rainedave

My Feedback: (1)

In the Jan/07 MAN - no I didn't buy the magazine - is a three page Sig ad. They show the Norvel AX and Big Mig .40s. Am I just out of the loop, or is Sig finally getting some Norvels in stock? Granted the ad is for the .40s, but this could indicate that the other displacements will follow. Who knows more about this?

digital_trucker

It so happens I checked with Sig yesterday. They still haven't received any shipments on Norvel engines. They're supposed to be getting some, but there's no way to know exactly when they're going to. So, we just have to wait and see if any ever get in.

flyinrog

My Feedback: (1)

I mentioned this in another thread..did you also happen to notice the the Herr little extra also takes a .46-.53 2 stroke!!.. a few typos in the big ad in FlyRC...I do get that mag..Rog

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

I wonder if the N.40 broke the back of the company? The only positive spin I've heard about their .40 is that it is light and it is miserly with fuel. Translated, means that it is a dog, although a light dog. I've never seen one at any field aroung here.
Q: Who wants a .40 sized engine that gets good fuel economy?
A: My Grandma!

rainedave

My Feedback: (1)

I'm getting one of the new Hybrids for Christmas. They burn nitro above half throttle and run off a lipo pack below 1/2 throttle. I think they're being made by Toy-motah.

Bipe Flyer

The review I read said it has as much power as most .46 engines.

Lower fuel consumption doesn't necessarily mean lower power. Take any two of the same engine, set the needles in different places and compare the fuel consumption and power output.

Andrew

At this point in time, I think the expectations are part of the "party line". When I spoke with SIG 3 or 4 weeks ago, the gentleman indicated that they had not been able to contact anyone associated with the factory and had no idea where the shipment was or when it would arrive.

Being a skeptic, I wonder if SIG made a partial payment and it has simply disappeared into Eastern Europe along with any expectations. I had been optimistic some time back, but guess I may have to try out a (gulp) AP.

Clean

The 25's were miserly on fuel and veeery light.

They also kicked butt in power output making most Scale Combat planes with long noses very easy to balance and even easier to get through a round as you needd 2 ounces less fuel. Made me fly my Mustangs at half throttle less I overfly everyone else.

So a light, high power 40 with great fuel economy, I would have bought a couple. I sure hope they are still around, I've got about 8 engines that I don't want to have to start scavenging for parts.

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

The N.25 isn't the same engine as the N.40. It is a screamer. The SAE standard for BHP is taken from pounds of fuel consumed per hour. If the engine isn't spitting fuel out the front bearing or intake, then fuel consumption is a good indicator of what our engines are doing. If I mod an engine, then find that the NV needs to be opened to compensate for the change, then I KNOW that the HP has been increased. C/L guys are always looking for the lightest and strongest parts and NO ONE is using the N.40. Prove me wrong, buy it then hook it up to a 4 pound model. If the N.40 can hold a 4 pound model in a hover, then it is pulling its' own weight. Any half decent sport .40 can hold a 4 pound plane in a hover, even my $60 OS LAs.

Bipe Flyer

The Norvel .40 arrived after several years of "coming next month" ads. When the did arrive, it was a small batch and there have been no more Norvels of any kind to come out of Russia since, so the fact that nobody you know has them doesn't mean anything.

Andrew Caholic reviewed one. See what he has to say about it.

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

AJC didn't have much to say about it, not enough to sell me on it. That engine was out long enough to either take off or flop. It flopped. There would have been a line wrapped around the block for it, if it was any good. There is already an engine that measures up to the N.40, and it does it for $60 last time I priced one.

Bipe Flyer

Neither of us have seen one first hand, so it's pretty difficult to draw hard conclusions. What has caused you to change your opinion so much though?

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2124483

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

I've seen lots of them [N.40s] in hobby store display cases. I saw lots of N.25s in display cases too but those sold like hotcakes with much less fanfare. I base my opinion of the N.40 on "open air market analysis", which has worked well for me as a way to pick brands of what-have-you to spend my money on. My original question though is, did the N.40 break the back of the company? By no stretch could you call that engine a success, I don't care whether you make 500 or 500,000 of them, the R&D and tooling costs are the same.

