Club FOX!
02-03-2012, 05:54 PM
#2401
RE: Club FOX!
My '83 Fox .40 (single rear BB, front bushing) measures:
Cylinder Bore at top of sleeve = .840"
Outer diameter of sleeve = .917"
Not sure if its needed, but the full stroke = .708"
This Fox engine has the square base carb on it, and the (I guess..?) more desirable high compression head I believe.
My K&B .65's carb base is .622", venturi is .343" or approximately 8.5mm.
If you can help, I'd be ever so grateful. If parts aren't to be had, I'll just plan on trading this Fox .40 in to get an Eagle IV .60.
Cylinder Bore at top of sleeve = .840"
Outer diameter of sleeve = .917"
Not sure if its needed, but the full stroke = .708"
This Fox engine has the square base carb on it, and the (I guess..?) more desirable high compression head I believe.
My K&B .65's carb base is .622", venturi is .343" or approximately 8.5mm.
If you can help, I'd be ever so grateful. If parts aren't to be had, I'll just plan on trading this Fox .40 in to get an Eagle IV .60.
02-03-2012, 07:10 PM
#2402
RE: Club FOX!
Sorry, I guess I can't help after all.
I'm not sure what this fits now, as I think it is too short for the 50. Bore is 0.862" and the outer sleeve diameter is 0.999", (identical to that on the 50). Height from the shoulder to bottom of sleeve is 1.300" and the ports are single, rather than the segregated I have on my 50's.
I'm not sure what this fits now, as I think it is too short for the 50. Bore is 0.862" and the outer sleeve diameter is 0.999", (identical to that on the 50). Height from the shoulder to bottom of sleeve is 1.300" and the ports are single, rather than the segregated I have on my 50's.
02-03-2012, 07:16 PM
#2403
RE: Club FOX!
ORIGINAL: Cougar429
Sorry, I guess I can't help after all.
I'm not sure what this fits now, as I think it is too short for the 50. Bore is 0.862'' and the outer sleeve diameter is 0.999'', (identical to that on the 50). Height from the shoulder to bottom of sleeve is 1.300'' and the ports are single, rather than the segregated I have on my 50's.
Sorry, I guess I can't help after all.
I'm not sure what this fits now, as I think it is too short for the 50. Bore is 0.862'' and the outer sleeve diameter is 0.999'', (identical to that on the 50). Height from the shoulder to bottom of sleeve is 1.300'' and the ports are single, rather than the segregated I have on my 50's.
I dont know if anyone's interested or if the price is outrageous or not, but there is a Fox 50 BB R/C for sale in the RCU classifieds. I think the guy wants $165 for it. I kinda think thats a good bit high, but I am far from an expert in the realm of value of discontinued engines.
02-03-2012, 08:17 PM
#2405
RE: Club FOX!
Hummm, a square base carb? That sure sounds like a small frame Fox .40 engine to me, not the large frame types. The large frame .40, and up engines use a flat bolt on flange carb. But the small frame .40's use a square base that plugs into the intake on the crankcase.
In that case the current small frame Fox .40 cylinder and piston should still fit it. So you should be able to get parts still from Fox as they still manufacture it. Fox never really changed anything except the crankcase molds as they wore out, making incremental improvements in the process.
The last large frame .45 I had, wound up with the rod failing at high RPMs from using a tuned pipe on it, and it severely shot peened the insides real good. I traded it in on a new .60 engine, I have some parts, I'll take a look see if I have something for a small frame .40 or not.
The small frame Fox 40 engine wasn't much larger than a .28 or .32 or .36 engine is.
Here is a pic of the small frame .40 and you can see where the carb uses a square base to plug into the intake on the engine's crankcase. Now I am showing a rare .29 BBRC version as Fox at first used the crankcase to make .29's and .36's and then later bored it out for the .40 size. But otherwise the engine hasn't changed in all these years except for external cosmetic changes.
You can see here on this group of Fox .40 and .45 large frame engines where the carburetor uses a flat flange and bolts onto the crankcase.
In that case the current small frame Fox .40 cylinder and piston should still fit it. So you should be able to get parts still from Fox as they still manufacture it. Fox never really changed anything except the crankcase molds as they wore out, making incremental improvements in the process.
