Mr Cox

The Norvel .40 passed unnoticed around here, I've never seen a single engine at the field.
How does their weight and power compare to other .40 engines?

Clean

And if you haven't taken the hint yet, YOU SUCK AT IT!!!!

You've no time for anyone but someone you determine to be worthwhile. You're company doesn't want to disclose any information unless you garner everyone elses info first and lord help you if you actually link your merchandise.

The greats in this hobby will make time to talk to anyone regardless of what they actually think of them. They have the ability to say, it costs that much because that's as cheap as I can sell it and stay in business but here is what you get without saying, shut up schmuck and let the worthwhile folks talk.

Either learn some tact or stop trying to represent because you're blowing it.

And by the way, I LOVED the Norvel engines. I've got 15 or so of the 1/2A's and had 12 of the 25's in both Big Mig and AME. I've only got two of the 15's. I needed muffler pressure on those and that stupid clip on crap don't cut it. I had limited time to modify a muffler to put on the engine. It was a dead end. Nothing like takin a little love tap in combat and watching your friggin muffler go flying off into non-existence.

Andrew

Mr C -

The weight listed in the instructions is 10.79 oz. (306g) w/o muffler. The engine is robust and uses what NORVEL called Sliktek technology for the P/C. It's either the same or similar to the 1/2A Revlite, but there is no noticable pinch at the top end with the larger displacement engine (I do have some .15s that are squeaky tight at the top). The cylinder has 6 angled intake ports. The rod has a round cross-section and is bushed at both ends with plenty of metal around the bushings. The backplate screws in and is similar in design to the 1/2A engines. All their larger engines use a head button with screw in retainer. The head button accepts a standard 1/4-32 plug - it does require a special wrench to remove the retainer. The 40 has a nicely machined dual needle carb.

I do not have a power comparison for you, but one of our club members flew NORVEL .15s in combat for a long time and was quite pleased. He could start them by grabbing the spinner with his fingers and giving the engine a quick flip backwards. The .15s were as good or better than anything at the field.

Clean -

Ditto on the muffler clip - of all the design innovations that NORVEL came out with, that clip was worthless (guess it was designed to keep muffer sales up!! [:@] ). The spring retainer was much better.

andrew

hsukaria

the Norvel 40 came in two versions, the BigMig and the AME. The AME had dual carb needles and dual ball bearings. The BigMig had single neeble carb with airbleed idle adjustment and bushing bearings. I suspect the BigMig was intended to be in the same category as the OS 40 LA and TT 42 GP. However, it was still lighter, the AME with the dual BB weighed as little as the OS LA with greater power.

I never did a quantitative comparison, but I have the 40 AME on a Model Tech Magic 36. It may be a mis-application of this engine because it has less low end torque and more top-end power than I want for this plane. That is why I am interested in converting it to diesel, so I can swing a bigger prop for 3D flying. A 4-stroke would add extra weight to the plane for my liking.

vertical grimmace

My Feedback: (1)

Glow is seriously on the way out anyway. The market for anything bigger than a .60 is certainly going to be dominated by gas engines, and even the .40-.60 market is going to further shrink to electric power.
I sensed the condesending tone early in this thread. I would be interested in good 1/2 A engines, but really at this point, there are too many other manufacturers who I know and trust for the larger stuff (.40-60), that are not rude on a public forum. Good luck, you will not have my support. Maybe you just do things differently in Russia.

Clean

The 15 worked pretty well on the cl club Class II goodyear we were running but we left the muffler off that. Didn't have to screw around with a Fox 15BBrc to get it to run, just bolt the Norvel on, break it in and enjoy. The literal SCREAM of a Big Mig on mouse can and a RCCA Scale plane, man, I loved those engines.

hsukaria

As far as service, I got excellent help from Sig Manufacturing when I was purchasing and setting up the Norvel. And that was after Norvel quit making engines.

hsukaria

Unless somebody invents a spark ignition system that is as small and lightweight as a glow plug for a 40-size engine, the glow engines will always have a higher power-to-weight ratio, especially if it is a Norvel/NV or Fox.

vertical grimmace

My Feedback: (1)

There actually are. Fox is making a small gasser and so is Magnum. But, that is not what I said. Re-read my post. Electrics are really coming into their own in the .40 -.60 size with the price of ESC's and Lipos coming way down.
Who knows where the market is headed for sure, but glow seems to be on the way out. The market is definately tight enough that businesses cannot afford to be rude.

ZAGNUT

My Feedback: (1)

then don't regurgitate the same old crap that nobody believed back when these engines first came out.

"light weight" compared to what?

"fuel efficient" yeah sure...

"good design" from an ease of manufacturing standpoint, maybe but otherwise not really. the anodized cylinders may be better than nickel but that's about it. if it had any real merit then everybody would be doing it instead of going through the pains of hard chroming aluminium.

"good quality metal" until you list the various alloys used for the castings and bar stock parts you're just peddling aluminium like everyone else.

and 1992? that was like yesterday, 90% of the engines i use are from the '70s and early '80s.

DeviousDave

You're right. Klondike should have made a proper go of his new venture by issuing a press release saying "Same old $#@~, but with today's prices!"

Give the man a chance.

hsukaria

I agree with you about electrics. I was just saying that there are limits on how practical small gassers can be with the added weight of the existing ignition design. The spark ignition for small gassers seems to me to be an area of good potential for improvement.

But I also think there will still be a group of people using their glow engines. But I don't know if they will be purchasing new engines. I have enough glow engines to last a long time. I even have a couple of junkers that I would like to get rid of, maybe give them away just to clear space.

vertical grimmace

My Feedback: (1)

If I were investing in a new business venture, it would not be making glow engines.