RE: RC Report Website?
Gordon himself said it best in his March fairwell editorial: RCR failed first and foremost because of his bad management. I've always wondered why Gordon steadfastly refuse to go "glossy". I understand his dedication to maintain his content-to-fluff ratio, but magazines need to be flashy and colorful to attract attention on the newstand - and to succeed. You cannot serve your readers if you go under. Pack with the devil, yes. But it's the nature of the beast. Having said that, I had at one time subscrbied to ALL the major RC rags. Slowly, I let all of them run out - except RCR. Still, every time I receive an issue of RCR, I wish it were glossy, flashy, chock full of stunning photos and - yes - ads, [i]and [/i]still carry the same written content. Love the content - hated the packaging! My sub is supposed to run out in 2012, I think. Gordon need not worry about me asking for refund. Whatever I paid, I've already gotten my money's worth many issues ago.
Posted on: 1/29/2009 3:30 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8416088

RE: Lathe for conversions
Captin, thanks for the note. I do try to be very careful moving them around. I'll remember to pull more than push. The big mill is bolted to the stand and to the wooden base. The others will soon be bolted through the table top. Speaking of northern country, I do miss it sometimes - especially the fall foliage. Well... only [i]sometimes[/i].[:)] I lived up there in CT and NY through most of the 80's and early 90s and remember the snow, slush and salt. Can't decide if that's better or worse than the mosquitos, mugginess and mold down here. Oh well, you win some and you lose some.
Posted on: 12/8/2006 1:34 AM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5089527

RE: Lathe for conversions
Grizzly catalog sure has some nice stuff. WholesaleTools also has a good size catalog. Plus they have a local store here in Houston, so I tend to check there first. Well, I finally got my garage cleaned up to a point where I'm not embarrassed showing it. All the machines are on wheels, which is an absolute necessity until I get my workshop built. The mills should be okay floating, but I'm not thrilled about the lathe not firmly grounded. None of the tools are set up properly yet. The Sieg X3 small mill is closest to being operationally ready and so will get priority. All tools are (or will be) variable speed, including the nice little bandsaw I got from Lathemaster. So you don't think I've got the sense to stop here, I just bought a 12x36 gear head lathe off Ebay last night. I couldn't stand the lone 8x14 being ganged up by all the mills.[>:]
Posted on: 12/8/2006 1:12 AM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5088339

RE: Lathe for conversions
Mr Mugen, very nice machines! Jet is the Cadillac of imports... or should I say [i]Lexus[/i] of imports.[:)] They used to be all made in Taiwan, and may still be. They, like many Taiwanese manufacturers, have been setting up factories in China, but quality control should still be a cut above the rest. Did you notice if your tools say where they were made? I just got all mine raised up on stands and tables, too. Boy, that 2-ton cherry picker sure made the one-man moving job easy. Saved me several cases of beer already.[;)]
Posted on: 12/7/2006 6:02 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5087814

RE: Lathe for conversions
I see what you mean. Yes, disengaging the intermediate gear will work just fine. That's what I have in mind too, except I would like to have a third postion to engage a secondary gear which reverses the feedscrew direction. Many 9x20 owners have done exactly this. Here is one example: http://www.bedair.org/Tumble/Tumble.html Also, I was a bit confused with your terminology. Typically, I see "crossfeed" refers to the motion of the cutting bit as it travels "across" or perpendicular to the axis of rotation. The motion of the bit traveling "along" or parallel the axis of rotation is usually called "Longitudinal" feed.
Posted on: 12/7/2006 1:06 AM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5085543

RE: Lathe for conversions
[quote]ORIGINAL: captinjohn On another note...why would it not be easy to disengage one of the Gears that make the cross feed run. Then install a separate variable speed electric motor with a gear or belt to the bottom (biggest gear) on the lathe? With the right electric motor you could have both directions of cross feed and also vary the speed. I am going to try and design it! Best Regards Capt,n[;)] [/quote] To drive the feedscrew with a separate motor, you would have to somehow synchronize its speed against the main spindle motor. Otherwise, it is impossible to cut threads accurately. You will also have to regulate both motor speeds regardless of load, which will be very difficult to do, unless you set up two vector or sensor feedback VFDs and couple them together. The expense of that will be many times the cost of your lathe. Staying with a hard mechanical gear linkage is much easier.
Posted on: 12/6/2006 7:23 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5084146

