bob27s

My Feedback: (19)

My apologies to others in this thread.......but I have to post this..

Dar,

Although you are correct that many people have different budgets and priorities, your posts are a bit out of line with the original thread that was started. Although the thread asked if the engine was worth the expendature, this is not a debate over how much the engine cost... it was a question as to whether anyone had tried this particular engine and their comments and impression on the engine, and their satisfaction that they received good value for what they laid out. I am pleased to see the first hand accounts provided by current engine owners.

In short, there is no other "40" size engine in the world that can turn a 14x6 over 10,000 rpm, throttle well, and idle at about 1800 rpm all day long. The engine is unique. And in that respect, it is difficult to compair it to anything other than the typical 40-50 size engines in its size range which it was designed to replace for 3D and scale applications. If anything, it would best be compaired to a .76-.80 size 4 stroke.

Sure, in the USA, the USA manufactured, assembled, and built engine does cost more. I assure you, Dub eats more than rice for dinner (although sometimes not much more). We have wage laws here, labor unions, and people who are paid a fair days wages for their hard work and knowledge. Materials cost more here. Shipping from those material and part manufacturers cost more here. All of the raw materials come from domesitic sources. We have an agency call the EPA that tracks hazardous materials, chrome, anodize, plating, solvents, casting, lubricants, fuels.... all require time and filing and maintenance of legal paperwork. We have an angency called the IRS that requires careful documentaion of all transactions and related tax records. All of this factors in the cost of production of the engine. Add onto that insurance, the occational lawyer to deal with copywrite and patent things (VERY expensive, especially dealing with over-seas copy cats), advertising, maintenance of machinery and tools... and the normal office stuff phone/internet/paper/utilities.... should I continue ? Perhaps things are different in the far east .....perhaps far different in the middle east, eastern europem and other countries as well........ This is what it is here. Nothing intended as an excuse.... just intended to outline what is involved doing business here in the USA.

And for your information, the "price" of most of Dubs stuff just went up two weeks ago for the first time in 10 years (aluminum and steel prices are through the roof, and our auto/truck fuel prices have driven material shipping higher as well).

As I have said before, the "VALUE" of an engine extends far beyond its purchase price. For some who live here in America the "made in the USA" label adds greatly to value. For some, the "Jett" lable is assurance of quality and performance, which adds value. And most important of all, there are very few other engines you can purchase, anywhere in the world, where your direct line of sales, service, questions, answers and tech support comes directly from the man who designed, fabricated, assembled, tested and individually applied his signature to.... that engine.

To summize..... Yes Dar, there are less expensive engines on the market. Perhaps a few approach the capabilites of what Dub produces. Perhaps a few even exceed those capabilities. Very often I will personally suggest modelers to a Thunder Tiger, OS, MVVS, Rossi, or similar product as more practicle alternatives depending on the modeler and the application. However I believe you are somewhat out of line by suggesting to others, in any way, that the Jett engines simply cost too much or are "too expensive" for a modeler to consider, or to even comment as such, since, as far as I personally know, you do not own a BSE-76L, or other Jett engine.

As I noted in a previous post........ 'ask any Jett pilot' and he can tell you.

I'm out.....

(edit to correct typos..)

Woody218

My Feedback: (24)

Bob, you are right on the money. It's the same reason someone would buy a Mercedes instead of a Yugo. Yeah, they're both cars, but if you're going to go, go with class!

Texan

My Feedback: (10)

Way to go Woody!

That just shows you that PROBRO's get the picture...

SC

autoguns

I have the phone number and I'm ordering the BSE 76L today...early Christmas....JW

autoguns

Its on the way ...what fuel do you use? ...I run Byron YS 20/20 in everything I have....JW

bob27s

My Feedback: (19)

That will work fine. Run what you have. The engine will enjoy it.

I typically run good ole Power Master 15%.

downunder

bob27s
I'll start by saying I have no interest in 3D flying but your comments about how your more suitable engines develop high torque at lower revs make me wonder if the RO-Jett series or the "S" engines would be suitable for 3D flying if fitted with a carb. It seems to me that the power delivery (and the props that are used) are very much like what's needed in CL stunt.

And for Dar's information, Jett engines are very much in demand for CL stunt at the highest levels (and by those aspiring to the highest levels).

autoguns

Thanks for the info.....JW

bob27s

My Feedback: (19)

Downunder......

great observation........

The BSE-40L, 60L, 65L and 76L were developed from the CL stunt engines. That is why they have many of the same properties.

They have been optimized for a cleaner 2-stroke top end. higher rpm, made more suitable for the props that would be used for 3D and Scale R/C use, and optimized for use with their matched r/c carb. Few folks flying R/C are comfortable with their engines running at constant speed on the edge of that 2/4 break.

