSUMING(there's that word, "assume"!) that testing did not go so well, or we would have heard more...maybe he can chime in.
Boomerang, I have to eat my own slice of crow, too. I was an early JJ supporter, saying "let's give him time to debug it", and I'm pretty dissapointed by now. There are plenty of guys who can say "I TOLD YOU SO!" with no small amount of satisfaction now!
And what is so disturbing is that you MIGHT get the engine running well for a time...and then it starts to deteriorate, just when you think you have it sorted. I am afraid that some of the recent supporters, including their current US rep, may find out the hard way about that. Or, then again, they may get them sorted.
At this point, my own personal recommendation is if you are on a real budget(and some guys are), hold off for a used Wren or RAM or PST or whatever, it will be a very similar price to a JJ. Maybe that will change if JJ finally gets it together.
10-25-2006, 03:25 PM
#728
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tokoroa, , NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 3,848
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
China has a *real* problem with quality control and consistency.
I've been evaluating some other (engine) products out of China and have been *shocked* at just how badly they're made.
Sure, they look nice with shiny paint and what appear to be good quality castings - but bearings have been forced in with hammers so that the balls are all brinnelled right from day one, machining has been so poor that bits just don't fit (bearings spin in housings for instance), bits have been plated without proper preparation which means in some cases that they've actually plated over bits of swarf that were created by the previous machining process -- not good in a hard-chromed engine bore!.
The manufacturers suggest that they're engaged in a constant program of quality improvement -- but although here are *design* changes, the quality and consistency remain absolutely attrocious.
Perhaps the bottom-line is that if you pay slave-labor rates, you get work performed by people who really don't give a stuff about the quality or consistency of what they make.
Even implementing an effective quality-control system becomes impossible when those who are supposed to be checking the product really don't give a stuff about their job.
If you want a *consistent*, *reliable*, *quality* product you have to buy from a supplier who pays their workers enough that they *do* care about doing a good job.
The only reason that some Chinese products seem to be selling in the West is that the importers of those products do a damned fine job of "last-chance" quality control. They toss out those units that are obviously below-spec and build that cost into their pricing.
Most Chinese-made stuff is cheap, *incredibly* cheap. This gives distributors sufficient margin to throw out a sometimes significant percentage of the stuff they receive and still retail the product at a competitive price.
Unfortunately, in the case of JetJoe turbines, it appears that there isn't that kind of margin available so distributors are left trying to sell a product built to a "Chinese" definition of quality in a market where only one in three (or less) is actually usable. Hence the turnover of distributors and the number of faulty units that are actually being delivered to customers.
Jet Joe may get their act together -- but given that the Chinese still have a long way to go before they understand the Western obsession with buying stuff that actually works right out of the box, it may take some time.
I've been evaluating some other (engine) products out of China and have been *shocked* at just how badly they're made.
Sure, they look nice with shiny paint and what appear to be good quality castings - but bearings have been forced in with hammers so that the balls are all brinnelled right from day one, machining has been so poor that bits just don't fit (bearings spin in housings for instance), bits have been plated without proper preparation which means in some cases that they've actually plated over bits of swarf that were created by the previous machining process -- not good in a hard-chromed engine bore!.
The manufacturers suggest that they're engaged in a constant program of quality improvement -- but although here are *design* changes, the quality and consistency remain absolutely attrocious.
Perhaps the bottom-line is that if you pay slave-labor rates, you get work performed by people who really don't give a stuff about the quality or consistency of what they make.
Even implementing an effective quality-control system becomes impossible when those who are supposed to be checking the product really don't give a stuff about their job.
If you want a *consistent*, *reliable*, *quality* product you have to buy from a supplier who pays their workers enough that they *do* care about doing a good job.
The only reason that some Chinese products seem to be selling in the West is that the importers of those products do a damned fine job of "last-chance" quality control. They toss out those units that are obviously below-spec and build that cost into their pricing.
Most Chinese-made stuff is cheap, *incredibly* cheap. This gives distributors sufficient margin to throw out a sometimes significant percentage of the stuff they receive and still retail the product at a competitive price.