RE: Lathe for conversions
My cars don't even ge a chance to leak oil in my garage - they are all parked outside! Right now, my 3-car garage is full of tools and home improvement supplies, wife can't even park her minivan in it. She isn't complaining too loudly yet, since it's winter season, but I have been given ultimatum. Okay, back on topic. Actually, converting to CNC is the main reason I may keep my X3 small mill. CNC conversion price tags goes up almost exponentially as you go up in mill size. I can convert my small X3 mill to CNC for about $1500. For a RF45 style square column, full kits run between $3k-5k. Bridgeport-type knee mills goes up from there to the stratosphere. You can save money by scrouring info off the net and assemble/make parts yourself, of course. You do typically replace the stock leadscrews with ballscrews for CNC. Most hobbiest or home CNC conversion do use standard PCs for control. Tim, try here for info on CNC for Bridgeport: http://www.cnczone.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=157
Posted on: 12/4/2006 11:14 AM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5073778

RE: Lathe for conversions
Tim, resisting upgrading and hording tools is sage advice, but we all know it's futile. When I started with this metal working thing, my first mill was a HF mini mill (Sieg X2). I ended up upgrading to an X3 just a few month later - before I even had a chance to make chips with the X2. Now the X3 is dwarfed by the newly acquired square column ZAY7045. I told myself this is absolutely [i]it[/i]... that is, until I can pawn off the smaller mills. Hmm... that knee mill sure looks nice. Anybody want to buy a mini mill?[:D]
Posted on: 12/4/2006 12:10 AM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5072664

RE: Lathe for conversions
You probably won't find much scrap copper in boneyards. Apparently copper prices is going through the roof - for as much as $4 a pound. I just saw a news report here locally aboutcopper theft here in Houston. Is getting to be quite a problem for builders,as thieves would rip out copper plumbing and wires, sometimes in broad daylight. It is the same way nationwide.
Posted on: 12/3/2006 11:57 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5072627

RE: Lathe for conversions
Captin, I believe that is the intermediate gear that reverses the feedscrew direction (relative to the spindle). I explained about it in post #111. All the other change gears, metric or English, have a simple center hole with a keyway. This is the only one that has a stud and spacer attached to it. I've got some carbide inserts, but I'm playing with HSS for now. I missed the last sale HF had on their tool grinder. Next time it goes on sale, I'm buying one.
Posted on: 12/3/2006 1:18 AM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5068515

RE: Lathe for conversions
Tim, that is [b][i]exactly[/i][/b] why I went with the VFD from the get go. My good machinist friend told me it is way overkill for a small lathe like this, but I figure the variable speed is actually a great learning tool for a newbie like me - I can tweak the speed instantly and see the result. yes, I read about the "tan chip color rule" in Machine Shop Secrets. Captin, if you haven't done so already, I'd highly recommend buying a copy of "Machinist's Handbook". It will answer a lot of your basic questions like: "what is the best cutting speed for aluminum?" It will also have specs and data table for everything from the various tapers (R8, MT2, etc.), to motor frame sizes, to alloy characteristics. Scanning the web can get you some pretty good "free" info, but still nothing beats a collection of good reference books. I also have Guy Lautard's collections of machinist's Bedside Reader. Great reads - except I don't do it at the bedside... but at my library (aka commode). Each little story Guy tells is good for about one "sitting".[;)]
Posted on: 12/1/2006 3:57 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5062934

RE: Lathe for conversions
Tim, yes, running the motor in either direction is easy with the VFD. The stock 8x also has a switch that does this. What I was talking about was running the feedscrew in opposite direction relative to the spindle. The smaller 7x lathes (including the Micromark 7x14) and most larger lathes (12"+) have a lever that let you switch feedscrew directions. Unfortunately, most other small bench lathes (8x, 9x, 10x and even some 11x) lack this feature. They require you to remove an intermediate change gear, remount it on a different location, and insert another intermediate gear in between the original intermediate gear and the spindle in order to reverse the feedscrew direction. It sounds more complicated than it really is, but to do this in the middle of a job is still a PITA. As I said, it is only a minor inconvenience, as reversing the feedscrew is mostly only necessary when cutting left-handed threads. However, it is still very nice to be able to power drive the feedscrew one way or the other, without having to change the spindle direction as well. Also, since the change gears are "dry" lubricated - by the thin oil film clinging to the teeth - it is good to be able to have a 3rd position, which disengages them from the spindle all together.
Posted on: 11/30/2006 4:43 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5058934