You will notice in this photo, the 76L crankcase is identical to the RO-JETT 77 stunt engine crankcase.

Bob

downunder

Thanks for that Bob...it occurred to me that maybe a good 3D engine might have similar timings to a CL stunt engine.

autoguns

I received mine today ...(BSE 76L) it looks very nice ..I can't wait to try it ...now I have to finish the plane it's going in .....JW

Texan

My Feedback: (10)

Have you run the 76L yet? If so, please share your comments. I am getting 9200 rpm with 10% Omega and Zinger Pro 14x4. It has been a great engine for 3D so far.

TX

autoguns

TEX,
I haven't finished the plane it is intended for ....But I will post the resalts as soon as I get it up and running...JW

Texan

My Feedback: (10)

JW,
Your plane is looking good. The Jett will look great up front. Not to mention the performance which will be out of sight!

One thing that I noticed is that there are two prop studs supplied wtih the engine. Use the longer one. Also, the spinner nut does not have any grip on the back side and it tends to slip on the prop hub when starting with an electric starter. I used a star washer behind the prop nut to solve the problem.

TX

autoguns

Thanks Tex,
I have to add some trim pieces to the plane then I can slap it together ... only about a days work to get it in the air. I did install the longer stud that came with the engine first thing . The star washer is a good idea, I'll add it before starting the engine. The prop you see on it in the picture is a APC 14x4 standard , and I plan on using ys 20/20 fuel ( I use it in everything I fly) .....I may try to get it ready to fly over the long weekend....JW

chadvone

My Feedback: (2)

I am curious about flight times with .76l I have saito 82 in a twist that does great but flight times are around 11 minutes with 11oz tank. I don't like to land.

Texan

My Feedback: (10)

I don't have any flight time estimates. It seems a little shorter than my Irvine 53 but not that much. I'll try to get the flight time when I'm out at the field.

autoguns

Tex...
Its done!!...I plan on running in the engine this week and fly it this weekend ....Heres some pics...JW

Texan

My Feedback: (10)

JW,

The Jett looks great in your plane! What is your all up weight? Good luck and keep us posted.

DarZeelon

Autoguns,


I would strongly suggest that you remove the engine from your new plane and mount it on a sturdy test-stand, to do the break-in.
Also use a smaller, high pitch prop, for good cooling.

You can do the break-in according to [link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_1850473/anchors_1850473/mpage_1/key_break%252Din%252Ctapered%252Dbore/anchor/tm.htm#1850473]this thread[/link], or the instructions in the Jett Engineering web site's tech pages, which are not much different.

I believe Bob Brassell will concur with me on these suggestions.

bob27s

My Feedback: (19)

Autoguns.....
Looking real good! (I bet you probably even have better flying weather than I do here!)

In reference to Dar's post....
Break-in per instructions provided with the engine.

You do not want a significantly smaller prop on the engine. I did the initial run-in of my 76L with a 13x6 (about 10 min on the test stand) and went to the 14x4W and 14x6 shortly there after. Target about 10.5-11.0K rpm during initial run-in with the 13x6. When you move up to the 14x4 prop, start off about 1000 rpm down, then find and maintain near peak RPM for about the last 3-4 minutes of that initial run. (not to worry, the 14x4 put out pleanty of cooling air)

The BSE-76L does not need significant "bench" run-in time...but allow for some. The engine gets better and better with each flight. Use the initial run-in and first flights to better understand the engine and needle settings.

For flight, install the prop you wish to use, set the high end needle about 500-600 rpm down from peak...... and you are good to go.

Bob

autoguns

Tex,
I'll let you know how mus hit weighs as soon as I can get to a good scale...JW

autoguns

Hi Bob,
I read the paperwork that was sent with the engine and I'll break it in using these directions. As far as pulling the motor out of the plane I extensivley reinforced the nose of this plane for this engine. Thanks for all your help ......JW

autoguns

Well Bob,. I ran the engine for the first time tonight (as per the directions sent with the engine) sound good I can't wait to run it in the daylight so I can tac it. after I run it some more I'll let you know the numbers...Thanks again for the info...JW

iskandar taib

My Feedback: (5)

AHAH!!!! I knew it!!! Richard Oliver was talking about testing a R.O. Jett .76 not long ago, elsewhere, in anticipation of the new F2B engine rules.

In other words, these aren't designed as high RPM, super-high output engines that the heavier Jetts are. These are light weight, low RPM, high torque engines, still with very high specific output. Not the sort of engine you'd put on a pylon racer or in a ducted fan model, but something you'd put into an aerobatics plane.