Unfortunately, in the case of JetJoe turbines, it appears that there isn't that kind of margin available so distributors are left trying to sell a product built to a "Chinese" definition of quality in a market where only one in three (or less) is actually usable. Hence the turnover of distributors and the number of faulty units that are actually being delivered to customers.
Jet Joe may get their act together -- but given that the Chinese still have a long way to go before they understand the Western obsession with buying stuff that actually works right out of the box, it may take some time.
10-26-2006, 12:39 AM
#729
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: houston,
TX
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
Interesting that combustion chambers have deteriorated. To burn it up that fast, it had to have been some type of air leak/ raw fuel combination that may have been due to bad spot welds, Im sure the blocked needles didnt help either. The only thing that should need to be inconel is the vaporizer tubes, that is odd that the combustion chamber inner wrapper was disentegrating. If anyone would like, send me a sample of their old combustion chamber, and I will do a full XRF analysis on it to determine the actual chemistry of the material that JJ is using. I work with these alloys daily, and will be able to determine the elemental content down to parts per thousand. A 25x25mm sample would be ideal. The combustion chamber should be minimum a 304 or 316 type stainless. Another quick test to determine the difference between stainless and inconel is to spark test a small sample on a bench grinder. Inconel should give you a dark red spark, and stainless will be a light yellow/ orange spark. Rule of thumb, the darker the spark the more Ni, Cr, Mo etc the sample contains. I'm not out to find fault in JJ or anyone, it would just be an interesting experiment, as China has been known to use inferior alloys, although they are improving.
Andy
Andy
10-26-2006, 08:07 AM
#730
Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: KendalCumbria, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
I was one of the peopl tempted to buy one of these turbines but having read this thread I am glad I didnt. I waited and missed a seasons flying til I could aford a Wren and I am glad I did.
I suppose this supports the maxims - 'you get what you pay for' and 'buy right - buy once' ???? Although we all have a right to expect goods to be fit for the purpose they were intended !! In the UK there are laws to protect the purhaser if the goods are not fit for purpose.
I feel sorry though for the guys and girls having continual problems - it could spoil peoples enjoyment of what should be wonderful experience.
I suppose this supports the maxims - 'you get what you pay for' and 'buy right - buy once' ???? Although we all have a right to expect goods to be fit for the purpose they were intended !! In the UK there are laws to protect the purhaser if the goods are not fit for purpose.
I feel sorry though for the guys and girls having continual problems - it could spoil peoples enjoyment of what should be wonderful experience.
10-26-2006, 08:14 AM
#731
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
ORIGINAL: XJet
China has a *real* problem with quality control and consistency.
I've been evaluating some other (engine) products out of China and have been *shocked* at just how badly they're made.
Sure, they look nice with shiny paint and what appear to be good quality castings - but bearings have been forced in with hammers so that the balls are all brinnelled right from day one, machining has been so poor that bits just don't fit (bearings spin in housings for instance), bits have been plated without proper preparation which means in some cases that they've actually plated over bits of swarf that were created by the previous machining process -- not good in a hard-chromed engine bore!.
The manufacturers suggest that they're engaged in a constant program of quality improvement -- but although here are *design* changes, the quality and consistency remain absolutely attrocious.
Perhaps the bottom-line is that if you pay slave-labor rates, you get work performed by people who really don't give a stuff about the quality or consistency of what they make.
Even implementing an effective quality-control system becomes impossible when those who are supposed to be checking the product really don't give a stuff about their job.
If you want a *consistent*, *reliable*, *quality* product you have to buy from a supplier who pays their workers enough that they *do* care about doing a good job.
The only reason that some Chinese products seem to be selling in the West is that the importers of those products do a damned fine job of "last-chance" quality control. They toss out those units that are obviously below-spec and build that cost into their pricing.
Most Chinese-made stuff is cheap, *incredibly* cheap. This gives distributors sufficient margin to throw out a sometimes significant percentage of the stuff they receive and still retail the product at a competitive price.