RE: Lathe for conversions
I haven't come across a forum that deals specifically with machining RC conversion engines, but this one comes the closest: http://www.cnczone.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=44 I've gotten some pretty good infomation on cnczone in general. Captin, good to see you got your HF 8x12 that quickly. I remember reading in one of the Yahoo groups about folks having waited months without getting their 8x12 orders shipped. About your motor making more noise rotating one way than the other, you might want to make sure that it is not gear noise instead. I found some of the quick change gears to be fairly stiff when I first uncrated the lathe. After I cleaned the whole machine with WD40 and oiled every lubrication port on the lathe, everything moved much smoother. I never even bother running the stock motor on my LM 8x14 before swapping it out for a 1hp 3phase motor, which will be driven by a Hitachi VFD. I lose the use of the intermediate pulley and the slowest 3 speeds, but the VFD will more than make up for it. My next mod will be to devise some sort of tumbler reverse mechanism so I can run the feed screw backwards without having to swap change gears. I don't need to cut left-handed thread, but it sure would be nice to power feed the carriage both ways - plus the ability to stop the feedscrew and change gears when I don't need them to turn. The 9x20 has the same problem, and many owners have devised tumbler reverse gears.
Posted on: 11/30/2006 3:10 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5058634

RE: Ryobi 31cc engine setup
I use the Aerotrend "Easy Flex" gas/diesel tubing. It's light blue transparent. Dick Bennett sells it. Tower used to sell it too, but apparently not any more. It is advertised as non age hardening, and so far it has worked well for me, but I think it will still harden in the long run. When I get around to order from Tower, I might give this a try for in tank use: http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXRZ80&P=6
Posted on: 11/28/2006 4:00 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5050118

RE: complete 2 ring Ryobi kit $69.99
[quote]ORIGINAL: cu. in. It looks like you made several changes to your Ryobi: 1. Glow plug/adapter 2. Removed flywheel 3. New mount 4. New muffler 5. New prop shaft. 6. Other? I would guess that your Ryobi weighs somewhere between 3.5 to 4.0 lb. without prop or spinner? Do you have an aircraft for it yet? Thanks, Bruce [/quote] [i]Hey!!![/i] That's [i]my[/i] Ryobi 31cc.[:D] That was a single-ring Ryobi (older version) - my very first conversion engine! In that pic, I've got it set up on glow fuel (90/5/5 methanol/castor/nitro). Attached is another pic showing what was on the other end of the test bench sawhorse. Ahh... brings back some hair flapping, smoke blowing, ear deafening, neighbor complainin' memories... Prop hub and glow plug adapter are from CH ignitions. Motor Mount and (not visible) carb adapter plate are from Carr Precision. B&B Muffler. I've had it running with up to 15% nitro and 10% oil (it makes more power with more oil, probably better combustion seal) and I remember it ripped the crap out of the 18x8 MA compared to an OS 1.60FX. Not bad for an engine package that barely cracked $100. Weight was right at 3lbs IIRC. Ended up selling that engine on RCU. Later I did buy another Ryobi 31cc - actually a Bloens curve shaft trimmer - this time a twin-ring new version, when Lowes had it on sale for $49.95 brand new a few Xmas back. It was one of the last batch of 31cc with separate bolt-on flywheel guard. It is a classic by now. I won't be parting with it any time soon and will be saving it for a project where only a slim profile engine like the Ryobi will do.
Posted on: 11/28/2006 2:39 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5049776

RE: Lathe for conversions
Back gear belt drive, power cross feed, cam lock spindle, and a nice quick change gearbox are the main features I am looking for in my next lathe. I'm not fond of gear heads for the reasons Tim220225 mentioned. Also, most of gearheads in the price range I'm looking at typically don't have spindle speeds below 70rpm. Back gear belt drive can get down to 50rpm for thread cutting. I would like a larger lathe, if only for the mass and rigidity. Most of the stuff I'll use a lathe for are not that big, but having the size and capacity sure would be nice. Jet made in Taiwan tend to be better quality and precision than the copies made in China. But even Jet will eventually move all their production to the Mainland. I do keep an eye on Ebay for a nice used Clausing or Mazak for sale locally, but I have no problem buying brand new imports. Problem with the imports is that quality could vary greatly - even among machines that look almost identical. My experiences are that as long as you do the home work up front and don't buy blind, there [i]are[/i] good import machines.
Posted on: 11/28/2006 1:21 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5049540

