Oil leaking out - Splattered Cowl
02-02-2007, 03:11 AM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Alpharetta,
GA
Posts: 792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Oil leaking out - Splattered Cowl
ORIGINAL: Ed Cregger
---------------
This only works if the two-stroke is saddled down with a huge prop and is running out of its design range. Put a normal sized prop on the two-stroke and it will thoroughly kick the snot out of a four-stroke of equal displacement. Don't believe me? Watch the motorcycle races. You'll see that they have to give the four-strokes twice the displacement to stay with the itty-bitty two-strokes.
This whole static thrust thing is baloney anyway. I don't fly my models static. Do you? I find it to be much more fun to have the model actually leave the ground and fly around through the air.
Ed Cregger
ORIGINAL: Checklst
chocks_Away A retired Pharmacist at our field purchased an electronic hand held scale. I don't remember the brand, but he checked it's accuracy with his brass scale weights. He is compiling more than a few numbers on a lot of different motors in the last 3months. He records the static thrust at max rpm, engine type and fuel type. I have used his scale and I kept a little more data on my engines like Prop Pitch.............. I am think of using his pull scale to set my throttle stick position to match a (hover rpm) example would be a plane that hovers at 3/4 throttle but you would like the same RPM at a Half throttle stick position........it just seem easier for me to find the 1/2 throttle position.
His only request is that you fly your plane and after landing you attach it to his scale and static pull without needle adjustment(not an over lean not flyable setting)
His data as a whole has shown what a lot of us have thought for some time that 2 cycle and 4 cycle are (thrust wise) are vary equal in the same CC engine size. Last time I looked at his chart the OS 120AX 2c had a 2 oz lower(static thrust pull) than the Satio 125FS ,this makes perfect since the CC is slightly larger on the Satio. Most ALL engines are staying with in the rule of (CC engine size rules) CC is more of a determining factor for power than what type of motor(2c vers4c)
THE ONLY ENGINES to break this RULE is some of the YS 4strokes so far 2 of their engines 140,63's are pulling well above the 2stroke counter parts of equal CC engine size. Example 4 OS 160's 2C all pulled around 16.1 lbs with one OS at 17.3 lbs on 30% nitro, only 2 YS140FS tested so far both were on 30% 17.6 and 17.12 lbs thrust, considering the differences in CC engine size this is quite a large gap between the 2. NOW I'm sure that does not supprise YS folks but the next has most of us at our field going Hummmmmmmmmmmmm the 4 YS 110's tested so far all on 30% stayed within their CC class go figure. I'm sure in the spring(good weather) we'll get a lot more 110s in the mix so maybe the data will swing up (above their CC class) like their brothers the 63 and 140 who knows.
Like I said above we don't tweak......change props........fuel ect.........we just fly, do a thrust pull write down the data and REFER TO IT when someone ASK...WHAT ENGINE will hover my 12lb plane the best. This Data has maybe 30 various engines so far so I hope no one takes it as gospel and starts a WAR over it.......it just shows simple trends.
chocks_Away A retired Pharmacist at our field purchased an electronic hand held scale. I don't remember the brand, but he checked it's accuracy with his brass scale weights. He is compiling more than a few numbers on a lot of different motors in the last 3months. He records the static thrust at max rpm, engine type and fuel type. I have used his scale and I kept a little more data on my engines like Prop Pitch.............. I am think of using his pull scale to set my throttle stick position to match a (hover rpm) example would be a plane that hovers at 3/4 throttle but you would like the same RPM at a Half throttle stick position........it just seem easier for me to find the 1/2 throttle position.
His only request is that you fly your plane and after landing you attach it to his scale and static pull without needle adjustment(not an over lean not flyable setting)
His data as a whole has shown what a lot of us have thought for some time that 2 cycle and 4 cycle are (thrust wise) are vary equal in the same CC engine size. Last time I looked at his chart the OS 120AX 2c had a 2 oz lower(static thrust pull) than the Satio 125FS ,this makes perfect since the CC is slightly larger on the Satio. Most ALL engines are staying with in the rule of (CC engine size rules) CC is more of a determining factor for power than what type of motor(2c vers4c)
THE ONLY ENGINES to break this RULE is some of the YS 4strokes so far 2 of their engines 140,63's are pulling well above the 2stroke counter parts of equal CC engine size. Example 4 OS 160's 2C all pulled around 16.1 lbs with one OS at 17.3 lbs on 30% nitro, only 2 YS140FS tested so far both were on 30% 17.6 and 17.12 lbs thrust, considering the differences in CC engine size this is quite a large gap between the 2. NOW I'm sure that does not supprise YS folks but the next has most of us at our field going Hummmmmmmmmmmmm the 4 YS 110's tested so far all on 30% stayed within their CC class go figure. I'm sure in the spring(good weather) we'll get a lot more 110s in the mix so maybe the data will swing up (above their CC class) like their brothers the 63 and 140 who knows.
