brokenenglish

PM sent.

fiery

My Feedback: (2)

Despite many pages of discussion, we have not seen a close-up of the Irvine 1.3 Mills, arguably the best of the recent reproductions. This one is in superb original condition.

william hanshaw

Hello, Fiery,

The pictures of the exquisite Irvine 1.3 show how nice an engine can be!. I trust it is being used for exhibit only, but if you do choose to bench run it, I would certainly enjoy watching and hearing the Irvine beauty purr! I would like to own an Irvine like this one, but probably never fly it due to its pristine condition. But I think I would bench-run it occasionally just to watch it purr! Thanks for sharing these nice pics, and best regards from a Texan friend!!

William Hanshaw, Fort Worth Texas USA

ffkiwi

Indeed-a lovely bit of work-but I could never understand how Irvine justified the price of 99 quid (in release) when they were only asking about 50-60 for one of their high specced 40s at the time (56 off the top of my head)-and there's no way the Irvine was more complex or difficult to produce than a twin BB ABC 40 with a twin needle carb and quiet muffler-especially so in an era of CNC maching. Had the price been more reasonable-in proportion with the .75 they'd have sold a lot more....now -the rare times they come up on Ebay they go for huge money...guess I'll just have to stick with my originals....and one Indian. A case I think of the Irvine accountants thinking the market was stupid-and the market wasn't-and responded accordingly. Trouble is-they then threw their toys out of the cot....

ChrisM
'ffkiwi'

AMB

Chris Irvine knew what they had here a classic- and the bean counters decided they could ask a high price and get it sic " if you want one pay the price" . There regular modern production engines such as the 40 they had to be priced competitively with the other engine makers maybe under the quise of limited production or whatever hence the price of this one martin

an other example would be remakes and limited edition coins go for far more than face value

ffkiwi

But my point was they misread the market completely-people weren't going to pay that sort of money for them-and they didn't sell well so they stopped making them rather quickly. Fiery's one is serial # 453-perhaps only 500 or 1000 were made-that is a fairly typical run for repros-MP Jets for example do runs of 500. The number of Indian 1.3s and 1.5's sold over the years-even with knowledge of their quality issues being widespread-is proof that the market is there-but modellers don't like being screwed any more than any other section of the buying public. I maintain that had the engine been priced at the 50-60 pound mark when introduced-it would have been comparable with others of the same size in the market-and would have sold on looks alone. Other far more exclusive repros-in terms of numbers- such as the VA and AH ones were selling for less or comparable prices. The Hobbs 75 was selling for 100 pound around the same time-and only 100 were made!

ChrisM
'ffkiwi'

fiery

My Feedback: (2)

That is a very interesting point Chris. Some have proffered the opinion that Irvine lost money on every Mills replica they sold. Perhaps by the time these replica's were made, manufacturing costs for a 'made in the UK' 'low volume run' engine requiring lapped fits had reached a point of no financial return - even when sold at a premium price.

I picked up the engine shown from a Euro nation's *bay. It did not seem to be attracting all that much attention. I bid significantly under the original selling price, and won it. I did not expect to.

Perhaps an indication the collector market is softening? Or that there are still bargains to be found if you dare to tread a road less travelled.

Fit and finish is simply exquisite. Above that of my Irvine Mills .75; which is itself very nice.

**

Bill, good to hear from you. Fear not, it will purr ...

brokenenglish

Chris,
I think your pricing point above is due to three factors:
1. Not much competition in that field (only Indian), which is not the case with glow .40s, etc.
2. Low expected sales volumes in relation to the usual run of glow engines.
3. There were people willing to pay a bit extra for a nice looking traditional engine with the Mills name attached to it.

fiery

My Feedback: (2)

By Tom Crompton in the UK

brokenenglish

Very nice Derek, and Tom's engines are going to be a lot better than the CS stuff.

fiery

My Feedback: (2)

There will not be too much left that is CS internals in that four cylinder 1.5 cc.

The 'unitary cooling jacket' on the twin is a nice touch.

Recycled Flyer

My brain was hurting by thinking how that jacket was ever going to screw on (until I zoomed into the pic a bit further!)

fiery

My Feedback: (2)

I could not figure it out initially either!