RE: Lathe for conversions
What do you guys think of this [link=http://www.wmhtoolgroup.com/Shop/index.cfm?navPage=4&iid=137565]Jet belt-drive 13x40[/link]? I've been looking around for a bigger lathe and this is about the only belt-drive I could find in this size. Don, I don't think Jet makes the 10x24 any more. The only one smaller than the 13x40 is the 9x20.
Posted on: 11/28/2006 11:37 AM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5049160

RE: Lathe for conversions
I have the [link=http://www.lathemaster.com/QUICK%20CHANGE%20TOOL%20POST%20SET.htm]Lathemaster QCTP[/link] on my LM 8x14. I like the direct bolt on and no mods necessary.
Posted on: 11/27/2006 11:50 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5047701

RE: World Models 28% 330L--Anyone Flying?
[quote]ORIGINAL: JTFDEZ My question about add weight for the CG is because in the Fuji 64 that I have, there is the option to use a long prop flange in order to move the engine in a rear position. What do you think about? [/quote] Two good reasons not to use the long prop flange: 1. Fuji wants too much money for it 2. The Fuji 64, like any big thumper, does shake quite a bit. The long unsupported prop shaft, as RCpilet pointed out, will be more prone to an unbalanced prop hanging WAYYY out there. I actually shortened mine by switching to Fuji's EI rotor, which seems to reduce the vibration. Go ahead and mount the engine directly to the firewall, The 0.5 inch or so difference in engine placement with the long prop flange is not going to make too much difference. You can do the math and figure it out. The Fuji 64 is light enough that it balancing shouldn't be a problem. I have 2 Fuji 64, and they are good engines. The Magneto version is heavier than a stock G62. The EI version (or converted to CH Synchrospark) becomes a bit lighter then a stock G62 converted to EI, and a bit slimmer and taller. Mine are converted to CH Synchrospark and with the J&A Peacemaker wraparound mufflers I had custom made, they run a couple of 100 RPM stronger than the G62 I have on similar setup. Both are very green and far from broken in, though.
Posted on: 11/27/2006 11:21 AM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5044445

RE: Zenoah G-45 vs. Fuji BT-43
captin, yes the 86cc is a boxer twin and quite a bit smoother than both the Fuji 64 and G62. I'm not a big fan of big thumpers much larger than 60cc. Once I get some work done on it, I will post in the conversion forum.
Posted on: 11/23/2006 1:42 AM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5029433

RE: Zenoah G-45 vs. Fuji BT-43
Boy... I really wish people wouldn't go on a tyraid without actually answering the original poster question. Here are the specs: G45 - 4.9 lbs with muffler, magneto ignition BT43EI - 3.5lbs with muffler, electronic auto advance ignition For the GP Yak 54, I would say the Fuji is the better fit between the two. The G45 is only 3 Oz. less than G62 and is really good only for Warbirds and Civilian scale big wings. If a person is asking about $400 engines, chances are they may not be interested in $600 engine + $100 muffler. The Fuji BT43EI is a pretty darn good $400 electronic ignition gasser. Every engine has its place, and every flyer's needs and wants are different. As for the constant Fuji bashing, I just don't get it. Fuji may have once shared the boat anchor title with Zenoah when Fuji first introduced the line, but these days, their EI version are not all that far off from the "snot-nose" brands. I have every size Fuji except the new 24EI and the 43EI. All are electronic ign, either Fuji's or CH Synchrospark. I would say the 64 (actually a 63cc)is a bit of a brute - powerful but vibrates a bit much. They were aiming for the G-62 and they came up a tad shy. The 50 (really a 46cc) is a pretty good engine - about the same powerwise as my Poulan 46cc conversions but weighs a bit more - not much when you figure in the weight of the engine mounts for the Poulan engines. The 32 (actually a 34cc, I don't know why Fuji do this), with its rear muffler, is great engine for narrow cowl planes like the J-3, but not as powerful as other 30-35cc gassers. The EI version is very very slim and lightweight. My personal favorite is the BT-86 twin (actually 86cc, what do you know [;)]). I have 3 of them, all converted to CH Synchrospark. It is a very lightweight engine for its displacement, at around 4.5lbs, EI without mufflers. Now bear in mind a 3W80 single weighs around 5lbs. I am gonna work on shaving some of the excess casting off the 86's cylinders and crankcase over the holidays and hope to get the basic engine block down close to 4lbs. It is earmark to go on a WM 28% Extra 330 90", for which WM recommends a 60cc. It should be quite a powerhouse for that airframe. BTW, I don't just own Fujis. I've had everything from G62, GT80, MVVS 26 & 35, Moki 1.80 gas, 3W106, ZDZ160, etc, etc. Not to mention a plethora of weedies and chainsaws. Regardless of the brand and industrial origin, they are all, by and large, made to last far longer than any number of planes you may put them on. I would not think of bad-mouthing any one of them. Well... okay... except may be that one sample 30cc POS gasser I bought directly from China.[8|]
Posted on: 11/22/2006 2:25 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5027247