The last large frame .45 I had, wound up with the rod failing at high RPMs from using a tuned pipe on it, and it severely shot peened the insides real good. I traded it in on a new .60 engine, I have some parts, I'll take a look see if I have something for a small frame .40 or not.
The small frame Fox 40 engine wasn't much larger than a .28 or .32 or .36 engine is.
Here is a pic of the small frame .40 and you can see where the carb uses a square base to plug into the intake on the engine's crankcase. Now I am showing a rare .29 BBRC version as Fox at first used the crankcase to make .29's and .36's and then later bored it out for the .40 size. But otherwise the engine hasn't changed in all these years except for external cosmetic changes.
You can see here on this group of Fox .40 and .45 large frame engines where the carburetor uses a flat flange and bolts onto the crankcase.
02-03-2012, 08:27 PM
#2406
RE: Club FOX!
ORIGINAL: 1QwkSport2.5r
I tried getting some background info from Randy at Mecoa about the drone sportsters awhile back. He didn't remember what the specs were supposed to be but he did "think" that WOT was spec'd at 5000-6000rpm with the supplied Revup 12x6 props. My engine turned one of those props at twice that rpm so I don't think he was quite right on that. He went on to say they were setup to be fueled, ran WOT and shot down. When ran WOT, they perform rather well. Try throttling it and you're done. My runner will not idle now and transition is very rich. Another member had PMed me awhile back with one of these drone engines and with a new carb they run as well or better than current production sportsters. The Venturi on my carb is about 7mm, but the problem lies with the mixture disk/idle mixture adjustment. I believe the spraybar orifice to be cut wrong. Full lean idle still gives a sloppy rich transition. I'm still searching for a pair of carbs that actually work without buying new ones from K&B or Perry/Conley.
My runner .65 is at about 2 gallons now.
Do the .60's take to getting wound up to 15-16k on a smaller prop?
I tried getting some background info from Randy at Mecoa about the drone sportsters awhile back. He didn't remember what the specs were supposed to be but he did "think" that WOT was spec'd at 5000-6000rpm with the supplied Revup 12x6 props. My engine turned one of those props at twice that rpm so I don't think he was quite right on that. He went on to say they were setup to be fueled, ran WOT and shot down. When ran WOT, they perform rather well. Try throttling it and you're done. My runner will not idle now and transition is very rich. Another member had PMed me awhile back with one of these drone engines and with a new carb they run as well or better than current production sportsters. The Venturi on my carb is about 7mm, but the problem lies with the mixture disk/idle mixture adjustment. I believe the spraybar orifice to be cut wrong. Full lean idle still gives a sloppy rich transition. I'm still searching for a pair of carbs that actually work without buying new ones from K&B or Perry/Conley.
My runner .65 is at about 2 gallons now.
Do the .60's take to getting wound up to 15-16k on a smaller prop?
Yeah actually you can, but they don't really like it. I don't think the rod can take the stress for all that long.
Mecoa suggests that 12,500 RPMs is max, and to use a 11x7 for running in the engine and larger props as needed.
If I remember correctly the engines were originally timed to run more like a 4 stroke engine and liked running bigger props. But I don't know if MECOA changed that or not.
02-04-2012, 05:00 AM
#2407
RE: Club FOX!
ORIGINAL: earlwb
Hummm, a square base carb? That sure sounds like a small frame Fox .40 engine to me, not the large frame types. The large frame .40, and up engines use a flat bolt on flange carb. But the small frame .40's use a square base that plugs into the intake on the crankcase.
In that case the current small frame Fox .40 cylinder and piston should still fit it. So you should be able to get parts still from Fox as they still manufacture it. Fox never really changed anything except the crankcase molds as they wore out, making incremental improvements in the process.
The last large frame .45 I had, wound up with the rod failing at high RPMs from using a tuned pipe on it, and it severely shot peened the insides real good. I traded it in on a new .60 engine, I have some parts, I'll take a look see if I have something for a small frame .40 or not.
The small frame Fox 40 engine wasn't much larger than a .28 or .32 or .36 engine is.
