When they ran they were fun but they were quite a handful to a 10 year old boy to get and keep running! PT-19, COSMIC WIND, BD-5, a half dozen wooden kit builds then the .35 Fox engine and combat wings, Aircobra, and flea market finds. Good times, thank you for sharing this!
Right on. I was 10 doing it too, but began flying in UKIE Pattern contests with Johnson 35 combat special engines in my Veco Thunderbird and Nobler. I was a voodoo fan too. You had some good stuff too, it sounds like. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see a later video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control recent flight. ruclips.net/video/BU0z7ddwslYU/видео.htmlkie Thanks much.
I can’t imagine how difficult to get BOTH cylinders to do what you want them to do simultaneously but what a great little engine when it’s happily tuned and singing away. Love it! ❤
50 years ago I had the same idea of gearing 2 or 4 of those little engines together, but not having access to a machine shop and or a source for the gears it never got beyond the design stage, Those little engines were a pain to run and keep running as a single unit let alone 2 of them, but it is nice to see that my idea actually would work.
A long time ago..... In the early 70s, Austrian Hanno Fratner Two .60-class engines were installed in the same way on an aircraft called Darotel.... It was nice to be reminded of something that happened 50 years ago.
That is great. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control recent flight. ruclips.net/video/BU0z7ddwslY/видео.html
@@NightFlyyer I got the PT-19 for Christmas in '61 and a P-40 "Warhawk" for my birthday a few months later. I got seriously bit by the bug. During the winter of '62-63 I built a "Flite-Streak" and my uncle gave me a Testors/McCoy .35 to power it. First flight in the spring was on 55 foot .012 steel lines I got from a friend.....I figured it out quickly that I'd need 70 or 75 foot lines to fly this beast! Flew combat and stunted with it for 2 years, had a lot of fun! Then at the age of 14.....I discovered girls.......
Right on. Those were great for sure. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control recent flight. ruclips.net/video/BU0z7ddwslYU/видео.htmlkie
My close friend Dave Raubinger, now confined to a wheel chair with MS, made this tandem Cox .049 coupling system 40 years ago! He recently sent it to me to experiment with, so I decided to try to run it after all these years and see if it still would. It's unique with it's own oiling and gearing system. I hope you enjoy seeing it really scream by the end of the video. .049's still available at www.coxengines.com
Firstly? My condolences on your friend's ( Dave Robinder) wheel chair confinement. However? It was good that he implemented this dual cox assembly with a cooling bearing tubing at the change of the time. He was ahead with progression with this idea." ~He only needed to add a single fuel adjustment other than dual for main control setup and quick response.~
Well 45 years ago, when he made this, there was no internet, no Google, and no way to hear others suggestions, like yours, so used what he had on hand. Single carb adjustment would have been nice for sure. Thanks.
That is great. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control flight from this week. ruclips.net/video/BU0z7ddwslY/видео.html
I may have commented on this video in the past, I have an article from the May/June 1966 issue of American Modeler Magazine, in the article it has photo, drawings, dimension and a parts list to build one of these. My dad built one from article in the late 60's or 70's and I still have the one that he built.
Dave, a couple of days ago you asked me to make a video on the Cox .049 based twin that my dad built from an article the May/June 1966 issue of American Modeler Magazine. So I did and it is now up on my channel, but RUclips won't let me post the link to in the comments so you will have to go there to find it. I put links to your channel and your video in the discerption of my video.
Yeee haaa. The year was 1973 I was in trade school learning to be a Machinist. I took two Cox.049 cylinder piston assemblies mounted them to a crankcase I made in a Southbend lathe. It ran but only on the prime as I couldnt develop vacume to work the reed valve and draw fuel. Still was fun to do and 40 years later I see this and think " I should have tried that " lol
That's a great story and effort. I'm sure Dave, my friend, will appreciate that. Thanks kindly. Check this out, if you like Cox engines. Flying shop rags. ruclips.net/video/Q7MwFVHCRpY/видео.html
I used to have a COX engine when I was a kid in the late 60s. Maybe you should experiment with different configuration like firing alternately not at the same time and only one carburetor.