RE: Zenoah G-45 vs. Fuji BT-43
Oh, regarding Fuji parts prices... if you actually are a Fuji engine owner, instead of fixing it yourself, trying sending your engine to Hobbico Services. I've sent in a Fuji 64 with a bent shaft, with a note asking for quotation on the needed repair. I got the engine back a week later, all fixed up and postage paid. No questions asked. Fuji, like many engine makers, inflate their parts prices to keep people from going into engine building/conversion business using their parts. Ever ask DA and 3W how much one of their crankshaft would be?[;)]
Posted on: 11/22/2006 2:24 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5027299

RE: Who wants a 50cc Super Decathlon?
G-62 might be on the large end of engine choices for a true 1/4 scale, which is 96" wingspan. 28% or 30% would work out better. My concern for WildhareRC going with a 1/4 scale is that there is no shortage of similar cabin cruisers (SD, J-3, Super Cub, Monocoupe, Rearwin Speedster, etc.) 96" or so wingspan ARFs already on the market, meant to be powered by small gasser, roughly 25~45cc. They will be competing in a fairly popular, albeit crowded, market niche. OTOH, there are no such ARFs sized to take advantage of the increasingly popular - and relatively affordable - 75~80cc singles. At least not here in NA anyhow. A 30%, like the Hostetler SD would be perfect for a G62 (scale power) or 3W80 single (overpower). Overall cost premium is neglegible compared to a 1/4 scale version, yet would have a more impressive presence at the flying field. All I'm saying is that before it makes sense for us to buy one, it has to make sense for Tom to market it. A large portion of Wildhare's fleet is 50-80cc friendly. It only make sense to cater to the same clientele, who may already have suitable engines looking for a new home of a different flavor. BTW, your SD looks great! I must say, though, I am partial to the yellow/black scheme. The red/white/blue is good too.
Posted on: 11/21/2006 3:06 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5023390

RE: Who wants a 50cc Super Decathlon?
I too love Super Decathlon. I bought a Sportsman Aviation 86" Super Decathlon as soon as it came out, and I bought another one NIB for parts when they were on clearance. The Homelite 30cc on CH Synchrospark flies it just fine. I'm sure a DA50 would have worked just fine but a waste of power IMHO. I would buy one too, but I prefer a 30% or 75cc version instead. Pricepoint wise, Tom would be better off sizing it for the ever popular and very inexpensive G62 for "scale aerobatics". The hotdog pilot can bolt on one of the 75-80cc singles. Servo requirements would be similar to a 50cc size, so very little cost premium. If you do build one, Tom, make sure you design a good wing strut mounting scheme. Field (dis)assembly is the ONLY thing I don't like about flying these high-wing cabin cruisers.
Posted on: 11/21/2006 10:57 AM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5022543

RE: Lathe for conversions
Tim, the 1-1/2" laminated hardwood top came with the workbench, which I bought [link=http://www.northerntool.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_6970_200322005_200322005]here[/link]. I replaced the threaded casters with adjustable machine mounts. When I get around to furnishing my workshop, I plan to make 1-1/2" benchtops by gluing 3/4" MDF on top of 3/4" plywood. The MDF makes a nice smooth worksurface, and the plywood will provide good load handing. Home Depot has this [link=http://homedepot.bighammersoftware.com/ProductInfo.aspx?cid=834245&pid=a46c77d2-f870-47e8-8fe0-0a1d1c1c4084]3/4" AraucoPly[/link] that I've found to be excellent material for benchtops. It's nearly the quality of hardwood ply but at regular pine plywood prices. Solid Core door panels used to make great benchtops, but these days you need to be careful about buying them. Not all "solid cores" are made the same. There is lumber core, which is what they used to sell in the old days, with softwood (usually pine) sadwiched between hardwood (Luan, Birch, etc.) sheets. Then there is "fiber core", which has MDF for the core. There is even one with polyurethane foam filled energy-efficient "solid core" doors, which would be my choice for actually using as doors, but they make poor benchtops.
Posted on: 11/17/2006 6:46 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5008781