Unfortunately, in the case of JetJoe turbines, it appears that there isn't that kind of margin available so distributors are left trying to sell a product built to a "Chinese" definition of quality in a market where only one in three (or less) is actually usable. Hence the turnover of distributors and the number of faulty units that are actually being delivered to customers.
Jet Joe may get their act together -- but given that the Chinese still have a long way to go before they understand the Western obsession with buying stuff that actually works right out of the box, it may take some time.
China has a *real* problem with quality control and consistency.
I've been evaluating some other (engine) products out of China and have been *shocked* at just how badly they're made.
Sure, they look nice with shiny paint and what appear to be good quality castings - but bearings have been forced in with hammers so that the balls are all brinnelled right from day one, machining has been so poor that bits just don't fit (bearings spin in housings for instance), bits have been plated without proper preparation which means in some cases that they've actually plated over bits of swarf that were created by the previous machining process -- not good in a hard-chromed engine bore!.
The manufacturers suggest that they're engaged in a constant program of quality improvement -- but although here are *design* changes, the quality and consistency remain absolutely attrocious.
Perhaps the bottom-line is that if you pay slave-labor rates, you get work performed by people who really don't give a stuff about the quality or consistency of what they make.
Even implementing an effective quality-control system becomes impossible when those who are supposed to be checking the product really don't give a stuff about their job.
If you want a *consistent*, *reliable*, *quality* product you have to buy from a supplier who pays their workers enough that they *do* care about doing a good job.
The only reason that some Chinese products seem to be selling in the West is that the importers of those products do a damned fine job of "last-chance" quality control. They toss out those units that are obviously below-spec and build that cost into their pricing.
Most Chinese-made stuff is cheap, *incredibly* cheap. This gives distributors sufficient margin to throw out a sometimes significant percentage of the stuff they receive and still retail the product at a competitive price.
Unfortunately, in the case of JetJoe turbines, it appears that there isn't that kind of margin available so distributors are left trying to sell a product built to a "Chinese" definition of quality in a market where only one in three (or less) is actually usable. Hence the turnover of distributors and the number of faulty units that are actually being delivered to customers.
Jet Joe may get their act together -- but given that the Chinese still have a long way to go before they understand the Western obsession with buying stuff that actually works right out of the box, it may take some time.
But let nobody fall into the prejuduce that the Chinese are incapable of making a quality product, that's a complete myth. They learn, they learn fast, and they can make stuff just as well as anybody else in the world.
10-26-2006, 02:11 PM
#732
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: , CHILE
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
quote]ORIGINAL: airbuspilot2
I think Paul is talking about me and the answer is yes I am a dealer for Chile, but I have not sell any engine to any one yet because I am not going to sell an engine if I do not think is ready.
[/quote]
Sorry but from what I have seen in your local adds here you ARE selling the engines, and even more you say that YOU participated in the development of the engine closelly with the manufacturer. You also say you have all the machinery for fixing and supporting this engines. So actually I think you did not make a mistake with Paul, you actually use his information for your own benefits.
I think Paul is talking about me and the answer is yes I am a dealer for Chile, but I have not sell any engine to any one yet because I am not going to sell an engine if I do not think is ready.
[/quote]
Sorry but from what I have seen in your local adds here you ARE selling the engines, and even more you say that YOU participated in the development of the engine closelly with the manufacturer. You also say you have all the machinery for fixing and supporting this engines. So actually I think you did not make a mistake with Paul, you actually use his information for your own benefits.
10-26-2006, 11:30 PM
#734
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tokoroa, , NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 3,848
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
ORIGINAL: EASYTIGER
Yeeesh. JetJoe has not had much luck finding decent distributors, has he? [X(]
Yeeesh. JetJoe has not had much luck finding decent distributors, has he? [X(]
Instead of trying to develop, test, refine, manufacture and ship an entire engine (which is really a *major* task), they should consider just building top-quality critical components such as turbine wheels, diffusers, compressors, etc -- and foster a market within the community of small-scale engine-builders.
I think we have to acknowledge that there are some very clever and competent people out there in the "amateur" area of the model turbine field and more than a few of these folks could do great things with such a ready supply of *quality* affordable parts.