Yep, well My wife used to work at Cox in Santa Ana before it burned down, and Dave Duncan the Head Engineer was a member of our RC flying club back in the 80's. I have many videos on Cox engines and airplanes on my channel, you may enjoy. According my friend who designed this, firing opposite was extremely difficult to start and it was very hard to adjust the carbs because each piston and cylinder were on engines that weren't identical in age and wear. H said it would run just right on one engine, but rich on the other and vice versa, so he went back to 2 carbs. Maybe with 2 brand new pistons cylinders and glow plugs, would be a way for 1 carb, but he said in no way could he adjust it so it would run right. Plus he also said it had horrendous vibration. So I never tried. Thanks.
Holy cow! That is awesome! Like seriously! Back in the early 90s my friends and I would take the Old foamy gliders and turn them into RC’s… As you know equipment was heavy back then So using an .049 what is the best possible solution LOL these planes never flew that great but they flew… Long story… I always wondered if you could couple two of them and turn up a two cylinder. Now I know! Wow! Again that is a really neat set up! Have a great week Dave!
I was flying Cox .049's in the 60's free flight later in the 70's 2-3-4 channel.....60 % nitro and 4.5" x 5.5" prop. Those little planes scream. Still fly them but electrics are easy...................nitro is the way to go.
Very cool, and good job discerning the problem with the coupled front bearings venting to the crankcases. Idea- could you set the needle valves independently by running without one glow plug, alternating first one, get it set, then switch to the other? Also, that prop isn't happy with the pulse excitation frequency of the setup- looking at the vibrations when viewed edge-on.
They both fire at the same time. There was too much vibration firing alternately and it was impossible to start. It would not stay running on just 1 cylinder. That prop was the only one I had, so it probably was out of balance. My friend designed and built it many years ago.
Good luck with it. Thanks kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control flight from last week. ruclips.net/video/BU0z7ddwslY/видео.html
Maybe a pipe collector system could be added to the muffler outlet pipes, but I don't know if it would help, as it screams pretty good as is. I'm just happy to run it for Dave as he designed it. Thanks Robert.
I was just searching earlier on ebay to see if anyone had ever machined a crank case to accept two cylinders with a different crank. I KNOW it could be done. Id do it if I had the equipment. Be extra cool!
Well, they were designed to run either way. If I had an engine run backwards, I simply flipped the prop backwards and it usually ran the right way. In this situation, both engines had to run together and one could not run backwards. And of course if it was running backwards, you would know right away as which way the wind was going. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control flight from this week. ruclips.net/video/BU0z7ddwslY/видео.html
We did too. LOL Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control recent flight. ruclips.net/video/BU0z7ddwslYU/видео.htmlkie
Yes, thank you. Well Dave is in no position to do that anymore. He did make a 6 cylinder radial before he got confined to a wheel chair, but that engine can't seem to be found. Thanks.
This is actually great for rc helicopter you place them to fire at the same time so piston motion is completely vibration free and let the main rotor act as a flywheel to compensate for power pulsing
I could not get it to run firing at the same time as I tried and tried. The push on the gears weren't right. It actually is quite smooth as is, though. Thanks.
Because this was the only one I had that was the right size and since this engine does not put out as much power as the Brushless motor did, so no problem. It works.
I used a 7x6 prop and have no idea about the RPMs. I did not design it, so have no detailed drawings. Sorry. I'll bet you could improvise though! Thanks kindly.
I seem to remember seeing a 5 cylinder radial engine advertised for sale in the magazines that was just 5 OS .10 on a gear drive back in the old days. Wish I could find the ad for it, but my old issues got lost in a move...
WHOA! That's a screamer indeed Dave I would love to see what type of plane your going to put those little twin monster on maybe to try add throttle to them???
I might try to build something that I could fly it on, but throttling would be more difficult. I don't want to change Dave's original design in his honor. Thanks.
I’m trying to work out why the oil tubes were used, most ball bearings run perfectly on their own lubricant. Even a sintered bronze bush wouldn’t need a continuous oil flow. Nice bit of engineering.
My friend is an engineer and figured the extra stress on the bushed bearing could use the extra oil when he built it, so that is the reason. It can't hurt but probably not necessary . Thanks.
