aussiesteve

I have had a number of people ask me about this product and am curious, does anyone have one of these flying?
As you probably know, I used to be a dealer in the brand but have not been for quite a while now.

I know the results of the testing of the 3 delivered to RC Aero in the US, I have seen the results of the one that went to the new dealer not far from here, I have seen the video of the one from Axar Models in Spain and have seen the vidoe posted by the French Dealer

Is there anyone else out there that is running one of these?

The videos I saw seemed to be spinning a 23/8 prop at around 6800 rpm, the others I am aware of are spinning at similar RPM's

Any others running out there?

Anyone?????

How about some reports - Good, Bad, Weak, Strong, Just another "so-so but not great" product - anyone?????

apalsson

My Feedback: (1)

23x8 at 6800RPM?
Not a lot for a 60
DLE55 does better than that

BadAzzMaxx

Crap, My DLE 55 clones turn a 22-10 carbon fiber 7300 to 7400

Milton

BadAzzMaxx

Steve
Anybody know the bore and stroke of the engine.

Milton

Rfabbre

My Feedback: (6)

What clone are you using????

aussiesteve

Bore 45mm
Stroke 38mm

Gives 60.4cc

Measured

It should be a real powerhouse at that bore size

aussiesteve

Some pics - I just might have been sent one to have a closer look. Because the Dealer involved was worried he was doing something wrong
No the dealer that sent me this is NOT USA based !!!!!

clivemc

yeah - me too am interested to see some real world user info on these .........

mpascual

My Feedback: (1)

JC 60 evo engine bench test :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mzx_rxSKq0k

7100 rpm with 23x8 Hawk wood prop after 1 liter of fuel burned.

Regards

BadAzzMaxx

Yea it should be, Have you checked the squash on it.

Milton

BadAzzMaxx

It is just a engine that I get parts for and put together here.

Just trying to decide if I want to continue doing it, Lot of work for what you can get for them.

The case and cylinders have no name on them.

Milton

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

Steve,

Looking at the pics you posted and there are things I liked, didn't like, and not sure of. The cylinder pic was pretty fuzzy so you can't do much with that other than think the combustion dome is a little too lage in cross section, reducing the compression somewhat. Hard to see the width and shape of the squish band for any guess work determinations.

I don't like the "legged" circlips on the wrist pin since they have a propensity for breaking off the leg or coming out alltogether. The upper end engine makers are getting away from those for that reason. I'd really like to see the fit of the rod end on the wristpin inside the piston. You know what I'm looking for

I'd like to see another picture of the big end bearing through the rod. The earlier pic gave me some bad feelings. On the good side they managed to minimize the amount of available end play on the rod but they did not center the crank in the case all that well.

Aside from all that I'm sure the engine would run ok. Just a matter of how much ok.

jedijody

My Feedback: (1)

I like that they used a metal reed cage instead of the cheesy plastic rubber gasket conglomeration but why does it have a spacer between the carb and reed cage? Some other very familiar looking parts there, some good one in particular not good.

apalsson

My Feedback: (1)

That's a bit better than the 6800
Has anyone actually done flight testing of this engine?

aussiesteve

I wil not have anything to do with this engine as far as stocking or servicing them goes. My reason for posting the original question was because a number of people have asked me about it and a "distributor near here" is somewhat disgruntled with the sample he got. even at 7100 rpm it ain't great when compared to the other low cost offerings out there.

The prototypes have been in peoples hands for quite a while now yet it seems there are still none in the air. Tells me something.

Seems that the copy work he did of the DA85 he was "loaned" was scaled down to fit some other parts he had laying around (Including the same stolen crankcase design he sells to a couple of others).

It's almost a shame really - it seems to be yet another one that is "almost" ok.

Jody / Pat - Yes, the parts you recognise are the parts you think they are - just with the markings ground off as necessary and the same bearings many "experienced" a year or so ago.

rchobbydood

My Feedback: (2)

Steve,

I have one of the test motors and mine has been running and flying well.

From the first run the engine has performed well with easy starting and good throttle response throughout the range. My rpm figures have been strong and i,ve been testing the engine with a high pitch propeller(new style that is not on the market yet) and am getting over 7000 rpm out of the box.

I have the engine in an old warbird that weighs in at 38 lbs plus and I am more than happy with the initial performance(it is far, far stronger than the 3w 60 I had in it). If I had more hours in a day I would have got the flight testing done alot earlier but I have done my best.

These engines traditionally take a fair amount of breaking in, mine has now got 10 runs on it (4 in the air) and continues to get stronger. I need to put a Xoar 23x8 which is the benchmark that everybody else is using and see what results I get.

The engines are still in test and you guys need to understand that. The testing has been done in a professional manner and the results are now being collated and the feedback given to the manufacturer - that is the nature of testing the product.

I have also put very large propellers on the engine as it was something that the WW1 guys asked me to do and I have had very strong results from this.

Please, all be patient and I will do my best to keep you all appraised of developments

BadAzzMaxx

Looking better than what I have seen so far, do you have a video of it.

Milton

apalsson

My Feedback: (1)

Hey Steve:

You better have your flame suit on now
I have a sneaking suspicion that T.O.M. will somewhat disagree with you on this comparison!

BadAzzMaxx

Here are couple videos I found.

Looks like a 22-8 prop but not sure, Can not see it clear.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lVqO..._order&list=UL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jlZ1..._order&list=UL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzUHF..._order&list=UL

Milton

BadAzzMaxx

Here is a two year old vedio of the JC 51 (really a 53cc and also sold as a REV 55cc) with a 22-10 carbon fiber prop.

Do not know the pulling difference in the video above and the one here but it looks like the JC 51 is stronger than the 60cc. ???

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=.../6/oKCfkTZ259E

Milton

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

Prop that JC with a 22-20 or a 24-16 prop and let me know how it works out. Then prop the 3w with the same prop. I already know which one will win. Most really don't understand where a 3w makes it's power. It's never in RPM. But that's the nature of flight testing. Done right you find that out.

Super08

My Feedback: (2)

Milton I see what you mean. Even going full screen and pausing it I can barely read the second digit. I think it may be a 3 though. Either way 6600 on a Xoar 23x8 PJA is not impressive. A DLE 55 will do better than that. It could be running pig rich too, we have no information to go with.

rchobbydood

My Feedback: (2)

Hi,

I have no idea as to who T.O.M is and he can disagree as much as he wants over a comparison. I have used 3w for many many years and know them very well.

The Jc 60 in its initial testing is far stronger and more importantly flys this airplane with far greater authority. Thats the bit that is important to me - how it performs in the plane

BadAzzMaxx

I think you might be right about the 3

Have you run your DA60 yet or are you knee deep in snow yet.

Milton

Super08

My Feedback: (2)

Still waiting for it to arrive. I think they had to stop and feed the dogs again and give them a rest. Not much snow but it was extremely cold last week, -31C with a -40 wind chill.