Here is a pic of the small frame .40 and you can see where the carb uses a square base to plug into the intake on the engine's crankcase. Now I am showing a rare .29 BBRC version as Fox at first used the crankcase to make .29's and .36's and then later bored it out for the .40 size. But otherwise the engine hasn't changed in all these years except for external cosmetic changes.
http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/g..._29BBRC_02.jpg
You can see here on this group of Fox .40 and .45 large frame engines where the carburetor uses a flat flange and bolts onto the crankcase.
http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/g...engines_01.jpg
Hummm, a square base carb? That sure sounds like a small frame Fox .40 engine to me, not the large frame types. The large frame .40, and up engines use a flat bolt on flange carb. But the small frame .40's use a square base that plugs into the intake on the crankcase.
In that case the current small frame Fox .40 cylinder and piston should still fit it. So you should be able to get parts still from Fox as they still manufacture it. Fox never really changed anything except the crankcase molds as they wore out, making incremental improvements in the process.
The last large frame .45 I had, wound up with the rod failing at high RPMs from using a tuned pipe on it, and it severely shot peened the insides real good. I traded it in on a new .60 engine, I have some parts, I'll take a look see if I have something for a small frame .40 or not.
The small frame Fox 40 engine wasn't much larger than a .28 or .32 or .36 engine is.
Here is a pic of the small frame .40 and you can see where the carb uses a square base to plug into the intake on the engine's crankcase. Now I am showing a rare .29 BBRC version as Fox at first used the crankcase to make .29's and .36's and then later bored it out for the .40 size. But otherwise the engine hasn't changed in all these years except for external cosmetic changes.
http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/g..._29BBRC_02.jpg
You can see here on this group of Fox .40 and .45 large frame engines where the carburetor uses a flat flange and bolts onto the crankcase.
http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/g...engines_01.jpg
Here's the thread I started when I was on the hunt to determine the model of the engine:
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_98..._1/key_/tm.htm
There's also a ton of pictures in there. Its no doubt a Lapped iron/steel engine and when I first got it back together (it came to me disassembled) it did run for about 10 minutes. I had the mixture needles reversed so it ran poorly. At that time I didnt have an electric starter so I was hand flipping it. After I had it running, I put it away to work on another project. The next time I ran it is when the wristpin clip broke and killed it.
I had emailed pictures to Sharon at Fox. Thats who told me it was a Series V Fox .40 with the single BB, but parts aren't available and modern parts do not fit. If you have a modern small frame .40 that you could measure the bore, outer sleeve diameter, and the stroke on, I could compare it to this one and see if it would work. I dont want to buy a modern piston/liner set and find it to not work and be stuck with a piston and liner I can't use.
02-04-2012, 05:09 AM
#2408
RE: Club FOX!
ORIGINAL: earlwb
Yeah actually you can, but they don't really like it. I don't think the rod can take the stress for all that long.
Mecoa suggests that 12,500 RPMs is max, and to use a 11x7 for running in the engine and larger props as needed.
If I remember correctly the engines were originally timed to run more like a 4 stroke engine and liked running bigger props. But I don't know if MECOA changed that or not.
ORIGINAL: 1QwkSport2.5r
I tried getting some background info from Randy at Mecoa about the drone sportsters awhile back. He didn't remember what the specs were supposed to be but he did ''think'' that WOT was spec'd at 5000-6000rpm with the supplied Revup 12x6 props. My engine turned one of those props at twice that rpm so I don't think he was quite right on that. He went on to say they were setup to be fueled, ran WOT and shot down. When ran WOT, they perform rather well. Try throttling it and you're done. My runner will not idle now and transition is very rich. Another member had PMed me awhile back with one of these drone engines and with a new carb they run as well or better than current production sportsters. The Venturi on my carb is about 7mm, but the problem lies with the mixture disk/idle mixture adjustment. I believe the spraybar orifice to be cut wrong. Full lean idle still gives a sloppy rich transition. I'm still searching for a pair of carbs that actually work without buying new ones from K&B or Perry/Conley.
My runner .65 is at about 2 gallons now.
Do the .60's take to getting wound up to 15-16k on a smaller prop?