Okay, so the next step on this would be to plumb both intakes to a single carb. If you continue to run it with alternate firing you shouldn't need that carb to be much larger of an intake and you could probably use the same needle and jet from the stock carb. Always wanted to try something like this when I was a kid, but lacked the facilities to actually fabricate it. Barring that, you might try a remote needle valve for both cylinders to try and get a balanced run from both sides. The crankcase leakage is probably due to there not being a forward load on the crankshaft. The forward curve of the main crank "disk" (pull one out, you'll see what I mean) was what sealed the engine in a tractor configuration. Always had problems using these in a pusher plane because of that.
That would be a lot of work since these engines are reed controlled through the rear of the engine. There are no carbs. Tee dee engines would be easier because they had Venturi needle carbs and no reeds. Thanks
Well, if you think about it, the backplate/reed-valve assembly is the carb. That's the induction side of the engine. Just not the typical RC or UC carb we're used to in front-rotor induction engines, like the Tee Dee series, and most modern RC engines. The function is the same. It should be possible to run a remote needle valve common to both cylinders and thus get an even mix to both. You'd have to keep the plumbing between the remote needle and the fuel inlets as short as possible but it should work. I used to do a lot of 1/2A flying and remote needles are real finger-savers on these small engines.
Its too much work for me to mess with and besides, I wanted to just show what Dave R was capable of before he got MS and now can barely move his hands. Thanks anyway, as anything can always be improved on.
would help if the mixture needles were linked together moving as one, i see 80s rc car pinion gears being used, robinson racing or trinity, very cool build, hope the friend is well.
He is not that well. I think since each engine has to be synced, he made them this way to be easier as they feed fuel right into the crankcase of each engine. 1 needle might work better for sure, but these Cox engines always were very sensitive to needle valve adjustments. Thanks much.
Me too. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control flight from this week. ruclips.net/video/BU0z7ddwslY/видео.html
Yep you can see them surrounding the cylinders with black spring metal clips that can be rotated to prime the engine. There is a small exhaust port visible too. Thanks.
Hehe, I was exclaiming because of the noise really. But yes, I knew these little engines normally vented direct through the barrel, though I've never owned one. Is one ?pipe? pointing towards the prop? Or is that a handle?
Yep, one pipe is pointing forward. Many of the early baby bees never had mufflers. They came later. It makes it easy to open the spring metal clips to expose the port and put in a few drops of fuel to prime. It would be nicer if they both aimed back, but...you know...Keep it simple, sir. :-)
When they ran they were fun but they were quite a handful to a 10 year old boy to get and keep running! PT-19, COSMIC WIND, BD-5, a half dozen wooden kit builds then the .35 Fox engine and combat wings, Aircobra, and flea market finds. Good times, thank you for sharing this!
Right on. I was 10 doing it too, but began flying in UKIE Pattern contests with Johnson 35 combat special engines in my Veco Thunderbird and Nobler. I was a voodoo fan too. You had some good stuff too, it sounds like. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see a later video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control recent flight. ruclips.net/video/BU0z7ddwslYU/видео.htmlkie Thanks much.
Always a favorite Christmas gift right up there with Erector Sets and Heath Kits.
All I can say is W😮W!
I remember those .049 mufflers.
It was the only way Mom would let us run those things in the garage.
I love Cox Engines. I'd love to see this twin fly...
Me too! Thanks.
I can’t imagine how difficult to get BOTH cylinders to do what you want them to do simultaneously but what a great little engine when it’s happily tuned and singing away. Love it! ❤
This brings back fond memories, including the smell of exaust.. These 049 were so awesome. Thanx for sharing, sir..
Thanks much. Bet you will like this. Flying shop rags part 2
ruclips.net/video/Q7MwFVHCRpY/видео.html
50 years ago I had the same idea of gearing 2 or 4 of those little engines together, but not having access to a machine shop and or a source for the gears it never got beyond the design stage, Those little engines were a pain to run and keep running as a single unit let alone 2 of them, but it is nice to see that my idea actually would work.
Right on. You’re right. It took some finesse to get a good flight. Thanks much.
That is freaking awesome. How do you actually balance them out? What an awesome idea. That deserves to be in a museum. Thank you for sharing this.
Thanks so kindly. Balance is set to fire both at TDC at the same time, so it balances out pretty good. Thanks so kindly.
A long time ago.....