Like I said above we don't tweak......change props........fuel ect.........we just fly, do a thrust pull write down the data and REFER TO IT when someone ASK...WHAT ENGINE will hover my 12lb plane the best. This Data has maybe 30 various engines so far so I hope no one takes it as gospel and starts a WAR over it.......it just shows simple trends.
This only works if the two-stroke is saddled down with a huge prop and is running out of its design range. Put a normal sized prop on the two-stroke and it will thoroughly kick the snot out of a four-stroke of equal displacement. Don't believe me? Watch the motorcycle races. You'll see that they have to give the four-strokes twice the displacement to stay with the itty-bitty two-strokes.
This whole static thrust thing is baloney anyway. I don't fly my models static. Do you? I find it to be much more fun to have the model actually leave the ground and fly around through the air.
Ed Cregger
) and nowhere in the data was mention static pull power had anything to due with speed or normal flying. Thrust and toque are not baloney, but since you brought up food and dirt. Ed you can take any 2stroke motorbike of any cc size you want (Not the original point) and run up and down a field at a 100mph all you want, and I'll take a 4 stroke tractor of matching cc sizes and slowly pull a plow & plant that field and we'll just see who is eating well at seasons end.........I don't think the point of the data was you and I playing & speeding around in the dirt.
I would hardly call my OS120Ax over propped with it's 16-8 and my Satio 125 spools up just fine on a 16-6 APC. Now both my engines are turning just a few hundred rpm's under their rated HP figures......(a vary good flyable setting)......and within a few OZ of thrust from each other..... it would however make for a interesting test if I had 2 identical air frames.......and a radar gun. I hardly think one will kick the snot out of the other.
On your last point I could not agree more!!!!!!! after hovering a plane a couple times I ask myself "whats the big deal and is that it" I then went back to flying a plane in a more normal fashion and had more fun, but everyone definition of fun is different, I just ask (of the hover boys)don't pull a Static Hover in the middle of the runway as I am doing a 100mph low pass.......LOL...could make for messy runway.
02-02-2007, 06:47 AM
#27
Senior Member
My Feedback: (14)
RE: Oil leaking out - Splattered Cowl
ORIGINAL: Checklst
LOL....Ed......I think you miss read, we were not testing motorcycles, and YES a plane in a good HOVER is static, and needs more thrust than it's weight to maintain altitude (well unless I'm during the hovering, then nothings static and altitude is questionable) and nowhere in the data was mention static pull power had anything to due with speed or normal flying. Thrust and toque are not baloney, but since you brought up food and dirt.
Ed you can take any 2stroke motorbike of any cc size you want (Not the original point) and run up and down a field at a 100mph all you want, and I'll take a 4 stroke tractor of matching cc sizes and slowly pull a plow & plant that field and we'll just see who is eating well at seasons end.........I don't think the point of the data was you and I playing & speeding around in the dirt.
I would hardly call my OS120Ax over propped with it's 16-8 and my Satio 125 spools up just fine on a 16-6 APC. Now both my engines are turning just a few hundred rpm's under their rated HP figures......(a vary good flyable setting)......and within a few OZ of thrust from each other..... it would however make for a interesting test if I had 2 identical air frames.......and a radar gun. I hardly think one will kick the snot out of the other.
On your last point I could not agree more!!!!!!! after hovering a plane a couple times I ask myself "whats the big deal and is that it" I then went back to flying a plane in a more normal fashion and had more fun, but everyone definition of fun is different, I just ask (of the hover boys)don't pull a Static Hover in the middle of the runway as I am doing a 100mph low pass.......LOL...could make for messy runway.
ORIGINAL: Ed Cregger
---------------
This only works if the two-stroke is saddled down with a huge prop and is running out of its design range. Put a normal sized prop on the two-stroke and it will thoroughly kick the snot out of a four-stroke of equal displacement. Don't believe me? Watch the motorcycle races. You'll see that they have to give the four-strokes twice the displacement to stay with the itty-bitty two-strokes.