I'd say the twin is either 1.5 cc or 2 cc, made utilising (recycling?) Aurora K-Mills cases.

ozejohn

PFEFFER 06 ............ Not quite a Mills, but I need help please.

I have an early version with open exhaust ports but lack any instructions. In particular the prop sizes for FF and CL.

There was an Aeromodeller test report, but I cannot find a copy.

Many Thanks in advance.

Regards,
John

ffkiwi

I'd go 8x3-8x4 for sport use-(giving about 7000rpm) and a 7x4 for max power. I wouldn't even attempt to use something like this in C/L-but if you insist-I'd guess about a 6x5 as a suitable load. I have one of the later model ones with the mini mufflers each side-and it's quite happy on a Cox 8x4 flexi nylon-which is a fairly light load as far as 8x4s are concerned. A DC 8x4 would also be good if you can find one....

ChrisM
'ffkiwi'

brusta

I use the late model Pfeffer's in F/F scramble models, I have found a tornado 7x4 prop excellent. It allows my motors to to be comped back till they are just ticking over. These are truely excellent motors for FF.

ffkiwi

I prefer the MP Jet Classic 0.6 for that role-the two engines are comparable in power-but the Pfeffer with its integral mufflers can be a pain if you accidentally flood it-and likewise is near impossible to exhaust prime with any degree of accuracy or repeatability

ChrisM
'ffkiwi'

brusta

I agree with you Chris, but the putt,putt,putt sound it makes is heavenly. I use a 1cc curry mills in my bigger / heavier scrambler. Its a Super Sniffer. The Pfeffer is used in an ultra light 130% Humbug. Its floats around like a powered glider. That is the best model on calm days.
Bruce

ffkiwi

I have a big soft spot for Czech engines-both production and small scale stuff-they do such lovely work-and that includes MVVS, Pfeffer, MP Jet, Jan Garcic et al. Ten or fifteen years back I was test running the Pfeffer out at the club field when several R/C fliers and spectators wandered over from the other side of the field to see what I was up to-after a number of suitably idiotic questions about the engine -which was happily running away, and restarting in a single choked flick, I told them it was a rare Czech engine with a square piston-and it ran very well until you wore the sharp corners of the square piston..... most of them took me at face value and wandered back nodding sagely...

ChrisM
'ffkiwi'

ffkiwi

[QUOTE=brusta; The Pfeffer is used in an ultra light 130% Humbug. Its floats around like a powered glider.
Bruce[/QUOTE]


Something a bit like this Bruce?.....my 4th one built over the past two and a half decades-plus a single original sized one for a Pee Wee and a modified original for a Mills 0.4 that I flew in Australia in 1996 in Scramble (AFFS Champs at Wagga)

william hanshaw

Hello friends,

After a long winter here, I've gotten out my diesels, and am bench-running them just for fun. The winds are pretty fierce this time of year on the "great western US plains", so I run my diesels on my patio instead of flying them. Of course, my favorites are my Mills .75 cc's, Replicas from India and China, and one original English Mills. Fiery, my Australian friend, was kind enough to tune it up, and it now runs very sweetly. A diesel buddy in New York had sent it to me after looking for one on the US East Coast. It lacked an integral tank, so I fitted it with an Indian tank. Now it runs very nicely, is very consistent and starts easily, just as the Mills are famous for doing. It's so nice that I probably won't fly it, but use my Indian or Chinese replicas.
I have a Bugaboo on two channels with an Aurora Mills, and a Tom Boy with a CS Mills. Both fly well.

I fitted an O.S..20 glow throttle assembly to my MAPS diesel; it fit snugly in the venturi's throat, and the diesel runs very well, throttles down nicely to a solid idle. It's a good marriage! I had trouble running my MK-17 until Fiery tuned it up to run nicely. He changed the venturi insert and that fixed the starting issue. It runs very well now.

My MP Jet Classic Mills-like diesel was in need of new innards and I couldn't get it to start. Again, Fiery and David came to my rescue and installed new innards; now it runs very well, very similar to the reliability of my Mills.

I own several PAW's, all of which run well. One PAW I bought on EBay is a .09 c.i. with a r/c throttle. I intend to install it in a 54" Old Timer "Powerhouse" from the 30's. It may be a little too much engine for that plane, but I can always slow it down with its throttle!