In the early 70s, Austrian Hanno Fratner
Two .60-class engines were installed in the same way on an aircraft called Darotel....
It was nice to be reminded of something that happened 50 years ago.
Yes, I know Hanno Frettner. He was the one to beat. Thanks much.
Hanno PRETNER, flying a DALOTEL
In 1962 I got a PT-17 control line plane with a cox .049. It was a lot of fun. Yes they are loud, we did not have mufflers back then.
That is great. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control recent flight.
ruclips.net/video/BU0z7ddwslY/видео.html
@@NightFlyyer I got the PT-19 for Christmas in '61 and a P-40 "Warhawk" for my birthday a few months later. I got seriously bit by the bug. During the winter of '62-63 I built a "Flite-Streak" and my uncle gave me a Testors/McCoy .35 to power it. First flight in the spring was on 55 foot .012 steel lines I got from a friend.....I figured it out quickly that I'd need 70 or 75 foot lines to fly this beast! Flew combat and stunted with it for 2 years, had a lot of fun! Then at the age of 14.....I discovered girls.......
@@ajwilson605 What a great story. I discovered girls too, but made sure they liked model airplanes. LOL Thanks and happy flying.
My first control line was a P40 powered by the Cox .049. That was back in the mid fifties.
Right on. Those were great for sure. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control recent flight. ruclips.net/video/BU0z7ddwslYU/видео.htmlkie
My close friend Dave Raubinger, now confined to a wheel chair with MS, made this tandem Cox .049 coupling system 40 years ago!
He recently sent it to me to experiment with, so I decided to try to run it after all these years and see if it still would.
It's unique with it's own oiling and gearing system. I hope you enjoy seeing it really scream by the end of the video. .049's still available at www.coxengines.com
Beautiful engine, love the simplicity. Thankyou for sharing Sir
Thanks kindly Jean!
Firstly? My condolences on your friend's ( Dave Robinder) wheel chair confinement. However? It was good that he implemented this dual cox assembly with a cooling bearing tubing at the change of the time. He was ahead with progression with this idea."
~He only needed to add a single fuel adjustment other than dual for main control setup and quick response.~
Well 45 years ago, when he made this, there was no internet, no Google, and no way to hear others suggestions, like yours, so used what he had on hand. Single carb adjustment would have been nice for sure. Thanks.
Super cool! I'm only 49 but I have/remember these beloved engines! Still have 2 of em!
Loved it, brought back so many memories! A have a bunch of these old cox engines, might have to go pull them out and have some fun!
That is great. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control flight from this week.
ruclips.net/video/BU0z7ddwslY/видео.html
NightFlyyer checked it out and commented, thanks!
I may have commented on this video in the past, I have an article from the May/June 1966 issue of American Modeler Magazine, in the article it has photo, drawings, dimension and a parts list to build one of these. My dad built one from article in the late 60's or 70's and I still have the one that he built.
Right on. Make a video of it and post the link here. Would love to see it.
That Nitro has plenty of power for sure! Sure was nice of your friend Dave to send it to you. I can’t wait to see it in action!
Thanks. Well, I would have to make a non foam plane for it, as the fuel will eat foam. You may be waiting a long time, Scott. LOL.
My regards to Dave! A very clever set-up!
Thanks jj!
Congratulations, what a great piece of engineering success, I really enjoyed that!
Thanks so much, Philip. I appreciate you.
Dave, a couple of days ago you asked me to make a video on the Cox .049 based twin that my dad built from an article the May/June 1966 issue of American Modeler Magazine. So I did and it is now up on my channel, but RUclips won't let me post the link to in the comments so you will have to go there to find it. I put links to your channel and your video in the discerption of my video.
O man this is a piece of art!!!! Well done!!!!
Thanks kindly!
Yeee haaa. The year was 1973 I was in trade school learning to be a Machinist. I took two Cox.049 cylinder piston assemblies mounted them to a crankcase I made in a Southbend lathe. It ran but only on the prime as I couldnt develop vacume to work the reed valve and draw fuel. Still was fun to do and 40 years later I see this and think " I should have tried that " lol
That's a great story and effort. I'm sure Dave, my friend, will appreciate that. Thanks kindly. Check this out, if you like Cox engines. Flying shop rags. ruclips.net/video/Q7MwFVHCRpY/видео.html
I used to have a COX engine when I was a kid in the late 60s.