This whole static thrust thing is baloney anyway. I don't fly my models static. Do you? I find it to be much more fun to have the model actually leave the ground and fly around through the air.
Ed Cregger
ORIGINAL: Checklst
chocks_Away A retired Pharmacist at our field purchased an electronic hand held scale. I don't remember the brand, but he checked it's accuracy with his brass scale weights. He is compiling more than a few numbers on a lot of different motors in the last 3months. He records the static thrust at max rpm, engine type and fuel type. I have used his scale and I kept a little more data on my engines like Prop Pitch.............. I am think of using his pull scale to set my throttle stick position to match a (hover rpm) example would be a plane that hovers at 3/4 throttle but you would like the same RPM at a Half throttle stick position........it just seem easier for me to find the 1/2 throttle position.
His only request is that you fly your plane and after landing you attach it to his scale and static pull without needle adjustment(not an over lean not flyable setting)
His data as a whole has shown what a lot of us have thought for some time that 2 cycle and 4 cycle are (thrust wise) are vary equal in the same CC engine size. Last time I looked at his chart the OS 120AX 2c had a 2 oz lower(static thrust pull) than the Satio 125FS ,this makes perfect since the CC is slightly larger on the Satio. Most ALL engines are staying with in the rule of (CC engine size rules) CC is more of a determining factor for power than what type of motor(2c vers4c)
THE ONLY ENGINES to break this RULE is some of the YS 4strokes so far 2 of their engines 140,63's are pulling well above the 2stroke counter parts of equal CC engine size. Example 4 OS 160's 2C all pulled around 16.1 lbs with one OS at 17.3 lbs on 30% nitro, only 2 YS140FS tested so far both were on 30% 17.6 and 17.12 lbs thrust, considering the differences in CC engine size this is quite a large gap between the 2. NOW I'm sure that does not supprise YS folks but the next has most of us at our field going Hummmmmmmmmmmmm the 4 YS 110's tested so far all on 30% stayed within their CC class go figure. I'm sure in the spring(good weather) we'll get a lot more 110s in the mix so maybe the data will swing up (above their CC class) like their brothers the 63 and 140 who knows.
Like I said above we don't tweak......change props........fuel ect.........we just fly, do a thrust pull write down the data and REFER TO IT when someone ASK...WHAT ENGINE will hover my 12lb plane the best. This Data has maybe 30 various engines so far so I hope no one takes it as gospel and starts a WAR over it.......it just shows simple trends.
chocks_Away A retired Pharmacist at our field purchased an electronic hand held scale. I don't remember the brand, but he checked it's accuracy with his brass scale weights. He is compiling more than a few numbers on a lot of different motors in the last 3months. He records the static thrust at max rpm, engine type and fuel type. I have used his scale and I kept a little more data on my engines like Prop Pitch.............. I am think of using his pull scale to set my throttle stick position to match a (hover rpm) example would be a plane that hovers at 3/4 throttle but you would like the same RPM at a Half throttle stick position........it just seem easier for me to find the 1/2 throttle position.
His only request is that you fly your plane and after landing you attach it to his scale and static pull without needle adjustment(not an over lean not flyable setting)
His data as a whole has shown what a lot of us have thought for some time that 2 cycle and 4 cycle are (thrust wise) are vary equal in the same CC engine size. Last time I looked at his chart the OS 120AX 2c had a 2 oz lower(static thrust pull) than the Satio 125FS ,this makes perfect since the CC is slightly larger on the Satio. Most ALL engines are staying with in the rule of (CC engine size rules) CC is more of a determining factor for power than what type of motor(2c vers4c)
THE ONLY ENGINES to break this RULE is some of the YS 4strokes so far 2 of their engines 140,63's are pulling well above the 2stroke counter parts of equal CC engine size. Example 4 OS 160's 2C all pulled around 16.1 lbs with one OS at 17.3 lbs on 30% nitro, only 2 YS140FS tested so far both were on 30% 17.6 and 17.12 lbs thrust, considering the differences in CC engine size this is quite a large gap between the 2. NOW I'm sure that does not supprise YS folks but the next has most of us at our field going Hummmmmmmmmmmmm the 4 YS 110's tested so far all on 30% stayed within their CC class go figure. I'm sure in the spring(good weather) we'll get a lot more 110s in the mix so maybe the data will swing up (above their CC class) like their brothers the 63 and 140 who knows.