Bipe Flyer

It may well have broken the back of Norvel, and if that's the case, let's hope that Norvel doesn't become a big financial burden for SIG.

skaliwag

My Feedback: (1)

Can't imagine Norvel being a burden on SIG. I would guess they only took over the US distributorship from Ed. S.

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

It's interesting that no other engine builder has come out with a REVLITE liner by now.

Bipe Flyer

I was just thinking that if they had paid a bunch of money on advertising and for engines that haven't arrived...

SGC

CP,
An Aussie guy bought the equipement to do the ceramic anodiseing and produced a 2.5cc diesel useing the technology he also produced replacement piston/liner sets for some of the OS motors, BUT people were hesitant on the technology so its gone by the wayside , not because its no good. I beleive the N40 failed due to buyer reluctance to accept new idears , the "it looks cheap so it must be no good " mentality. I had coments like that when I showed up at the feild with my first 061 revlite, which is still going strong after manymany flytes.
Stewart

flyinrog

My Feedback: (1)

Theres no good time to come out with a new ..40 when your up against OS, and all the others..if VA came up with one would you buy it?..its like Cox hitting the market with .40 ARFs..why?.. I believe they started working on a .40 engine but didnt get anywhere.....now if OS decided to make an .049 again, I would try one for fun or even a 1cc engine .....I dont think there really is much new technology or interest in new technology when it comes to RC engines, especially our little ones....I remember AJ's column on the Norvel .40 being pretty positve,, but then again thats what he's paid to do ....Rog

NorfolkSouthern

It is difficult for me to understand why Sig would post an advertisement that features an engine made by a non-existent company. Why not an O.S. or Thunder Tiger instead? It seems like it would make more sense for them to count their losses, start ordering from AP, and then just move on.

NorfolkSouthern

rainedave

My Feedback: (1)

I do know that there is quite a bit of time between the layout and design of an ad and its actual publication in a magazine. Maybe this ad was created and submitted to MAN back when SIG was pretty certain they would be getting Norvels.

Today, it's all about marketing. Take the Evolution engines, for example. They are very successful, and people claim they are good engines, but their initial success and foothold in the market was because of visually appeal with the newer, younger crowd. Their reputation as a reliable engine came later.

The larger Revlite Norvels also looked radical - like the head was missing from the cylinder - but, they didn't have the Nintendo-appeal of the Evolutions. Marketing.

ptulmer

My Feedback: (5)

CP, I've got one of the AX .40's and it is really powerful, especially for it's weight and displacement. No joke. But, who wants a .40? Their biggest mistake was not making a .46. Even a .46LA seems like it would be a better option. I've got both, the .46LA will turn a big prop better. Like most Norvels, it's better not to load it too much. Considering the % of people who go shopping for a high-revving engine that likes small props, it wasn't the best design to come out with first.

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

PT, I think for versatility it is hard to beat the lightweight .46LA. It will swing a 11x4 prop well enough for good 3D action or rev up pretty good with a 9x8 for some decent speed. I would guess from what you tell me about the N.40 that it wasn't designed for torkin'...so this puts the engine into the sport/speed category, $110 range. My $80 TT.40 will turn a 9x6 @ 17,000 and it is no light weight, but this is the kind of engine that the N.40 is competing with.
SGC, I had a hunch that someone else had been playing with the REVLITE material. I didn't realize that it is a ceramic coating. It looks like a treatment I've seen before on some aerospace parts.

ptulmer

My Feedback: (5)

Huh, I was thinking bigger... the Norvel .40 was on my Something Extra and was swinging an 11x4 with great gusto. I normally try to run the APC 12.25x3.75 on .46 size engines. That big ol' paddle was way too much for the AX .40. Oh yeah, the darn thing also requires a special head wrench that costs an extra $10. (the SE was about 5lbs and wouldn't hover, but had great vertical)

SGC

CP,
My understanding is the Revlite is a ceramic base anodiseing dye, the Plasma ceramic coating used by Tony Cincotta in his diesel was formed by blowing microfine clay particles through a plasma arc, this turned the clay into a ceramic which is impregnated into the aluminium , leaveing a clear finnish, the plasma arc doesnt heat the aluminium dureing the process. Both processes were developed in Russia I beleive.
Stewart