Maybe you should experiment with different configuration like firing alternately not at the same time and only one carburetor.
Yep, well My wife used to work at Cox in Santa Ana before it burned down, and Dave Duncan the Head Engineer was a member of our RC flying club back in the 80's. I have many videos on Cox engines and airplanes on my channel, you may enjoy. According my friend who designed this, firing opposite was extremely difficult to start and it was very hard to adjust the carbs because each piston and cylinder were on engines that weren't identical in age and wear. H said it would run just right on one engine, but rich on the other and vice versa, so he went back to 2 carbs. Maybe with 2 brand new pistons cylinders and glow plugs, would be a way for 1 carb, but he said in no way could he adjust it so it would run right. Plus he also said it had horrendous vibration. So I never tried. Thanks.
.049s are great little engines. This is awesome! 👍
Thanks very much!
Holy cow! That is awesome! Like seriously! Back in the early 90s my friends and I would take the Old foamy gliders and turn them into RC’s… As you know equipment was heavy back then So using an .049 what is the best possible solution LOL these planes never flew that great but they flew… Long story… I always wondered if you could couple two of them and turn up a two cylinder. Now I know! Wow! Again that is a really neat set up! Have a great week Dave!
Thanks very kindly Dylan. We appreciate that!
I was flying Cox .049's in the 60's free flight later in the 70's 2-3-4 channel.....60 % nitro and 4.5" x 5.5" prop. Those little planes scream. Still fly them but electrics are easy...................nitro is the way to go.
Remarkable, and very well done. You have also proven that you can run a electric propellor on a IC engine. Brilliant.
Actually that is a 7x6 ic prop, but some will work on small IC engines like this, but not good for anything big. Thanks.
Very cool, and good job discerning the problem with the coupled front bearings venting to the crankcases. Idea- could you set the needle valves independently by running without one glow plug, alternating first one, get it set, then switch to the other? Also, that prop isn't happy with the pulse excitation frequency of the setup- looking at the vibrations when viewed edge-on.
They both fire at the same time. There was too much vibration firing alternately and it was impossible to start. It would not stay running on just 1 cylinder. That prop was the only one I had, so it probably was out of balance. My friend designed and built it many years ago.
Night Flyer Dave you are sure Good & that Engine looks Neat ! Thanks for the Video !
Thanks very much!
Excelent Job, congratulations
Thanks kindly!
That engine belongs in a model museum.
Thanks for that. It may end up there for sure!
That’s cool I would love to see someone add a 3rd and maybe a 4th...
They probably have. Thanks kindly.
That sure looks like an electric prop. I’m very surprised it didn’t shed a blade.
It's not.
Does it give torque?
Or is just fun?
Since it is not counter rotating, it does give torque and it is also fun. It flew many years on a glider. Thanks.
Brilliant, thank you.
I have a few Cox 049's i will have to have a go at making a twin.
Good luck with it. Thanks kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control flight from last week.
ruclips.net/video/BU0z7ddwslY/видео.html
A shout out to Dave Raubinger, and kudos to Dave for a job well done. Looking forward to seeing it fly, fly, fly..!
Thanks bud. You saw it fly on daves glider. I may do that too if I find something.ti put it in. Thanks.
Cool project
Thanks a lot Tom.
wow, nice job! that's a needle tweakers dream! Since its good with 180 firing, I wonder how it would do with header pipes into a collector system
Maybe a pipe collector system could be added to the muffler outlet pipes, but I don't know if it would help, as it screams pretty good as is. I'm just happy to run it for Dave as he designed it. Thanks Robert.
Awesome really enjoyed that Mr Herbert many thanks :)
Thanks kindly!
Great share and my best to both of you.
Thanks very kindly!
I was just searching earlier on ebay to see if anyone had ever machined a crank case to accept two cylinders with a different crank. I KNOW it could be done. Id do it if I had the equipment. Be extra cool!
Awesome Video! Brings back some fond memories!!
Cox engines were bad to run backwards at start - how would you ensure that both engines would start and run in the right direction ??