Like I said above we don't tweak......change props........fuel ect.........we just fly, do a thrust pull write down the data and REFER TO IT when someone ASK...WHAT ENGINE will hover my 12lb plane the best. This Data has maybe 30 various engines so far so I hope no one takes it as gospel and starts a WAR over it.......it just shows simple trends.
This only works if the two-stroke is saddled down with a huge prop and is running out of its design range. Put a normal sized prop on the two-stroke and it will thoroughly kick the snot out of a four-stroke of equal displacement. Don't believe me? Watch the motorcycle races. You'll see that they have to give the four-strokes twice the displacement to stay with the itty-bitty two-strokes.
This whole static thrust thing is baloney anyway. I don't fly my models static. Do you? I find it to be much more fun to have the model actually leave the ground and fly around through the air.
Ed Cregger
) and nowhere in the data was mention static pull power had anything to due with speed or normal flying. Thrust and toque are not baloney, but since you brought up food and dirt. Ed you can take any 2stroke motorbike of any cc size you want (Not the original point) and run up and down a field at a 100mph all you want, and I'll take a 4 stroke tractor of matching cc sizes and slowly pull a plow & plant that field and we'll just see who is eating well at seasons end.........I don't think the point of the data was you and I playing & speeding around in the dirt.
I would hardly call my OS120Ax over propped with it's 16-8 and my Satio 125 spools up just fine on a 16-6 APC. Now both my engines are turning just a few hundred rpm's under their rated HP figures......(a vary good flyable setting)......and within a few OZ of thrust from each other..... it would however make for a interesting test if I had 2 identical air frames.......and a radar gun. I hardly think one will kick the snot out of the other.
On your last point I could not agree more!!!!!!! after hovering a plane a couple times I ask myself "whats the big deal and is that it" I then went back to flying a plane in a more normal fashion and had more fun, but everyone definition of fun is different, I just ask (of the hover boys)don't pull a Static Hover in the middle of the runway as I am doing a 100mph low pass.......LOL...could make for messy runway.
----------------
Okay, you can't make your point without dropping into the ridicule mode, so, I guess I'll do the same thing.
Satio? You must be dyslexic. Oh, sorry, for you that would be dexlysic.
vary? Is that from a different dialect?
OZ? What does Australia have to do with it?
Ed Cregger
02-02-2007, 12:09 PM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Alpharetta,
GA
Posts: 792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Oil leaking out - Splattered Cowl
Sorry Ed did not mean to upset so much you with my typing skills, and the quality of my spell check at 3am. Sorry you miss read the first data and decided to ridicule it, and that's no "Baloney" I think if you would actually read your response of the miss read data, you might see plenty of ridicule and sarcasm to go around. I see it "Do You?"
BTW Ed...............sorry for you that would be......... By The Way Ed, if you spent half as much time reading the data as you spend on spell checking you might find you under stand what was written better........just a thought.
Ed this response was full of Sarcasm so don't miss read it as anything else.................
I apologize to RCU and to All in this thread for the original post was not written with the intent to be dragged so far off topic into the gutter. SORRY!
BTW Ed...............sorry for you that would be......... By The Way Ed, if you spent half as much time reading the data as you spend on spell checking you might find you under stand what was written better........just a thought.
Ed this response was full of Sarcasm so don't miss read it as anything else.................
I apologize to RCU and to All in this thread for the original post was not written with the intent to be dragged so far off topic into the gutter. SORRY!
02-02-2007, 02:10 PM
#29
RE: Oil leaking out - Splattered Cowl
Ed you can take any 2stroke motorbike of any cc size you want (Not the original point) and run up and down a field at a 100mph all you want, and I'll take a 4 stroke tractor of matching cc sizes and slowly pull a plow & plant that field and we'll just see who is eating well at seasons end.........I don't think the point of the data was you and I playing & speeding around in the dirt.
02-02-2007, 02:45 PM
#30
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Grimsby, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Oil leaking out - Splattered Cowl
ORIGINAL: Ed Cregger
I'm not trying to insult your intelligence and I have no way of knowing how much experience you have. Pardon me if I stepped on your toes. You didn't answer as though you understood what I was saying. That is why I persisted, waiting for an acknowledgement.
I'm not trying to insult your intelligence and I have no way of knowing how much experience you have. Pardon me if I stepped on your toes. You didn't answer as though you understood what I was saying. That is why I persisted, waiting for an acknowledgement.
Nah don't worry about it, no insult even thought of, as I know your only trying to help
Err........ maybe my fault for not acknowledging you properly ?
