I bought this engine for less that $13.00 to use the muffler on my .45. It came with a U/C needle valve so I threw on a K&B carb just to see what it would do for kicks. On 5% with a 10X6 Rev Up 13,400, 9X7 APC 15,000 rpm. I like surprises like this.

Bill

Bill, that's great. Nothing like picking up an older engine and finding out it's a good runner.

David

You should look for one of these.

Nice find.
Actually the FOX bushing versions of the ball bearing engines only lose about 200 to 500 rpms or so off the top end.
I actually tend to prefer the bushing versions of the engines. They run good and don't really lose that much power. Plus you don't need to worry about ball bearings going bad on you.
At the time FOX made the bushing and ball bearing engines the same, except for the bearings. So it was a excellent comparison of the effects ball bearings really had on a engine. Later FOX changed the port timing a little on the ball bearing engines, but by then I think Fox had stopped producing the bushing versions. Other companies that had bushing versus ball bearing engines of the same displacement, had made the engines wildly different. So you could not compare them to see that a bushing version runs almost as good as a ball bearing version. Anyway it used to aggravate Mr Fox that people put so much emphasis on the marketing claims of competitors that ball bearing supported cranks was the way to go.

could you post another shot ot 2 of that engine..it looks interesting

As far as Fox not liking people going with RPM claims, he also had an interesting idea about providing sample engines for magazine engine test columns. One of the engine testers for MAN mentioned this, in response to someone writing in about how he buys engines based on the reports in Model Magazines. He has never had any other engine reach the test results, even though he has often bought Fox engines that actually exceeded the reports' claims. The response was that, usually, the tester requests an engine from a manufacturer for testing. The manufacturer sends one or two, and requests that they be returned within a particular time frame. Indications are that the sample engines are hand-fitted prototypes built for reviews, not production engines. When he wrote to Fox for, IIRC, a sample .45, he received a pair of Fox Purchase Orders. The intent was for the reviewer to buy off-the-shelf engines from an LHS, so he could test exactly what the actual modeler would get. The reviewer for R/C Reports had similar comments.

I had the opportunity to tach an older Fox .45 BB of mine against a fairly new ST .45. The ST was only about 200 RPM faster than the 15 year old Fox, using APC 10-6 sport props and 10% fuel. The Fox has over 400 flights, and a couple vertical landings in dirt. It even survived hitting an oak stump dead center. It also has ben tached with a top end of 14500 and a sustainable idle of 1950 rpm.

Sorry I missed your post.
Ihave a couple more photos.
Ididnt have a proper muffler for it so Imade an adapter and used an Enya muffler, worked fine.

The other nice thing about the Fox .40s and .45s I have, I have never had a problem hand flipping the, including after one maven claime I'll never get the Fox to start, consistently got single flip starts. He left after i got in three flights that way.

That one performs like a .45! How does your Fox .45 perform with those props?

That is a great deal for a engine.

A while back I was setting up a FOX 45 engine to use in a new plane I was building. I wanted to try out a EZ carb I had and make sure the engine was running OK.
I got a little over 12,600 RPMs running a Master Airscrew 11x6 prop and the stock muffler. i used Omega 5% nitro glow fuel in it.
The engine is still pretty new actually, so it still needs some running in.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDU6p9u3CqQ[/youtube]

Years back I flew my Fox .45 with a Prather pipe and turned
a MAS 10X6 15,300 for years . Too many crashes finally wore
out the poor crankcase. Great engines, I would like to see
more of them at the field.
Ralph