Gents,

There is send me a PM of an eyewitness Bob, who could remember the K & B of Ed, see picture 1
He did ask me what could be the reason and I repeat:

“The one question I had for you referred to the engines Mr. Kazmirski used in his planes. As you know Kaz was a machinist and I promise you even at twelve I recognized that the K&B 45 ran stronger than most. ”

I am not a motor reviewer and I do not have the equipment for that but.
Why not compare and ask questions to ourselves.
Ray (RFJ) again did give me the info some time ago.

I compare the K & B 45 (picture 2) and the VECO 45 RC (picture 3) with my own eyes. The engines we talk about with the Taurus.
Picture 4 for who is interested: The ST56 RC, (Ray, can you show us the specs of the ST like I show from the others in this post?)

1 Power in every position, stability of ratio fuel /air of the mixture

Important is the distance between the backside of the crankcase and the spraybar.
The smaller the distance the closer you can mount the engines spraybar near the fueltank.
The smaller the distance between the spray bar and the air input inside the tank (European model) the better we can adjust fuel to air ratio, the better the power, so no “two ckicks” more but maybe“one”.(Important Dutch Money Factor)

When adjusted for vertical optimal mixture the more power in horizontal flight pad (normal and inverted) because the less “over optimal ratio?” horizontal.
The winner is the K & B 45 with a distance of 1 3/4 ” (see picture 2)
The loser is the Veco 45 with a distance of 2 ” (see picture 3)

2 Overall power

To compare the generated power of the engines we can look to differences. That’s easy, nothing to measure.

When the piston is going upwards (Yes, vertical mounted engine, hè, hè !? We are speaking about the Taurus!) The crankcase have to be loaded with the new mixture, when the channel through the crankshaft is free. Timing of the engines is nearly the same but!!!!!!

The K & B is the winner again, read there are more reasons.

The airflow to the venturi of the carburetor has two angles in the route to the centre of the crankcase of 120 degrees, the VECO has two angles of 105 degrees. The resistance factor (ksi) of a bow or angle of 105 degrees is much more than 120 so the K & B is faster with refueling the mixture in the crankcase. The total distance from input carburetor to centre crankcase of the K & B (2 " between the yellow dots) is also shorter (VECO 2 9/16").
The main reason of the better breathing is the use of the bronze bushed main bearing in the K & B 45. This makes the more afterwards positioned carburetor and so also more forward angled mounting of the carburetor possible!!!

The K & B doesn’t have ball bearings so also not in the crankcase, the space between the balls is “dead” space that ruins the compression ratio of the crankcase in sucking and press the mixture to the cylinder. So the K & B also wins with breathing!!
The K & B nearly looks like an engine with an internal sucking roots compressor when you modify the crankshaft by filling the (dead room) spaces of the counterbalance of the crankshaft (Ed could have done this, because it is possible (dutch: volwang krukas!!!), Maybe Ed did give the channel through the crakshaft a better shape, see the blue lines in the crankcase/crankshaft.
The K & B 45 has a rotating disk behind the crankshaft with a counterbalance to reduce vibrations! The K & B is the winner in generate overall power and does not destroy your reeds radio.


Ed did want power, not weight, so simple to compare
Weight
K & B Torpedo 45 RC 9.1 oz (winner)
VECO 45 RC 11,8 oz


Ed did want power for the weight so simple to compare
Power/weight
K & B Torpedo 45 RC 1,07 b.h.p./lb (winner)
VECO 45 RC 0,847 bhp/lb


Specific output
K & B Torpedo 45 RC 82 b.h.p./litre = 1,37 b.h.p. / cu inch (winner)
VECO 45 RC 1,34 b.h.p. / cu inch

CONCLUSION
So gents what about that!

That silly old K & B Torpedo 45 RC, not even ball bearings, second choice cheap CL engine!!
No, the best fuel to power transformer for that moment and Ed knew of course.

Important is, built the tank as close to the engine as possible, because the fuel to air ratio will always be the best. Make the 2 tubes through the fire wall just Ed did.
Use the European fulltank with the air inlet as close as possible near the firewall. We like it in the centre but in the top of the tank you also might.
Best is centreline of the tank and spraybar identic and also the air inlet in the fueltank on this level near the front of the tank. (See last study picture)

Kingpin did bent the inlet “somewhere in the top" in the fuel tank we see. (I THINK, sorry!)

With my controller the engine “thinks” the tank is beside the carburetor , he doesn’t know better. (I enlarged the throat of the carb, the engine can drink the fuel no suck??)

I am busy with the next question, did Ed really built in a restrictor in the Veco 45 so we can read?? Why?
When you make the throat of the venture of the carburetor smaller, you generate more sucking pressure. The differences of the fuel level position during the fully aerobatic maneuvers is relative less then, when compare with the high sucking pressure and so the mixture is more optimal and power more constant and better.
But the K & B has a much better breathing?? Does he already have a more narrow venturi in the carburetor, and nearly the same poweroutput as the VECO 45 before his restriction is mounted by Ed.
Maybe Ed was dissapointed about the maneuvrability of the VECO 45 and did give away power for fuel ratio stability!.
But how to tell that to you "fans", read the press.

An important fact for making this post is the reason I more times did fight for “Not forget the K & B Torpedo 45” in the thread of Ed Kazmirski’s Taurus.
Maybe this engine was more important than the VECO and ST.
(My thread is now on the first page of the 60 pages on the hitscounter)

Added in the post one more reason the K & B is better:
The K & B is again better.
The carb is more backwards mounted on the crankshaft bearing. so the bore in the crankshaft of the K & B is shorter than the VECO.
This volume of the bore is "dead room" for the crankcase, so bad for the internal crankcase compression ratio, this is again a reason the K & B is a better breather.


Cees