Who knows, if this was the model that was adopted, at least a few of these guys would be able to make good money building engines that the rest could afford -- at a quality that far exceeds the current JJ offering.
The finishing, assembly and testing of their engines seems to be where JJ falls flat on their face -- so why not simply skip that stage altogether and supply a market that's prepared to do just this?
The reality is that right now, most JJ engine seem to need so much work that they are in effect just a loose collection of parts with variable quality, finishing and precision anyway. So why not give up on the illusion that these are (even remotely close to) ready-to-run engines and admit that they're just a starting point. Even better, JJ should stop wasting time, money and resources trying to build *every* component, and just focus on the most important ones that can't be cheaply sourced elsewhere.
I mean, who in their right mind would use a JJ-made fuel pump for example? There are plenty of alternative sources for pumps that actually *work* and that time/effort/money would be better spent improving the turbine wheels or compressors that they factory ships.
10-30-2006, 02:52 PM
#735
Member
My Feedback: (38)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: cherokee,
NC
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
i need help with my jj1200. we test started it on the bench as per instructions we could find. the engine starts up and then flames start shooting out the back and then it shuts down. what exactly are the parameters set at to make it run right.
10-30-2006, 08:33 PM
#736
My Feedback: (67)
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
Hi All,
I do business in China and run factories in China. As a foreign investor, I categorize the Chinese quality into 3 categories.
1. Foreign invested, run factories in China - Nokia, Foxicon (Apple, and HP maker), GM, Baocheng(Taiwan, making Nike shoes), etc.
2. Military run operation - Their space program, aerospace, turbine jet manufacturers, They might not be the best in the world military, but their quality standards are comparable to competitive private companies in the west. Look at their ultra reliable AK47s in the middle east streets going for less than 200 bucks.
3. Chinese locals owned factories. - locals that started their own work shops. Many are what I called "paperless operation" meaning that you don't even see a paper trail of quality controls in the entire shop. These are usually small cap, under cap, that hope to strike the gold mine and will do anything for money. Their owners will treat you to nice KTV, wine and women, instead of working on their core competitiveness -quality and price. Of course, there are some exception, but China is a big country, good ones got buried by the bad.
The first one has the management know how and technical know how to make the best products with low Chinese labor cost. Hiring the best talents, giving them best machines. These are the most competitive companies and have been able to make the best quality products out from China. IPOD, iMac, cell phones, etc.
The 2nd one has great quality control. Visiting a few of them by chance and saw some best machines and quality assurance program that's a direct replica of Toyato's TQM, or GE's QA program. However, they are not privatized nor mobile enough to do small projects.
The 3rd one are the loose cannons. JJ happens to be on this 3rd cat. Many Chinese model companies are in this category unless they have reputable western distributors working with them to bring up their quality. I am sure that there is going to be great quality chinese made Turbine, but mostly likely by the first cat player(s) in the future. Until then, I stick with Artes, Wren, Jetcat. Any Japanese O.S quality turbine out there? Don't know why Japanese model makers are not active in this turbine business.
Hope this will help clarify the China made issue. They are not just bad apples. It depends on who plants the apple trees.
Mike
I do business in China and run factories in China. As a foreign investor, I categorize the Chinese quality into 3 categories.
1. Foreign invested, run factories in China - Nokia, Foxicon (Apple, and HP maker), GM, Baocheng(Taiwan, making Nike shoes), etc.
2. Military run operation - Their space program, aerospace, turbine jet manufacturers, They might not be the best in the world military, but their quality standards are comparable to competitive private companies in the west. Look at their ultra reliable AK47s in the middle east streets going for less than 200 bucks.
3. Chinese locals owned factories. - locals that started their own work shops. Many are what I called "paperless operation" meaning that you don't even see a paper trail of quality controls in the entire shop. These are usually small cap, under cap, that hope to strike the gold mine and will do anything for money. Their owners will treat you to nice KTV, wine and women, instead of working on their core competitiveness -quality and price. Of course, there are some exception, but China is a big country, good ones got buried by the bad.