I own an AE .02cc which runs well, after Derek and David installed a Schlosser NV assembly in it. I also own an AE .01cc, but it has low compression, so it's a display queen...and will be until I find a new piston/cylinder for it...which will probably never happen. I've been advised that to have one made would be prohibitively expensive.

I have an English Frog and several ED's, some are pretty well run-out and are difficult to start.

My Russian VA 04cc runs nicely but it doesn't get sufficient RPM's. I've heard mixed reviews about the VA's, i heard they've since been discontinued.

I run some US-made diesels too. Three McCoy .049's, an OK Cub .049, and several Davis Diesel conversion heads on Cox .049's. All run after some or lots of coaxing.

Well, that's my diary of dieseling thus far. I thank Chris, Derek, and David so much for helping me get my diesels running, from far across the planet. You fellows are proven experts and have been very kind to share your expertise with me.

Best Regards,

William

ffkiwi

Good to see you're still at it Bill-we haven't seen you here for a while... I'm a little surprised that the OS 20 throttle mates so well with the MAP3-that would suggest to me that it must be well undersized for a 20! The usual issue when throttling diesels (especially if a converted glow) is that the throttle bore is too big....this is well documented with MVVS and ASPs for example. You obviously found out the hard way that the 5mm venturi on the MK-17 is too big-and that its much more tractable on the 3.5mm bore one. I forget which one they come fitted with from the factory-you get both of them if you purchase the engine new. The same issdue bedevils the Yin Yan 2.47-it comes with the large venturi fitted. Decades ago I discovered (the hard way of course) that the 7mm venturi and the '5-7 turns open on the needle' starting instructions were hopelessly incorrect. Fit the smaller (5.5mm?) venturi and a more sensible 3-4 turns open on the needle-and you have a very good general purpose 2.5 diesel once it has run in properly [they're always a bit difficult to start from brand new] I wonder how many people have been put off-or having tried them dismissed them as 'junk' because of poor instructions and too big a venturi.....

Sadly a lot of the early diesels now-if you buy them second hand-are well worn-and this always translates into difficult starting (though once running they often go extremely well)-unfortunately there's no option other than a rebore-and the people who can do this correctly are few and far between-and know exactly what their skills are worth. We lot downunder are quite fortunate-we have David Owen and Jon Fletcher in Australia who can do this work-and until relatively recently Robin Hiern as well in Oz and Harvey Westland and Alan Barnes in NZ. In the UK there are 4 or 5 people doing the same thing-but I doubt anyone in the US has the appropriate experience other than one of the 'Motor Boys'...and i don't think they take in work...
It's a bit of a pity because with CNC machining now it should be quite possible to do a 'run' of replacement parts at quite reasonable cost-this certainly happens in the C/L sphere with piston liners for some sought after engines. Last year one of the guys on the Barton forum did a run of Nelson piston and liners. [I'd love to see someone do a run of ED Racer piston liners for example....]
It strikes me that there are a couple of people in the US who have the skillsets-but probably not the experience-to handle this sort of work-the two Bobs-Bob Mattes and Bob Beecroft (both of who do a lot of engine rework for people) might be persuaded to do rebores on worn diesels-possibly utilising honing and hard chrome techniques on the liner (which would then permit the original piston to be reused after re-lapping to size). What they would charge for such a service however is entirely another matter............and scale comes into it. Anyone messing about with tiny diesel fits has got to be really good at it...

ChrisM
'ffkiwi'

fiery

My Feedback: (2)

'Limited Edition' Irvine Mills 1.3.

Apart from the gold anodised cooling jacket and spinner nut, were these any different in specification to the standard Irvine Mills 1.3?

fiery

My Feedback: (2)

Another rarity. An Aurora K-Mills .37.

Is the displacement in c.c. or c.i.?

ffkiwi

AFAIK in CC (so directly competing with the VA Mills .4cc).....my sources tell me not too many were made, and they were not too successful.

As regards the Irvine 'Millenium Edition' Irvine Mills 1.3,- to the best of my knowledge the internals are the same, but I'm open to being corrected on this one....

ChrisM
'ffkiwi'