I tried getting some background info from Randy at Mecoa about the drone sportsters awhile back. He didn't remember what the specs were supposed to be but he did ''think'' that WOT was spec'd at 5000-6000rpm with the supplied Revup 12x6 props. My engine turned one of those props at twice that rpm so I don't think he was quite right on that. He went on to say they were setup to be fueled, ran WOT and shot down. When ran WOT, they perform rather well. Try throttling it and you're done. My runner will not idle now and transition is very rich. Another member had PMed me awhile back with one of these drone engines and with a new carb they run as well or better than current production sportsters. The Venturi on my carb is about 7mm, but the problem lies with the mixture disk/idle mixture adjustment. I believe the spraybar orifice to be cut wrong. Full lean idle still gives a sloppy rich transition. I'm still searching for a pair of carbs that actually work without buying new ones from K&B or Perry/Conley.
My runner .65 is at about 2 gallons now.
Do the .60's take to getting wound up to 15-16k on a smaller prop?
Yeah actually you can, but they don't really like it. I don't think the rod can take the stress for all that long.
Mecoa suggests that 12,500 RPMs is max, and to use a 11x7 for running in the engine and larger props as needed.
If I remember correctly the engines were originally timed to run more like a 4 stroke engine and liked running bigger props. But I don't know if MECOA changed that or not.
I wouldn't be a bit surprised if these sportster engines have the gusto to turn a 16x6 at 8000rpm or better.
I asked the question of the .60's taking higher rpm in regard to the Fox Eagle IV .60 engines, not the Sportster engines.
02-04-2012, 06:21 AM
#2409
RE: Club FOX!
When I was really big into pattern flying years ago, I used to run tuned pipes on my Fox .60's. I had the engines tuned to run around 14,500 to 15,000 rpms which was easy to do. Which at the time was what everyone else was getting on their Rossi, Webra, OPS, and HP engines too. I tried tuning to a little over 16,000 RPMs but although it worked, but it was harder to tune to that speed, thus I was worried about engine life, so I backed off from it. Of course today, that might be interesting if the Fox Eagle IV would fit in a Hangar 9 Jackal plane as 16,000 RPMs or better with a 11x7 prop and a tuned pipe would be pretty impressive on that plane.
But if you can get a old Performance Specialties (aka Nelson) muffler or a Jett Muffler, a tuned pipe isn't needed to get 14,500 to 15,000 rpms and you don't have to mess around tuning it either.
But if you can get a old Performance Specialties (aka Nelson) muffler or a Jett Muffler, a tuned pipe isn't needed to get 14,500 to 15,000 rpms and you don't have to mess around tuning it either.
02-04-2012, 07:18 AM
#2410
RE: Club FOX!
1QwkSprt2.5,
I rummaged through my parts box, and my cylinders were all too big. But I did noticed that the old Fox 45 bushing cylinder happened to be about the right size. But I don't know for sure of course.
I rummaged through my parts box, and my cylinders were all too big. But I did noticed that the old Fox 45 bushing cylinder happened to be about the right size. But I don't know for sure of course.
02-04-2012, 08:30 AM
#2411
RE: Club FOX!
ORIGINAL: earlwb
1QwkSprt2.5,
I rummaged through my parts box, and my cylinders were all too big. But I did noticed that the old Fox 45 bushing cylinder happened to be about the right size. But I don't know for sure of course.
1QwkSprt2.5,
I rummaged through my parts box, and my cylinders were all too big. But I did noticed that the old Fox 45 bushing cylinder happened to be about the right size. But I don't know for sure of course.
Outer diameter of the Liner just below the lip on top = .918"
Thickness of lip at top of liner = .095"
Cylinder bore = .840"
Overall length of cylinder = 1.541"
If yours is reasonably close to those numbers, I'll buy that set from you and pay shipping.
Thanks Earl. Maybe ol' Bessie will run again after all..
02-04-2012, 08:56 AM
#2412
RE: Club FOX!
Yeah it is hard to say as I don't know how accurate my caliper is.
But at that time circa 1980, Fox had a .29, .36 and .40 engine size in the small frame crankcase. And also the control line combat 29, and .36's too.
Some of the small frames were bushed and had a single bearing or dual bearings. Later they had a ABC version too, if I remember right.
