Yesterday, I was unpacking boxes. One of them had my and my son's .049 C/L planes. After a little cleanup, here's my Goldberg Li'l Toot and a close up of the Testor's McCoy engine and tank mount, prop it came with.

(9/28/2012, 11:34 - Links removed and changed to attachments)

My first balsa bird was a "Lil Toot." My friend crashed his, top wing fell off and then the plane flew like a bat out of hell! So I built one without the top wing,, But your's is very nice. OK, so kit or scratch built? And how does that bird fly?

Haven't flown it yet, tigreflyer. Over the past 20 years, I've moved 6 times, it was packed in a box from one of the prior moves. It was from an original Goldberg kit. For those who want to modify a Brodak beam mount engine kit to this, I think there is enough detail in the pictures to be able to come up with a close facsimile.

Sure does look good! Don't forget the pilot!

I wonder how a Lil Toot would fly compared to a Stuntman. I'd guess the Stuntman would make rounder loops, and properly balanced, in a windless sky might do some large squares. At 90 degrees, both would be precarious. What do you think?

Your plane looks reallly classic with that .049 Red Head. The engine compliments the plane and and the plane compliments the engine. I remember, after all these years those great coil spring wheel locks that may have been only available with the Toot. And the more I look at your lead outs, the more famailiar they look. Did those come with the kit?

Originally Posted by tigreflyer

Your plane looks reallly classic with that .049 Red Head. The engine compliments the plane and and the plane compliments the engine.

Thanks. When I built it, I originally had a Cox 290 engine with Goldberg 290 engine mount adapter and a perfect external tank. Later, I decided to mount the McCoy engine, although the engine mount holes were spaced differently than Cox.

I remember, after all these years those great coil spring wheel locks that may have been only available with the Toot.

At this point I can't remember whether those wheel locks and washers were with the kit or not. (I think they probably did come with the kit, although they were available as Goldberg hardware.)

And the more I look at your lead outs, the more familiar they look. Did those come with the kit?

No, they didn't. I used music wire and bent it to the right profile.

Originally Posted by ARUP

Sure does look good! Don't forget the pilot!

I probably have the pilot decal somewhere. If I find it, may go ahead and mount it. Of course, I could take a picture with my motorcycle helmet or ball cap on, take both front and back side, print and laminate them on a piece of 1/16" balsa. Then it's me flying.

Originally Posted by tigreflyer

I wonder how a Lil Toot would fly compared to a Stuntman. I'd guess the Stuntman would make rounder loops, and properly balanced, in a windless sky might do some large squares. At 90 degrees, both would be precarious. What do you think?

That I can't say. Given the small 16" wingspan with more wing area, It probably does okay. Flying it has low priority, as I have a Sterling Ringmaster to repair. That I'd like to make the Oct 6-7 commemorative Ringmaster worldwide mass flight. For the moment, I don't have a flight report.

That is a great looking airplane!

Originally Posted by tigreflyer

... I remember, after all these years those great coil spring wheel locks that may have been only available with the Toot.

If I remember correctly, those coil springs were put out by "Perfect" and came in several sizes for different LG wire sizes.

I believe the McCoy .049 with the red glow head was a notch up from the ones that came in an RTF, like the one I have. I think the tank mount and prop both were available with the standalone engine.

Nice clean-up. You have a treasure there.

George

Originally Posted by gcb

If I remember correctly, those coil springs were put out by "Perfect" and came in several sizes for different LG wire sizes.

It is possible that Goldberg bought wholesale from Perfect and re-marketed them as their product. Now that you mention it, I vaguely remember the Perfect product. I've attached a photo of an example Goldberg retainer.

I believe the McCoy .049 with the red glow head was a notch up from the ones that came in an RTF, like the one I have. I think the tank mount and prop both were available with the standalone engine.

It may be, AFAIK. I remember the RTF from my brother's Testor's Corsair in 1967, seems to be the same engine except his had a solid shaft needle valve and natural aluminum head. This version has an improved cable shaft needle valve. I never owned a tach, but IIRC the McCoy's power was at least that of a Cox Babe Bee and may be that of a Black Widow. I didn't realize it, but the later reed valve version with epoxy crankcase and integral tank was very powerful, according to an article in one of the model mags. Quite a testimony for a humble looking engine. I've got one of those engines, too, awaiting a plane to install.

Nice clean-up. You have a treasure there.

Thanks!

This one is from an RTF. If I remember correctly, it was a P38 with one powered and one dummy engine.

I have some of the plastic ones...they were designated Testor's 8000. I'm guessing the name was because .8cc is .049ci. They are affectionately known as "pipe bomb" engines. I have one metal bodied one that came in an RTF space craft...don't remember the name. That's the one on the right, by itself. The ones with a tank are oriented for CL with the cylinder pointed horizontal left (from the front). The engine was marketed with the engine upside down in the box. It came with a prop, wrench, and needle extension.

.

The Red Head shown on the beautiful BiPlane is a fairly late production motor. The cylinders on the earlier motors are oriented to the side so that the exhaust does not flow directly into the venturi. The later motors have the venturi intake extended, so that they did not have to worry about cylinder orientation when the assembled the motors.

We got a few motors that had the short intake and the cylinders with the exhaust pointed forward and aft when I flew for testers, they did not run well at all.

I don't recall there being any difference in the RedHead .049 from the regular ones, except for the anodizing on the glow head. I think they were just trying to associate the engine with the older McCoy RedHeads (I may be wrong here).

Testors made these motors with both the solid and the flexible needle valves depending on where they were going to be used (the P-38, Airacobra, King Cobra, and T-34 Spotter used the short, solid needle valve, the Dauntless and Cosmic Wind, Silver Wind, et. al. used the cable type flexible needle valve.

Either way, these motors ran very well

Originally Posted by Ah Clem

The Red Head shown on the beautiful BiPlane is a fairly late production motor. The cylinders on the earlier motors are oriented to the side so that the exhaust does not flow directly into the venturi. The later motors have the venturi intake extended, so that they did not have to worry about cylinder orientation when the assembled the motors. We got a few motors that had the short intake and the cylinders with the exhaust pointed forward and aft when I flew for testers, they did not run well at all.

Interesting bit of fact I wasn't aware of, Ah Clem. Wee bit of history there too that you worked for Testors, with first hand experience on these motors. Glad you could share with us.

I don't recall there being any difference in the RedHead .049 from the regular ones, except for the anodizing on the glow head. I think they were just trying to associate the engine with the older McCoy RedHeads (I may be wrong here).

I wouldn't have a clue, but the red head does add a nice touch.

Testors made these motors with both the solid and the flexible needle valves depending on where they were going to be used (the P-38, Airacobra, King Cobra, and T-34 Spotter used the short, solid needle valve, the Dauntless and Cosmic Wind, Silver Wind, et. al. used the cable type flexible needle valve.

Either way, these motors ran very well

That I have to agree with you there. Just curious, but was there a reason that Testors went with an unusual heavier crankcase with odd cooling fins (see attached late 1960's .40 CL engine)? I gather they were not popular as by 1974, I bought several at a closeout sale for a song each.