The first one has the management know how and technical know how to make the best products with low Chinese labor cost. Hiring the best talents, giving them best machines. These are the most competitive companies and have been able to make the best quality products out from China. IPOD, iMac, cell phones, etc.
The 2nd one has great quality control. Visiting a few of them by chance and saw some best machines and quality assurance program that's a direct replica of Toyato's TQM, or GE's QA program. However, they are not privatized nor mobile enough to do small projects.
The 3rd one are the loose cannons. JJ happens to be on this 3rd cat. Many Chinese model companies are in this category unless they have reputable western distributors working with them to bring up their quality. I am sure that there is going to be great quality chinese made Turbine, but mostly likely by the first cat player(s) in the future. Until then, I stick with Artes, Wren, Jetcat. Any Japanese O.S quality turbine out there? Don't know why Japanese model makers are not active in this turbine business.
Hope this will help clarify the China made issue. They are not just bad apples. It depends on who plants the apple trees.
Mike
10-30-2006, 09:44 PM
#738
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
"Japanese O.S quality turbine out there? Don't know why Japanese model makers are not active in this turbine business."
There are really only three or four major Japanese engine companies. Shuwa, OS, Enya, Saito. I have heard from at least one of them that they shelved any turbine projects for the immediate future because the small potential profits do not outweigh the potential liability. They are successful companies, big enough to sue, it's not worth it to them. That may change. Notice that aside from Jetcat, which is a successful manufacturer of medical equipment and such, most of the model turbine companies are not very big. I don't think many people are getting rich from making or selling model turbines, and I think OS is pretty aware of that!
There are really only three or four major Japanese engine companies. Shuwa, OS, Enya, Saito. I have heard from at least one of them that they shelved any turbine projects for the immediate future because the small potential profits do not outweigh the potential liability. They are successful companies, big enough to sue, it's not worth it to them. That may change. Notice that aside from Jetcat, which is a successful manufacturer of medical equipment and such, most of the model turbine companies are not very big. I don't think many people are getting rich from making or selling model turbines, and I think OS is pretty aware of that!
10-31-2006, 03:43 AM
#739
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tokoroa, , NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 3,848
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
I don't think it's fear of losing their shirts that keep OS et al out of the turbine business -- after all, they could just fund a smaller company that was a legally separate entity to their main business and thus mitigate any potential liabilities.
You are probably more correct in your assumption that the market isn't big enough for a large company to be that interested -- yet.
However, with the massive growth in small UAVs and RPVs, I suspect that there will be a hike in new market entrants who see the model-market as a reat proving tround for designs that they wish to sell (for a much greater profit) to military and commercial UAV operators.
Tooling and setup is a major barrier to entry for many however, unless you want to be a jet-engine "assembler" using other people's turbine wheels, compressors, etc. If you're just an "assembler" it becomes hard to create a point of distinction within the market and also hard to increase your profit margins without adversely affecting the end-price.
You are probably more correct in your assumption that the market isn't big enough for a large company to be that interested -- yet.
However, with the massive growth in small UAVs and RPVs, I suspect that there will be a hike in new market entrants who see the model-market as a reat proving tround for designs that they wish to sell (for a much greater profit) to military and commercial UAV operators.
Tooling and setup is a major barrier to entry for many however, unless you want to be a jet-engine "assembler" using other people's turbine wheels, compressors, etc. If you're just an "assembler" it becomes hard to create a point of distinction within the market and also hard to increase your profit margins without adversely affecting the end-price.
11-05-2006, 02:01 PM
#740
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Oudtshoorn, SOUTH AFRICA
Posts: 643
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
Hi ET,
Morne Zatimer!!!!! Must be my under cover name?
No news is good news! I completed 100 flights on JJ1800 in Draco today! Yes 100! I do about 10 flights over a weekend and in sunny RSA we have flying weather 360/365 days!
Some pictures of today
Regards
Morne Nortier
Morne Zatimer!!!!! Must be my under cover name?
No news is good news! I completed 100 flights on JJ1800 in Draco today! Yes 100! I do about 10 flights over a weekend and in sunny RSA we have flying weather 360/365 days!
