New Products Flash Sale
Thread Tools
Old Jan 25, 2013, 07:18 PM
northernlightsfl is offline
Find More Posts by northernlightsfl
Registered User
northernlightsfl's Avatar
Discussion

Power of the newer engines


Being from the old school of McCoys Vecos K&B and Fox engines I am seeing that the newer engines are more powerful with less displacement.
I saw a .25 in a modern engine would be better than a McCoy 35.
I would like to know if this is true I have a big box full of the old engines and if the smaller displacement engines are as powerful hoping to get some new ones
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Jan 25, 2013, 09:53 PM
jeffie8696 is offline
Find More Posts by jeffie8696
TEAM BOCA
jeffie8696's Avatar
Modern Schnerule porting makes the newer engines much more powerful but there is no reason to discard older decent running engines. I enjoy my old baffle port engines because they are different.
Old Jan 26, 2013, 06:59 PM
DGrant is offline
Find More Posts by DGrant
Registered User
DGrant's Avatar
RC engine technology has advanced greatly... especially in the last 30yrs. Although each engine you mentioned were definately all contenders for most powerful of thier day.. they probably don't hold a candle to alot of todays engines. Some might come close.. but I do believe in the overall scheme of things.. and all things considered.. IE power, durability, reliability, ease of operation.... the new generation engines will far exceed an old classic.

Not saying the old engines are any sort of slouch.. not at all.. and if in good condition with an experienced hand.. just might still give years of service.. Most of todays engines though are far lighter, have more power, and are generally more efficient.. There are obviously a few outstanding brands today.. OS being the go-to for many people.. There's Saito, Magnum, Thundertiger, ASP, etc.. many many decent brands to choose from.

Also, when you say "smaller" displacement engines... there is more and more power in smaller and smaller packages every year. A good running OS.46AX has as much, or more power then a K&B, or Veco .61 did 30yrs ago, and its smaller and lighter..

So.. if you're into nostalgia, and like classic engines(I definately do in some cases).. then go through your box and weed out your favorites.. If you are all about power and getting the job done with a current fresh engine.. then there will probably be collectors, or otherwise that would be interested in what you've got... Just shop shop shop.. study up .. and have fun learing.. its a great hobby. I wish you well.
Old Jan 26, 2013, 09:08 PM
kenh3497 is offline
Find More Posts by kenh3497
Just Another Brick in the Wall
kenh3497's Avatar
I have a Webra "Speed .61" that back in the day was the go to engine for power and reliability. It is of the modern Schnerule ported design. Today many if not all the 55 engines will meet or exceed the old Webra for power.

Ken
RCG Plus Member
Old Jan 26, 2013, 09:18 PM
jeffie8696 is offline
Find More Posts by jeffie8696
TEAM BOCA
jeffie8696's Avatar
You said Schnerule, heh, heh, heh, heh
Old Jan 26, 2013, 09:37 PM
earlwb is online now
Find More Posts by earlwb
Registered User
earlwb's Avatar
The thing I noticed was that the .45 to .50 size planes are as large as the .60 size planes from the past. Our .40 size planes from the past were smaller then. That was when the .40 and .60 size non-Schneurle engines were around. Nowadays the .60 size planes are huge in comparison to the old .60 size planes from the past.

The Schneurle ported engines are quite a bit more powerful than the old baffled piston engines from the past. The airplanes grew in size to compensate for it too.

But if you are careful in your airplane choices the old baffled piston engines can be quite useful and still run and fly really good anyway.
RCG Plus Member
Old Jan 27, 2013, 10:30 AM
surfer_kris is offline
Find More Posts by surfer_kris
Registered User
surfer_kris's Avatar
The older engines are better at lugging large props, while the modern ABC engines are better at higher revs and therefore need a lower prop load. This means higher power in terms of Hp for the modern engines, but depending on the plane and style of flying the older engines will do very well to.
Old Jan 27, 2013, 10:55 AM
earlwb is online now
Find More Posts by earlwb
Registered User
earlwb's Avatar
Starting in the 2000's some of the engine manufacturers were tuning the Schnuerle engines so that the engines would turn larger props and handle more restrictive (more quiet) mufflers in a effort to reduce overall engine noise.