The small frame control line engines used a square intake venturi, with a insert for those events that required the engine to draw fuel versus the pressurized fuel events. So that is why Fox came up with the square base RC carbs for the engines.
The large frame crankcases had the 40 and 45 sizes in both the bushing and the ball bearing versions and later a ABC version as well as the Quickie racing and sport engines and later still the .50 followed along as well.
The small frame .40's are fairly small and about the same size as the .32 size engines, just slightly larger, so it can make for a good performance hop up in a plane where a .28 or .32 doesn't quite have the oompth to fly the plane.
But at that time circa 1980, Fox had a .29, .36 and .40 engine size in the small frame crankcase. And also the control line combat 29, and .36's too.
Some of the small frames were bushed and had a single bearing or dual bearings. Later they had a ABC version too, if I remember right.
The small frame control line engines used a square intake venturi, with a insert for those events that required the engine to draw fuel versus the pressurized fuel events. So that is why Fox came up with the square base RC carbs for the engines.
The large frame crankcases had the 40 and 45 sizes in both the bushing and the ball bearing versions and later a ABC version as well as the Quickie racing and sport engines and later still the .50 followed along as well.
The small frame .40's are fairly small and about the same size as the .32 size engines, just slightly larger, so it can make for a good performance hop up in a plane where a .28 or .32 doesn't quite have the oompth to fly the plane.
02-04-2012, 10:13 AM
#2413
Senior Member
My Feedback: (14)
RE: Club FOX!
ORIGINAL: earlwb
Yeah it is hard to say as I don't know how accurate my caliper is.
But at that time circa 1980, Fox had a .29, .36 and .40 engine size in the small frame crankcase. And also the control line combat 29, and .36's too.
Some of the small frames were bushed and had a single bearing or dual bearings. Later they had a ABC version too, if I remember right.
The small frame control line engines used a square intake venturi, with a insert for those events that required the engine to draw fuel versus the pressurized fuel events. So that is why Fox came up with the square base RC carbs for the engines.
The large frame crankcases had the 40 and 45 sizes in both the bushing and the ball bearing versions and later a ABC version as well as the Quickie racing and sport engines and later still the .50 followed along as well.
The small frame .40's are fairly small and about the same size as the .32 size engines, just slightly larger, so it can make for a good performance hop up in a plane where a .28 or .32 doesn't quite have the oompth to fly the plane.
Yeah it is hard to say as I don't know how accurate my caliper is.
But at that time circa 1980, Fox had a .29, .36 and .40 engine size in the small frame crankcase. And also the control line combat 29, and .36's too.
Some of the small frames were bushed and had a single bearing or dual bearings. Later they had a ABC version too, if I remember right.
The small frame control line engines used a square intake venturi, with a insert for those events that required the engine to draw fuel versus the pressurized fuel events. So that is why Fox came up with the square base RC carbs for the engines.
The large frame crankcases had the 40 and 45 sizes in both the bushing and the ball bearing versions and later a ABC version as well as the Quickie racing and sport engines and later still the .50 followed along as well.
The small frame .40's are fairly small and about the same size as the .32 size engines, just slightly larger, so it can make for a good performance hop up in a plane where a .28 or .32 doesn't quite have the oompth to fly the plane.
I'm not questioniing your accuracy, or your veracity, for that matter - whatever that is...(smile)
I don't remember there being a Class B Combat (under .30 CID), although I do remember something about a Class A/FAI combat class. Help me out here, Earl. Shake the memory's rafters for me.
Ed Cregger
02-04-2012, 06:29 PM
#2415
RE: Club FOX!
Yes, there you have it a old RC class B combat for up to .29 engine size.
Fox made the Combat .29 as both a RC and a control line or free flight engine too.
Then they made the .36 combat for the next size up as well in both RC and CL.
Later I think Fox had given up on the combat engines and instead of scrapping it out, they bored it out and made a .40 engine out of it. That is were it stayed ever since.
Fox had for many years kept modifying and improving the combat engines, but eventually the engines just were not selling as well as they used to. The larger Combat engines and planes were becoming less and less popular over time. So sales were dwindling as time progressed.
Here is a short history on the Fox combat engines http://www.clcombat.info/foxhistory.html
I think he made the combat engine series from 1957 up until maybe 1990 or so.
