If of any interest this one was given to me by Max Starick back in the late 70's. As it had no tank or venturi/needle valve I eventually handed it over to Mike Chrisp who overhauled it during the mid 90's. It is in perfect running order but obviously with Mike's additions.

The number stamped under the front end of the crankcase is DK 610. No stamping on the lugs.

Originally Posted by brokenenglish

The starting point for any consideration of English diesels has to be the ED Bee, which was launched commercially in September 1948.
I know it wasn’t chronologically the first, but it’s so representative and so loved.
Anyway, I propose to cover the ED Bee Mk I, in detail, over the next couple of days, and then perhaps go on to the Comp Special, the ED Mk IV, and other engines, hopefully without sparking off another rebellion in the colonies!
Obviously, I’d be very pleased if anyone wishes to comment or add to my own contribution.
So... the prototype ED Bee (well-known advert photo), and the first two production models (1948) are shown below. Specific features of each engine are shown on the photos and, unless anyone objects, I’ll continue with the 1949/50/51/52 variants over the next few days. There are at least half a dozen different variants of the Mk I Bee...

This is a great article, I hope you can do the rest including the Mk.II. so I can verify what I have.
Here are my 4 Mk.I's, left to right-
#1- 1A 1738 50 on front of crankcase
#2- 1N 1316 51 "
#3- 1 N 241 53 "
#4- 1 F 422 4 on mounting lug.

Originally Posted by kakariki

This is a great article, I hope you can do the rest icluding the Mk.II. so I can verify what I have.
Here are my 4 Mk.I's, left to right-
#1- 1A 1738 50 on front of crankcase
#2- IN 1316 51 "
#3- 1 N 241 53 "
#4- 1 F 422 4 on mounting lug.

Thanks, actually it wasn't intended to be an "article", it started out as a "quick post", but I seem to have rambled on a bit...
Your engines are a good illustration of the S/N year format change that I mentioned above. Years 50 to 53, you get the two digits, but in 54 they went back to one digit. Even the one digit isn't a problem obviously. It just means that you "have to know" within ten years. Although I've seen 1959 ED Hunters listed on eBay as being 1949 and 1969!
I'll try to "finish off" the Mk I Bees later today.
PS: Concerning your engine #2 above, the first character is a "1", not "I".
Secondly, on engines #1 and #2, are you sure that the 1(thousand) character isn't a slash "/"?
Even if we understand a bit about ED serial numbering, some of the S/Ns are extremely difficult to read. I must own about 50 ED engines, and there are quite a few on which the S/N just isn't clear and unambiguous (particularly Racers, with the chemically coated magnesium case)...

Hi
Article was the first word that came into my head although not accurate.
Yes #2 is a "1", and I looked very closely at the "1" thousand in engines #1 & #2 and it is the same as the "1" at the start of the serial number, there are some slashes between the manufacturing number and the year and they are definately different, so I'm convinced they are in the thousands.
I saw another article showing Mk.I's high in the #1800's.
50 ED's is a lot, I have 29 spread across the range, but I only started collecting this year. -
ED 246 RACER Mk.II
ED 246 RACER Mk.III MARINE
ED 246 RACER Mk.III MARINE
ED 3.46 HUNTER Mk.IV Ser.II
ED 3.46 HUNTER Mk.IV Ser.III
ED 3.46 HUNTER Mk.IV Ser.IV
ED 3.46 MARINE
ED BABY .046
ED BABY .046
ED BEE Mk.I
ED BEE Mk.I
ED BEE Mk.I
ED BEE Mk.I
ED BEE Mk.II
ED BEE MK.II
ED BEE Mk.II
ED BEE MK.II MARINE
ED CADET
ED COMP SPEC Mk.II
ED COMP SPEC Mk.II
ED COMP SPEC Mk.II
ED HAWK
ED HORNET
ED MK.II PENNY SLOT
ED MK.II PENNY SLOT
ED MK.II PENNY SLOT
ED SEA OTTER 3.46 MARINE
ED SEAGULL CADET MARINE
ED SUPER FURY
ED SUPER FURY #2

Thanks for the info and look forward the read more.
Barry

ED 1.46 "HORNET"

s/n Z C 3816

As a "bonus", when purchasing some engines, I was given (!) these things by a man who is sorting out his late father's estate.