I think in the late 1980's and early 1990's the Schnuerle engines reached their peak as to performance. The earlier engines would turn higher RPMs whereas the later engines were setup to turn larger props. The engines haven't really changed any for performance since then. Of course the driving factor was pattern flying of that time, where competitors wanted to use retracts and tuned pipes to get the most power and speed to perform the aerobatic maneuvers. That changed when the Las Vegas style Tournament of Champions events started happening and the planes quickly got much larger as well. Landing and takeoff points changed too, so people started using tail dragger planes instead of retracts on tricycle gear setups.
RCG Plus Member
Old Jan 27, 2013, 11:55 AM
DarZeelon is offline
Find More Posts by DarZeelon
Registered User
DarZeelon's Avatar
In addition to the well-documented power increase of modern Schnürle ported engines, compared to their baffle-piston counterparts of years gone by; it seems the power required today is much greater than it was then...

Then, people used to fly planes on the wing, with the engine providing power for forward motivation.
Today, most newer fliers consider a model that cannot pull itself vertically up; under-powered...

Nearly all of today's trainers can climb vertically on the .46 in their nose; but in reality, they don't need more than a .25 for safe flight and for realistic, full-scale like flight, a .15-.20 will also suffice.
Old Jan 27, 2013, 02:11 PM
jeffie8696 is offline
Find More Posts by jeffie8696
TEAM BOCA
jeffie8696's Avatar
Dar said Schnürle Heh, heh, heh, heh
Old Jan 27, 2013, 02:55 PM
Brutus1967 is online now
Find More Posts by Brutus1967
the great Gassifïer
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffie8696 View Post
You said Schnerule, heh, heh, heh, heh
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffie8696 View Post
Dar said Schnürle Heh, heh, heh, heh
You havin' a flashback of the times when Beavis and Butthead still were considered funny?

Brgds, Bert
Old Jan 28, 2013, 10:16 AM
Machzx is offline
Find More Posts by Machzx
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarZeelon View Post
In addition to the well-documented power increase of modern Schnürle ported engines, compared to their baffle-piston counterparts of years gone by; it seems the power required today is much greater than it was then...

Then, people used to fly planes on the wing, with the engine providing power for forward motivation.
Today, most newer fliers consider a model that cannot pull itself vertically up; under-powered...

Nearly all of today's trainers can climb vertically on the .46 in their nose; but in reality, they don't need more than a .25 for safe flight and for realistic, full-scale like flight, a .15-.20 will also suffice.
This I agree with !
We all have to fly in the prop now !
The old cadets come to mind flying so slow they would stand still in a good head wind
Let go of the sticks and it would self right with out a gyro or whatever is in our new trainers
Man I sound old now
Old Jan 28, 2013, 10:28 AM
Machzx is offline
Find More Posts by Machzx
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarZeelon View Post
In addition to the well-documented power increase of modern Schnürle ported engines, compared to their baffle-piston counterparts of years gone by; it seems the power required today is much greater than it was then...

Then, people used to fly planes on the wing, with the engine providing power for forward motivation.
Today, most newer fliers consider a model that cannot pull itself vertically up; under-powered...

Nearly all of today's trainers can climb vertically on the .46 in their nose; but in reality, they don't need more than a .25 for safe flight and for realistic, full-scale like flight, a .15-.20 will also suffice.
This I agree with !
We all have to fly in the prop now !
The old cadets come to mind flying so slow they would stand still in a good head wind
Let go of the sticks and it would self right with out a gyro or whatever is in our new trainers
Man I sound old now


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wanted Realflight 4.5 or newer John G Aircraft - General - Miscellaneous (FS/W) 3 Jan 28, 2013 06:15 PM
For Sale Garage Sale..vintage and newer stuff Marc P Cars - Trucks and Parts (FS/W) 6 Jan 25, 2013 10:23 PM
Wanted Enya .15 IV or newer RC Engine ALL American Aircraft - Fuel - Engines and Accessories (FS/W) 2 Mar 01, 2012 05:03 PM
Sold Old Hobbico Trainer, newer Radio and engine RTF $125 flyinjrc74 Aircraft - Fuel - Airplanes (FS/W) 0 Jul 12, 2011 12:11 AM
For Sale Large Collection - newer stuff - 30 planes/engines/servos/etc. nutzaboutharleys Non R/C Items (FS/W) 13 May 20, 2011 12:06 AM