Some pictures of today
Regards
Morne Nortier
11-05-2006, 03:02 PM
#742
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Oudtshoorn, SOUTH AFRICA
Posts: 643
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
Yes! for those that require a video clip, send me an e-mail and i will return! The clip too large for RCU.
Yes i like the JJ1800! I have stripped the prototype and found that all parts are securely mounted like a turbine should be! Even the NGV bolts to shaft tunnel. So no more press fits.
Well time will tell if all turbines standards will be the same. Mine is just fine!
Regards
Morne
Yes i like the JJ1800! I have stripped the prototype and found that all parts are securely mounted like a turbine should be! Even the NGV bolts to shaft tunnel. So no more press fits.
Well time will tell if all turbines standards will be the same. Mine is just fine!
Regards
Morne
11-06-2006, 07:51 AM
#743
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Newcastle, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
ORIGINAL: MNModels
Yes i like the JJ1800! I have stripped the prototype and found that all parts are securely mounted like a turbine should be! Even the NGV bolts to shaft tunnel. So no more press fits.
Well time will tell if all turbines standards will be the same. Mine is just fine!
Regards
Morne
Yes i like the JJ1800! I have stripped the prototype and found that all parts are securely mounted like a turbine should be! Even the NGV bolts to shaft tunnel. So no more press fits.
Well time will tell if all turbines standards will be the same. Mine is just fine!
Regards
Morne
This time I'll certainly wait until 100 other customers have had their 100th flight. Who really wants to be 37th or 51st customer (or test dummy) when the bearings have been put in the wrong way round or they've run out of inconel and stick whats to hand inside, as that becomes the JJ customer's problem. I'm pleased you are burning up fuel and having a blast flying and it is good that the proto types JJ1800s are holding up in actual use this time around.
What's maybe been missed in China is that there are 'dozens of flawless manufacturers' in this particular established power range and no real need to take a chance on Joe and my Behotec never needs opening except for its regular service.
Paul
11-06-2006, 09:30 AM
#744
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
If I got your name wrong, I sincerely apologize! I thought it WAS "Morne Zatimer!"
I'm definitely not ready to buy another JJ, but what is the pricing on this one?
Does anybody else have one running besides you?
I'm definitely not ready to buy another JJ, but what is the pricing on this one?
Does anybody else have one running besides you?
11-07-2006, 06:50 AM
#745
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: LeedsYorkshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
I am sure that all the problems with the jj turbines are genuine, but I have had my jj1400 for over 12 months now and the only problem that i have had with it was to change the bearings once,(probably because the starting wand that i got with the turbine would not spin it up fast enough and it used to lock out on high temp, but once i changed the the motor on the wand its been fine) its starts and runs fine, flys my roo 11 just fine
11-08-2006, 10:37 PM
#746
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: halifax, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
Hello,
As a "newbie" please excuse my ignorance, I recently acquired a JetJoe (second user) turbine. Being curious I stripped it down. It did not come with any electronics. Cut a long story short. The beariing at the "nut" end seems a loose fit in its housing and I am wondering if this is wear? I find it hard to imagine wear to the outer of the bearing? Or for that matter to the bearing housing. Of course when the nut is tightened the bearing is then, presumably? held against the "back". If anyone cast a bit of light on this matter. Also where/what sort of tool is required to remove the opposite (spline) end?
Thanks for any information in advance
As a "newbie" please excuse my ignorance, I recently acquired a JetJoe (second user) turbine. Being curious I stripped it down. It did not come with any electronics. Cut a long story short. The beariing at the "nut" end seems a loose fit in its housing and I am wondering if this is wear? I find it hard to imagine wear to the outer of the bearing? Or for that matter to the bearing housing. Of course when the nut is tightened the bearing is then, presumably? held against the "back". If anyone cast a bit of light on this matter. Also where/what sort of tool is required to remove the opposite (spline) end?