Unfortunately Fox had trouble with AAC cylinders in the last MK 7 engines. But his MK IV through MK VI engines pretty much ruled combat from 1983 through 1986 or so.
Then it was the Nelson, Cyclon,Fora and some other engines that took over being the engines to get. Of course Nelson is out of the picture now too.
Fox made the Combat .29 as both a RC and a control line or free flight engine too.
Then they made the .36 combat for the next size up as well in both RC and CL.
Later I think Fox had given up on the combat engines and instead of scrapping it out, they bored it out and made a .40 engine out of it. That is were it stayed ever since.
Fox had for many years kept modifying and improving the combat engines, but eventually the engines just were not selling as well as they used to. The larger Combat engines and planes were becoming less and less popular over time. So sales were dwindling as time progressed.
Here is a short history on the Fox combat engines http://www.clcombat.info/foxhistory.html
I think he made the combat engine series from 1957 up until maybe 1990 or so.
Unfortunately Fox had trouble with AAC cylinders in the last MK 7 engines. But his MK IV through MK VI engines pretty much ruled combat from 1983 through 1986 or so.
Then it was the Nelson, Cyclon,Fora and some other engines that took over being the engines to get. Of course Nelson is out of the picture now too.
02-05-2012, 09:37 PM
#2416
RE: Club FOX!
Thought I'd send this along about the Fox carb needle initial adjustments.
Also, for years I've been wrecking those odd ball slotted nuts fox uses to retain their needle springs with needle nosed pliers. Asked the person at Fox last time I called in for parts (Crankcases for three older .45s. The old straight style muffler is no longer available, and the new flanges have a different opening size and mounting screw spacing) where they get what appears to be a security type spanner. The tech said they just make them out of a hard metal tubing, and file the ends down to get the nubs to fit in the slots.
Also, for years I've been wrecking those odd ball slotted nuts fox uses to retain their needle springs with needle nosed pliers. Asked the person at Fox last time I called in for parts (Crankcases for three older .45s. The old straight style muffler is no longer available, and the new flanges have a different opening size and mounting screw spacing) where they get what appears to be a security type spanner. The tech said they just make them out of a hard metal tubing, and file the ends down to get the nubs to fit in the slots.
02-06-2012, 04:40 AM
#2417
RE: Club FOX!
Good Duke's Fuel Article 50+AirYears thanks for sharing it.
Duke also had this to say on how to tweak the MX X carb on his engines. Now then you seldom if ever really needed to do this as usually the carbs worked fine right out of the box, but if you did have a problem, here was how one can correct it.
Duke also had this to say on how to tweak the MX X carb on his engines. Now then you seldom if ever really needed to do this as usually the carbs worked fine right out of the box, but if you did have a problem, here was how one can correct it.
02-06-2012, 06:04 AM
#2418
RE: Club FOX!
Many years ago, I used to play with building engines from a Fox junk engine box. I placed a Fox .45 BBRC piston and sleeve in a plain bearing Fox 40 case( had the D-flange carb mount). I can't remember which rod ( .40 or .45) I had to use, but it ran. I later found a good case and made a really good .45 out of all the parts. It was fun we called the frankenstein engine a Fox 42.5
I really liked the Duke's Mixture articles. I learned alot reading those through the years good stuff for sure!
I really liked the Duke's Mixture articles. I learned alot reading those through the years good stuff for sure!
02-06-2012, 08:05 AM
#2419
RE: Club FOX!
Yeah a lot of us has played around with making frankenstein engines of various sorts. Fox engines tended to have a lot of parts interchangeability for doing such things too.
The Fox plain bearing or bushed crankshaft engines use a shorter crankpin on the crankshaft. So although a ball bearing crank connecting rod may fit, it is too wide for the crankpin. So you have to machine a little off the rod to make it more narrow to fit the shorter crankpin. You can quickly tell the two main rod types apart as the bushed engine rods used a thin slot for lubricating the big end whereas the ball bearing engines used a angled hole into the rod for lube purposes.