Been flying for 2 years now - IC and electric - 50/50 really....
Yeah I know they don't break in immediately, and do take several tankfuls to fully break in.
My other fourstroke of a 54 size seemed to take ages to get fully settled (about a dozen tankfuls over a couple of months I reckon !) so I don't expect this one to be any different ?
What I didn't realise was that you said the needle will be differently set when run in to what it will be now after only 3 tankfulls gone through it.
I thought that once it's set now, it won't really be touched much anymore unless a prop is changed or fuel is changed.
I didn't realise that it would need further leaning out later, nor did I know that it would take any more leaning out than it's at now.
If that is the case, it must have been a very gradual process with my other engines for me not to have noticed doing it with them.
The vast majority of "engine problems" that I see with newbies (less than 10 years flying experience) and their engines is that most grossly underestimate how long it actually takes for an engine to be broken-in enough to arrive at its peak performance. Until you get the engine to that point, it is still in the break-in process and cannot be expected to handle well.
Too much nitro is the next major culprit for two-stroke flyers and inverted engine installations are number three. Although the order of these problems is arguably debatable.
Ever notice that the engines that do break-in quickly never quite seem to arrive at said performance peak? Break'um-in, break'um-out. <G>
02-02-2007, 06:12 PM
#31
Senior Member
My Feedback: (14)
RE: Oil leaking out - Splattered Cowl
ORIGINAL: Checklst
Sorry Ed did not mean to upset so much you with my typing skills, and the quality of my spell check at 3am. Sorry you miss read the first data and decided to ridicule it, and that's no "Baloney" I think if you would actually read your response of the miss read data, you might see plenty of ridicule and sarcasm to go around. I see it "Do You?"
BTW Ed...............sorry for you that would be......... By The Way Ed, if you spent half as much time reading the data as you spend on spell checking you might find you under stand what was written better........just a thought.
Ed this response was full of Sarcasm so don't miss read it as anything else.................
I apologize to RCU and to All in this thread for the original post was not written with the intent to be dragged so far off topic into the gutter. SORRY!
Sorry Ed did not mean to upset so much you with my typing skills, and the quality of my spell check at 3am. Sorry you miss read the first data and decided to ridicule it, and that's no "Baloney" I think if you would actually read your response of the miss read data, you might see plenty of ridicule and sarcasm to go around. I see it "Do You?"
BTW Ed...............sorry for you that would be......... By The Way Ed, if you spent half as much time reading the data as you spend on spell checking you might find you under stand what was written better........just a thought.
Ed this response was full of Sarcasm so don't miss read it as anything else.................
I apologize to RCU and to All in this thread for the original post was not written with the intent to be dragged so far off topic into the gutter. SORRY!
---------------
Not a problem, my friend. My attempts at humor seldom prove to be successful and are generally misunderstood.
Ed Cregger
02-02-2007, 10:35 PM
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Alpharetta,
GA
Posts: 792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Oil leaking out - Splattered Cowl
No problem Ed, just as much my fault as your's, I think most of the time we all read way more into it, than was intended. [8D]
02-03-2007, 03:37 PM
#34
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Grimsby, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Oil leaking out - Splattered Cowl
Flown again today, took the cowl off after it got lathered in oil after the first flight, and flew it with it off to see if I could see where the oil was coming from..
Landed afterwards, oil mostly on the crankcase nipple side of the engine bay area
Started the engine up on the ground, and connected a piece of fuel pipe to the nipple, and held onto it pointing at the floor while the engine was running at full rpm.
Oil was spitting out the pipe this time, so I don't know why it didn't do that before when I first put some pipe on there originally ?
The oil coming out of the nipple may only account for about 50% of the mess being made, as it seems to be getting blown into other areas that it wouldn't do if it was all coming from there.
I will now fix another bit of pipe on the nipple and route it to the floor, and see how we go next time I take it out.
Landed afterwards, oil mostly on the crankcase nipple side of the engine bay area
Started the engine up on the ground, and connected a piece of fuel pipe to the nipple, and held onto it pointing at the floor while the engine was running at full rpm.
Oil was spitting out the pipe this time, so I don't know why it didn't do that before when I first put some pipe on there originally ?
The oil coming out of the nipple may only account for about 50% of the mess being made, as it seems to be getting blown into other areas that it wouldn't do if it was all coming from there.
I will now fix another bit of pipe on the nipple and route it to the floor, and see how we go next time I take it out.