Thanks for any information in advance
11-13-2006, 10:32 AM
#747
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Newcastle, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
ORIGINAL: falconio
Hello,
As a "newbie" please excuse my ignorance, I recently acquired a JetJoe (second user) turbine. Being curious I stripped it down. It did not come with any electronics. Cut a long story short. The beariing at the "nut" end seems a loose fit in its housing and I am wondering if this is wear? I find it hard to imagine wear to the outer of the bearing? Or for that matter to the bearing housing. Of course when the nut is tightened the bearing is then, presumably? held against the "back". If anyone cast a bit of light on this matter. Also where/what sort of tool is required to remove the opposite (spline) end?
Thanks for any information in advance
Hello,
As a "newbie" please excuse my ignorance, I recently acquired a JetJoe (second user) turbine. Being curious I stripped it down. It did not come with any electronics. Cut a long story short. The beariing at the "nut" end seems a loose fit in its housing and I am wondering if this is wear? I find it hard to imagine wear to the outer of the bearing? Or for that matter to the bearing housing. Of course when the nut is tightened the bearing is then, presumably? held against the "back". If anyone cast a bit of light on this matter. Also where/what sort of tool is required to remove the opposite (spline) end?
Thanks for any information in advance
The cearamic bearings have only a minute amount of play in them due to being cageless. The shaft tunnel should have two 'O' rings at each end let into a groove. This takes up play sometimes to a interference fit resulting in the pre load sticking. Hence, depending on the clearance or bore the 'O' ring may be trimmed down (if needed) nearly flush to the wall and still hold the bearing firmly.
Paul
RCdriver
11-14-2006, 03:59 PM
#748
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: halifax, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
Thanks Paul,
that is useful information, I have contacted the UK rep (last Saturday) and ordered the O rings etc., However I was a little confused as to information he gave regarding the position/ setting of the bearings. If I understood correctly? Then the bearing (outer) is not the same diameter, but is "thin" one side and "thick" the other and it is importantant to get them the right way round. Also the compressor wheel is easily removed from the dhaft, but this also has a position aligned on the shaft (for it to main tain balance. I cannot see any mark on the shaft, but I can see a mark, like ink on a blade, Any comments?
that is useful information, I have contacted the UK rep (last Saturday) and ordered the O rings etc., However I was a little confused as to information he gave regarding the position/ setting of the bearings. If I understood correctly? Then the bearing (outer) is not the same diameter, but is "thin" one side and "thick" the other and it is importantant to get them the right way round. Also the compressor wheel is easily removed from the dhaft, but this also has a position aligned on the shaft (for it to main tain balance. I cannot see any mark on the shaft, but I can see a mark, like ink on a blade, Any comments?
11-15-2006, 01:55 PM
#749
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Newcastle, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
falconio
The GRW cageless bearings are marked on the outer race with a mark > point this outwards at each end when placed on the shaft i.e. < shaft > pointing to the compressor and turbine wheel. These bearings with little pressure at the centre
can come apart ending up with two races and 15 ceramic balls scattered all over the floor [X(][X(](grown engineers have been known to cry, it can spoil your day if it happens) go slowly take the time and its a breeze. With the 'O' rings inserted it should be 0.04mm proud into the shaft tunnel rather than 0.4mm, test there is sufficient movement so the pre load works and is not binding up hence trimming the 'O' ring till its right, though strictly more for the rear practice on the front 'O' ring.
Paul
The GRW cageless bearings are marked on the outer race with a mark > point this outwards at each end when placed on the shaft i.e. < shaft > pointing to the compressor and turbine wheel. These bearings with little pressure at the centre
can come apart ending up with two races and 15 ceramic balls scattered all over the floor [X(][X(](grown engineers have been known to cry, it can spoil your day if it happens) go slowly take the time and its a breeze. With the 'O' rings inserted it should be 0.04mm proud into the shaft tunnel rather than 0.4mm, test there is sufficient movement so the pre load works and is not binding up hence trimming the 'O' ring till its right, though strictly more for the rear practice on the front 'O' ring.
Paul
11-17-2006, 07:15 AM
#750
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portales,
NM
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: JetJoe OWNERS thread
Jet Joe Fans,
and I know the critics and cynics will enjoy this the most! www.JetJoeUS.com website is updated.
GBrown
and I know the critics and cynics will enjoy this the most! www.JetJoeUS.com website is updated.
GBrown