This is the Dyno-like "TFA-diesel", plans & build article published by the "TFA"-magazine in 1944.
Drawings were made by Mr Ivan Rogstadius, based on a Dyno that somehow managed to make its way to Sweden during WW2...
More to read HERE
This article trigged many DIY'ers to start building....understandable, as those years the borders were closed and aeromodellers had to use "what was there"...

Interestingly, this magazine project inspired the Johansson Brothers (Västerås) to build their first diesel, which was the start of their "KOMET" range of diesels.....

This is (almost) the "complete project" of Mr K.G. Bergh: A more or less complete engine + the main parts of two more, the wooden patterns for sand casting, and some mandrels, etc... The "extra" cylinders contain pistons & contra pistons as well.... Both crankcases have well fitting backplates...
The castings however, are somewhat rough, but all machining work is excellent.

I think this set provides a great view of the enthusiasm, energy and creativity shown by aeromodellers at a time when nothing could be bought....

And, no....I don't think I will ever split these parts, or "restore" anything.....maybe just trying to make the engine run (with a prop), eventually.
I figure this collection is most interesting as a complete set, as a window to the past....

I love these bits , but I'm not sure what to do with them....
What would you do...?


.

Originally Posted by Gluehand

As a "bonus", when purchasing some engines, I was given (!) these things by a man who is sorting out his late father's estate.

This is the Dyno-like "TFA-diesel", plans & build article published by the "TFA"-magazine in 1944.
Drawings were made by Mr Ivan Rogstadius, based on a Dyno that somehow managed to make its way to Sweden during WW2...
More to read HERE
This article trigged many DIY'ers to start building....understandable, as those years the borders were closed and aeromodellers had to use "what was there"...

Interestingly, this magazine project inspired the Johansson Brothers (Västerås) to build their first diesel, which was the start of their "KOMET" range of diesels.....

This is (almost) the "complete project" of Mr K.G. Bergh: A more or less complete engine + the main parts of two more, the wooden patterns for sand casting, and some mandrels, etc... The "extra" cylinders contain pistons & contra pistons as well.... Both crankcases have well fitting backplates...
The castings however, are somewhat rough, but all machining work is excellent.

I think this set provides a great view of the enthusiasm, energy and creativity shown by aeromodellers at a time when nothing could be bought....

And, no....I don't think I will ever split these parts, or "restore" anything.....maybe just trying to make the engine run (with a prop), eventually.
I figure this collection is most interesting as a complete set, as a window to the past....

I love these bits , but I'm not sure what to do with them....
What would you do...?


.

It's definately an interesting piece of history, if it was mine I'd be making up a little timeline display showing the engine from start to finish.
Barry

Originally Posted by kakariki

It's definately an interesting piece of history, if it was mine I'd be making up a little timeline display showing the engine from start to finish.
Barry

Yes, I've had similar thoughts....maybe all the parts spread out on the drawing, also with some contemporary attributes added, like e.g. a cup of coffe surrogate, a few ration coupons etc....

As promised, here are the last two versions of the ED Bee Mk I.
Carrying on from my last post, a couple of comments need to be made.
Firstly, I haven't shown a "1951" Bee, as it was exactly the same as the 1950 version (which I did show, but it should have been labelled "50/51"!). Also, GH posted a 1951 Bee that looks correct.
OK, that gets us "up-to-date".

The next significant change was at the end of 1951, when ED decided to change and slightly strengthen the crankcase, and change to a bigger compression screw, which obviously necessitated a different head. This change was to be the final model, shown in the second photo.
However, while the new "machined" parts were incorporated immediately, there was still had a small stock of the old crankcases to use up, and this resulted in the "transition" model shown in the first photo, with the new "machined" parts installed on an early type crankcase. All the unmessed with engines I've ever seen in this configuration had a serial number indicating January 1952.
Anyway, fairly early in 1952, the final model got onto the market in its "proper" configuration (photo 2). This final model was produced from 1952 to 1955. The only remaining minor change was that, in 1954 (I think!), the serial number was moved from the front of the crankcase onto the edge of the mounting lug, but I didn't think that was worth a separate photo!

