Super Tigre X.11
#1
Thread Starter
Super Tigre X.11
I have a few different types of this engine and just thought I would post some numbers.
The earliest engine came with a blue head, and these are really messed up from the factory I think. The compression ratio is way too low and the carb opening is too large...
The next version was much improved. It came with a plain head, a single ballbearing, a larger muffler, and a insert in the throttle barrel to improve the fuel draw.
On an APC 7x4 prop, 10% nitro (and 20% all castor) it will do 16800rpm. It has a very smooth running all over the the throttle range, I have rotated the fuel jet a little to lean out the midrange. This is a very nice engine indeed.
There is also a third version, with a squarish looking head, and double ballbearings. The porting is also a little larger, visually, compared to the earlier versions. I only have one off these (NIB) and haven't run it yet...
Below is an image of Mki and MkII (to the right). The left one (blue head) is pretty, but also pretty useless while the second one is a truly great engine.
Second image shows MkIII, which I haven't run yet.
The earliest engine came with a blue head, and these are really messed up from the factory I think. The compression ratio is way too low and the carb opening is too large...
The next version was much improved. It came with a plain head, a single ballbearing, a larger muffler, and a insert in the throttle barrel to improve the fuel draw.
On an APC 7x4 prop, 10% nitro (and 20% all castor) it will do 16800rpm. It has a very smooth running all over the the throttle range, I have rotated the fuel jet a little to lean out the midrange. This is a very nice engine indeed.
There is also a third version, with a squarish looking head, and double ballbearings. The porting is also a little larger, visually, compared to the earlier versions. I only have one off these (NIB) and haven't run it yet...
Below is an image of Mki and MkII (to the right). The left one (blue head) is pretty, but also pretty useless while the second one is a truly great engine.
Second image shows MkIII, which I haven't run yet.
Last edited by Mr Cox; 05-21-2014 at 10:28 AM.
#2
Pretty comparable to the LA .10, and AP .09. Just a bit better than the Cox TD. I checked with the MA prop though, and there are different widths of blades on those too. The Mk 3 looks a bit meaner. I haven't seen too many of the .11s, it is nice to have a small motor that idles nice.
#3
Thread Starter
I'm pretty happy with it, I haven't really done anything to the engine and I used the stock muffler too. It certainly beats most of my other .10-12 engines both in terms of throttling and power. Here are some other engines and numbers with their stock mufflers, on the same fuel and prop:
OS .10 FSR; 15300rpm (too rich in the low/middle range, non-adjustable)
OS .10 FP; 14800 rpm (losing its Nickel from the liner...)
Enya .09; 14500rpm (likes more load)
ASP .12 ; 16500rpm (rich middle range)
OS .10 FSR; 15300rpm (too rich in the low/middle range, non-adjustable)
OS .10 FP; 14800 rpm (losing its Nickel from the liner...)
Enya .09; 14500rpm (likes more load)
ASP .12 ; 16500rpm (rich middle range)
#4
Mr. Cox - did you ever determine if your blue head X11 was truly flawed in some way or no? Was your engine new when you ran it? I'm looking to pick up a used blue head cheaply off eBay and wanted to find out if it ever panned out to be a decent engine or not? I was going to grab this one for a 1/2a trainer.
#5
Thread Starter
I bought the blue head one as a used engine. The piston to cylinder fit is not ideal but it seems to seal fine with full castor fuel, I used 20% but could go to 25% I guess.
I think the main problem is the low compression ratio but the carb also needs a restriction, throttle and draw fuel well. My engine would not run on full throttle without pressure from the muffler. For my plain head engines (that are NIB) there is a restriction provided for the throttle barrel.
After removing about 0.3mm from the head, and adding a restriction to the carb barrel, it now works better. It will now do about 14000rpm on an APC 7x4 prop (and 10% nitro). This is very far from the plain head one that does 16800rpm on the same prop and fuel...
The blue head engine might work fine on a lager prop and restricted carb. I tested it in stock version on a Grauper 7.5x5 prop, and it worked fairly well. Top revs are then only 10700rpm, and it would still require a restriction of the carb. So if you are after a timid old-school engine, the blue head might be fine, but it is the plain head ones that are real keepers.
I think the main problem is the low compression ratio but the carb also needs a restriction, throttle and draw fuel well. My engine would not run on full throttle without pressure from the muffler. For my plain head engines (that are NIB) there is a restriction provided for the throttle barrel.
After removing about 0.3mm from the head, and adding a restriction to the carb barrel, it now works better. It will now do about 14000rpm on an APC 7x4 prop (and 10% nitro). This is very far from the plain head one that does 16800rpm on the same prop and fuel...
The blue head engine might work fine on a lager prop and restricted carb. I tested it in stock version on a Grauper 7.5x5 prop, and it worked fairly well. Top revs are then only 10700rpm, and it would still require a restriction of the carb. So if you are after a timid old-school engine, the blue head might be fine, but it is the plain head ones that are real keepers.
Last edited by Mr Cox; 07-06-2014 at 10:17 AM.