The Fox plain bearing or bushed crankshaft engines use a shorter crankpin on the crankshaft. So although a ball bearing crank connecting rod may fit, it is too wide for the crankpin. So you have to machine a little off the rod to make it more narrow to fit the shorter crankpin. You can quickly tell the two main rod types apart as the bushed engine rods used a thin slot for lubricating the big end whereas the ball bearing engines used a angled hole into the rod for lube purposes.
02-06-2012, 07:41 PM
#2420
RE: Club FOX!
I remember a couple Fox haters in my club really set their hooks in this recommendation as something that had to be done on all Fox engines. Frankly, I never ran into anybody ever felt they needed to do that. The article suggested it might be needed ofr SOME engines. I seem to remember seeing the same thing in the Owner's manual for a different engine.
One of these guys had a complaint about metal chips in one of his engines. Interestingly, at the same time, the Engine Guru in RCM had just mentioned that this actually had become a very common problem on an entire run of Webra, I think, and at least one other high end engine. This friend was again the only person I ever met who'd run into this, also.
One of these guys had a complaint about metal chips in one of his engines. Interestingly, at the same time, the Engine Guru in RCM had just mentioned that this actually had become a very common problem on an entire run of Webra, I think, and at least one other high end engine. This friend was again the only person I ever met who'd run into this, also.
02-08-2012, 06:33 PM
#2421
RE: Club FOX!
Earl was kind enough to send a piston and liner that he thought might fit my small-case series 5 Fox .40. Good news is I can join the club after all - The piston and liner are identical.
Kudos, Earl. Sometime this spring I'll test run this thing and break in the new piston and liner. What would be a good prop to run for break-in, and what would be a realistic "max rpm" for this little guy? 13-14,000 or so? Also, should there be a head shim installed? I plan to run 5% nitro and for break-in, 25% castor. Normal running fuel I would probably use my regular brew of 5% nitro and 20% all castor.
Kudos, Earl. Sometime this spring I'll test run this thing and break in the new piston and liner. What would be a good prop to run for break-in, and what would be a realistic "max rpm" for this little guy? 13-14,000 or so? Also, should there be a head shim installed? I plan to run 5% nitro and for break-in, 25% castor. Normal running fuel I would probably use my regular brew of 5% nitro and 20% all castor.
02-08-2012, 06:42 PM
#2422
RE: Club FOX!
A 10x6 prop was the standard prop for .40 engines years ago. A 11x5 would work too. A 11x6 may be too much for it though.
Yeah that sounds like a good fuel to use too.
You are welcome, glad to help someone out.
Yeah that sounds like a good fuel to use too.
You are welcome, glad to help someone out.
02-08-2012, 07:21 PM
#2423
RE: Club FOX!
ORIGINAL: earlwb
A 10x6 prop was the standard prop for .40 engines years ago. A 11x5 would work too. A 11x6 may be too much for it though.
Yeah that sounds like a good fuel to use too.
You are welcome, glad to help someone out.
A 10x6 prop was the standard prop for .40 engines years ago. A 11x5 would work too. A 11x6 may be too much for it though.
Yeah that sounds like a good fuel to use too.
You are welcome, glad to help someone out.
02-09-2012, 05:17 AM
#2425
Senior Member
My Feedback: (14)
RE: Club FOX!
I never understood folks that hated one brand of engine or another. I used to wait for them to get tired of playing with their Fox, or other brand of unpopular engine, and then make them a low ball offers for it. Lots of times folks would just give them away. All because they didn't understand the design philosophy of the manufacturer. I've been given Enya engines because of those allegedly unworkable airbleed carbs, etc.
Once someone makes up their mind that they know it all, there's no point in trying to help them get an engine running that only needs a tweak or two. I don't mean to hurt anyone's feelings, but it sure is frustrating being a friend to one of these people when you know the answer to their problem, but their ego gets in the way of accepting the answer. Yes, I've been one of those hard headed rascals myself more than once in my life.
Ed Cregger
Once someone makes up their mind that they know it all, there's no point in trying to help them get an engine running that only needs a tweak or two. I don't mean to hurt anyone's feelings, but it sure is frustrating being a friend to one of these people when you know the answer to their problem, but their ego gets in the way of accepting the answer. Yes, I've been one of those hard headed rascals myself more than once in my life.
Ed Cregger