Well, they were designed to run either way. If I had an engine run backwards, I simply flipped the prop backwards and it usually ran the right way. In this situation, both engines had to run together and one could not run backwards. And of course if it was running backwards, you would know right away as which way the wind was going. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control flight from this week.
ruclips.net/video/BU0z7ddwslY/видео.html
In uk competitions silencers became compulsory. The power reduction was huge so competitors drilled large holes in them 😀
We did too. LOL Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control recent flight. ruclips.net/video/BU0z7ddwslYU/видео.htmlkie
Lovely stuff, always did love Cox engines .... would be nice to put another one on top and bottom, 4 up :)
Yes, thank you. Well Dave is in no position to do that anymore. He did make a 6 cylinder radial before he got confined to a wheel chair, but that engine can't seem to be found. Thanks.
Was the six cylinder made from Cox parts, did it use one needle valve, it sounds like a very cool idea.
This is actually great for rc helicopter you place them to fire at the same time so piston motion is completely vibration free and let the main rotor act as a flywheel to compensate for power pulsing
I could not get it to run firing at the same time as I tried and tried. The push on the gears weren't right. It actually is quite smooth as is, though. Thanks.
NightFlyyer oh well it's still good engine and cylinder cutting out does not seem to be so bad you can still land it
I have a box full of old cox engines that I aquired would like to do something like this could I get more info?
I really don't have any more info as this is what I got from my friend long ago. Good luck.
Very ingenious. Why do you use an electric propeller?
Because this was the only one I had that was the right size and since this engine does not put out as much power as the Brushless motor did, so no problem. It works.
Makes me miss my old styrofoam r/c plane with old .049 In it. Back in the mid to late 90s
Those were the days for sure. Thanks much.
bloody brillant mate...would love a set of detailed drawings/plans so i could make my own version...any details as to prop size it turns an rpm's?
I used a 7x6 prop and have no idea about the RPMs. I did not design it, so have no detailed drawings. Sorry. I'll bet you could improvise though! Thanks kindly.
This is pretty cool. I could only imagine a triple or a quad setup, this would sound mean!
I seem to remember seeing a 5 cylinder radial engine advertised for sale in the magazines that was just 5 OS .10 on a gear drive back in the old days. Wish I could find the ad for it, but my old issues got lost in a move...
Dave also made a 6 cylinder radial and it was hard to set all the needle valves since these are reed engines. No carbs. Thanks.
WHOA! That's a screamer indeed Dave I would love to see what type of plane your going to put those little twin monster on maybe to try add throttle to them???
I might try to build something that I could fly it on, but throttling would be more difficult. I don't want to change Dave's original design in his honor. Thanks.
Totally understandable sir!
I built a twin cox in the 80's almost exactly the same but without the oil tubes. Ran good but never put it on a plane.
That's great. I may put mine on a plane if I find a suitable one.
I’m trying to work out why the oil tubes were used, most ball bearings run perfectly on their own lubricant. Even a sintered bronze bush wouldn’t need a continuous oil flow. Nice bit of engineering.
My friend is an engineer and figured the extra stress on the bushed bearing could use the extra oil when he built it, so that is the reason. It can't hurt but probably not necessary . Thanks.
Fantastico. Bel suono
Thanks kindly.
But will it fly? You cant just tease us with this thing bench running, I know you have what it takes to get it up in the air...
Dave R had it on a sail plane, and it flew great. We'll see if I can make something. Thank.
MUITO BOM 👍👍👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 🇧🇷
Thanks kindly.
Dave I wonder if you and I could mount that on a swamp boat 🚣♀️ LOL maybe we could try that sometime Tom
Ingenious!
Thanks much!
Thanks so kindly. Your right. Just soak the cylinders in fuel. LOL
Re-time for balance, get one carb feeding both reeds, and that thing would really take off like a rocket!
Yes. I ran it like he designed it. There's always room for improvement.
Maybe a small GPS tracker? Might be fun Get it lost and use the tablet or phone to find it.
Sweet!
Thanks kindly.
Wild Stuff
Thanks much.
is there bearing modifications for these engines?
They have no bearing, just bushings, so not sure if anyone makes and mods anymore.
NightFlyyer ok, thanks.
Okay, so the next step on this would be to plumb both intakes to a single carb. If you continue to run it with alternate firing you shouldn't need that carb to be much larger of an intake and you could probably use the same needle and jet from the stock carb. Always wanted to try something like this when I was a kid, but lacked the facilities to actually fabricate it. Barring that, you might try a remote needle valve for both cylinders to try and get a balanced run from both sides.