OK, that completes a quick overview of the ED Bee Mk I. I just hope I haven't forgotten anything important...

In a few days' time, I'll try to start a similar review of all the various Comp Specials...

Thanks Brian, for your "Bee" review....much appreciated...!

Thanks Brian from me also......Very informative.

I just got my BEE out, and it does have on the front right hand side of the crankcase IH424 and on the left side front 53.
The prop. driver does not have a smooth rim.

When I bought I did have the choice of two, but I chose this one because I liked the look of the alloy tank and single sided comp. screw.
I do remember the other one had a green plastic tank, but how the rest of it was I have no idea.......Perhaps it may have had the early crankcase and both BEE's were put together using each others parts mixed up?????

Not to worry though, it starts and runs okay.

Yes. I have a "work rush" at the moment so, of course, I forgot to mention that the later plastic tanks could be green, yellow or clear. I assumed everyone would know that, but it may not be the case...
Gossie, I don't think your crankcase can have left the factory with its present head and comp screw, and an alloy tank! It's true that, given the choice, alloy tanks are far less affected by leaking. They haven't shrunk and the mounting screw can be tightened slightly more as well.

Thanks for the discourse on the E.D. Bee Brian, I found it most interesting.

In common with many thousands of modellers of my generation my first engine was, almost inevitably, an E. D. Bee. That particular one is long gone, but when my good friend John Harrison passed away, his son offered me the pick of his engine collection before selling it and I just asked for two - a Kalper 0.32, which I had always wanted, and a 1953 model E.D. Bee, identical to the one I had owned all those years ago. Here it is - serial 1N 1801 53. Being "all electric" now, and lacking a source of diesel fuel, I can't run it or the Kalper, but both are in first class running order, so, one day....

A question Brian; I have seen various figures quoted over the years for the number of Mk I bees produced, ranging from 20,000 to 100,000 - I wondered if you have any more accurate information on production numbers. I know that, in the early fifties, every modeller you met seemed to have one or more.

Thanks for a very interesting discussion. Very sad to think they are all gone and mostly out of service. I doubt in the next 50 years if anyone will be interested in showing their “old electric”! My first little glow engine was a Cox .049. My first diesel was an ETA 2.5 which I didn’t really appreciate at the time. I flew it with a 9x4 prop on a Ring Master which had also been flown with a McCoy .19 RV racing engine. Both seemed to have similar power. And now, no diesel fuel, other than JD in small batches.
Edubarca (page 275, post # 4115) have you had a chance to try the fuel mixture?

Originally Posted by Sundancer

A question Brian; I have seen various figures quoted over the years for the number of Mk I bees produced, ranging from 20,000 to 100,000 - I wondered if you have any more accurate information on production numbers. I know that, in the early fifties, every modeller you met seemed to have one or more.

George, I'm only a "messer around with engines", and I've never considered this kind of "administrative data". Kevin Richards may well have an accurate idea, but I'm reduced to "ballpark reasoning".
Looking at all the S/Ns that I'm aware of, and assuming that the S/N actually corresponds to the number produced, it can be seen that the "monthly figure" occasionally exceeds 1000, but these are not a "majority" of engines. I've never seen a monthly figure that exceeded 2000 (has anyone else seen one?).
So, based on that, what would be a likely average monthly production figure, over the 7 years of Mk I production? Well, it seems that around 1000, or maybe a bit less, would be a reasonable guess...
The Mk I Bee was produced for about 84 months, and applying the above reasoning (which may be completely wrong!), it seems likely that the total Mk I Bee production may well have been between say 60k and 80k engines...
To me, it seems unlikely that production could have been less than 50k or more than 100k, but all that is only "reasoning", I have no knowledge whatsoever on the subject and I'd be interested in any other opinions!
We really need Kevin Richards or Richard Dalby on this...
George, hopefully I shall start messing with a few Comp Specials next week... I'll send you a list of questions that you can ask, and questions that you mustn't ask!!!