The crankcase leakage is probably due to there not being a forward load on the crankshaft. The forward curve of the main crank "disk" (pull one out, you'll see what I mean) was what sealed the engine in a tractor configuration. Always had problems using these in a pusher plane because of that.
That would be a lot of work since these engines are reed controlled through the rear of the engine. There are no carbs. Tee dee engines would be easier because they had Venturi needle carbs and no reeds. Thanks
Well, if you think about it, the backplate/reed-valve assembly is the carb. That's the induction side of the engine. Just not the typical RC or UC carb we're used to in front-rotor induction engines, like the Tee Dee series, and most modern RC engines. The function is the same.
It should be possible to run a remote needle valve common to both cylinders and thus get an even mix to both. You'd have to keep the plumbing between the remote needle and the fuel inlets as short as possible but it should work. I used to do a lot of 1/2A flying and remote needles are real finger-savers on these small engines.
Its too much work for me to mess with and besides, I wanted to just show what Dave R was capable of before he got MS and now can barely move his hands. Thanks anyway, as anything can always be improved on.
that is so awesome! would be amazing to see you run it on a flying rc plane. Have you ever tried that ?
Not yet, but it has flown on a plane...a glider in the past. Thanks.
Put that on a nice p51 or p47. That would turn one of those airplanes into lightning with wings.
Ohhh i think that this will be also my project to do...can you tell me number of teeth on gears?
Great. There are 13 on each of the crankshaft gears and 18 on the main spur gear. Good luck and happy flying.
Try running the oiling lined from each engine back to itself.
That could work too, but I am not changing Dave's design. Thanks.
That was creative and Awesome!!
Thanks a lot, Tab. We appreciate that.
That is cool!!
Thanks Doug!
That would be ace on a tiny warbird.
And why not a radial four-cylinder or six or nine?
Others have done that for sure.
To save space you can rotate the cylinders to form a twin V engine.
That would be a challenge for sure.
Why not use a smooth fly wheel?
There's many ways to cut a pizza, and my friend did it this way.
Genial
Muchas Gracias!
Gotta make an airplane to take advantage of the engine perhaps a custom made Edge 540?
Maybe. I will think on it! Thanks.
those COX mufflers cut the power down a LOT .. always ran mine wide open, pretty useless.
That is true, we all ran them wide open. LOL.
@@NightFlyyer All I can figure those mufflers were for starting your engines in the House, when your parents weren't home. (I never did that!!).
@@KrustyKlown Me neither and for sure, Id not be around today as my mom would have.........
Cool
Thanks
would help if the mixture needles were linked together moving as one, i see 80s rc car pinion gears being used, robinson racing or trinity, very cool build, hope the friend is well.
He is not that well. I think since each engine has to be synced, he made them this way to be easier as they feed fuel right into the crankcase of each engine. 1 needle might work better for sure, but these Cox engines always were very sensitive to needle valve adjustments. Thanks much.
There’s something about small combustion engines that fascinates the heck out of me
Me too. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control flight from this week.
ruclips.net/video/BU0z7ddwslY/видео.html
Or, you could buy a Fox or a Cox .09 Nitro Engine and ditch the complexity of a twin. Nonetheless, this is a fine piece of machining.
Of course but part of the fun is seeing if you can build something that is not "off the shelf" Thanks.
OMG! And that had mufflers?????????
Yep you can see them surrounding the cylinders with black spring metal clips that can be rotated to prime the engine. There is a small exhaust port visible too. Thanks.
Hehe, I was exclaiming because of the noise really. But yes, I knew these little engines normally vented direct through the barrel, though I've never owned one.
Is one ?pipe? pointing towards the prop? Or is that a handle?
Yep, one pipe is pointing forward. Many of the early baby bees never had mufflers. They came later. It makes it easy to open the spring metal clips to expose the port and put in a few drops of fuel to prime. It would be nicer if they both aimed back, but...you know...Keep it simple, sir. :-)
I have one going on ebay
A Cox Twin cylinder?
Pretty certain there was a 5 cylinder geared Cox radial around in the 70s.