RE: Lathe for conversions
Tim, thanks for the detailed explanation. I did something similar. The workbench has a 1-1/2" laminated hardwood top and rated for 1200lbs load. It doesn't seem to even notice the 245lbs lathe. I checked the bedways for level and they were good. I didn't use collars and took the light cut directly on the drill rod. Next time I will use collars and maybe better resolution mics. captin, good for you! After you had a chance to look at it, let us know how you like it.
Posted on: 11/17/2006 12:33 AM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5006328

RE: Lathe for conversions
Tim, that is what I am quickly finding out, and I just got into this machining thing. I benefitted from having a good friend who's a serious home machinist. I took his advice of leveling the surface of a good solid workbench before bolting the lathe down on the tabletop. I then checked for any remaining warpage by lightly turning a long drill rod with a sharp bit. Mine turned out better than my 0.001" mic can measure, so no fine adjustment was necessary. It really emphasized that there is no substitute for cast iron, which made me glad I went with the 8x14. It is ready to go right out of the box and a lot of cast iron for the money. Right now I'm working out of my garage, so the 8x14 will be it. Once I get my workshop built this winter, I'm getting larger machines. Still, it's a good exercise to cut my teeth (maybe literally!) with the small machine. They aren't as intimidating for a rank beginner and, missing features found on larger machines, simpler to operate. BTW, it's funning seeing your little quickie 500s sitting around the big ol' BP.[:)]
Posted on: 11/16/2006 2:21 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5004115

RE: Lathe for conversions
captinjohn, every one of these 7x, 8x and 9x have their pluses and minuses. You just have to decide which fits [i]your[/i] requirements best. For example, if you need to cut left-handed threads frequently, 7x is a better bet. Neither 8x or 9x come stock with a reverse tumbler gear for the feed screw. OTOH, if you need the extra inches (for gunsmithing say), 9x is obviously the choice. Keep in mind, though, a lathe should really be qualified by the chuck size, not the swing-over-bed. There are a few folks who put a 5" chuck on their 7x - not for the faint of heart IMHO - but they can hold just about any workpiece a 9x with a 5" chuck can. Between centers isn't much of a concern for RC stuff, since most engine work don't involve anything longer than 10". I ruled out 7x from the start, because of the size issue and the fact that you pretty much have to rebuild the darn thing to get any sort of precision out of it. Between the 8x and 9x is a tougher choice. I went with the 8x because even though the "spec" reads smaller (8x14 vs. 9x20), it is actually substantially beefier than the 9x. The 8x14 weighs more than the 9x20. The ways are induction hardened and physically wider and the prizms larger than the 9x. The 5" 3jaw and a 5" 4jaw I have for it are plenty big enough, though I've been keeping an eye out for 6" or 6-1/4" 6jaw chucks on Ebay. The lead screw on the 9x is of a somewhat small diameter and very fine pitched. Some owners have reported problems with that. Again, those are just my thoughts. The 7x and 9x are much more popular and so enjoy better aftermarket support. In the end, any of these will be a good starter lathe. I'm already looking ahead at 12x36 and 13x40.[>:]
Posted on: 11/16/2006 12:29 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Engine Conversions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5003759

RE: Tachometers
I've used many hobby-grade photo tachometers over the years. Various vintages of Hobbico, H9, Glowbee, etc. They all worked well enough for the purpose of relative comparisons, between props or between engines. I prefer the current Hobbico/Tower version because it uses cheap AAA batteries, instead of 9V or worse the expensive button or coin type batteries. As long as you understand that it detects alternating light intensities, you can avoid backgrounds that can confuse it. Point it slightly up toward the sky or something like a flat white wall, the photo-type tachs works just fine. Busy objects like fences, stick-built structures, or a bunch of your buddies standing around can confuse the readings. As for not working well in poor lighting, well... should you [i]really[/i] be around a running meatgrinder in poor lighting conditions? I take rpm reading directly [i]behind[/i] the prop. With glow engines, I am often tweaking needles at the same time right there anyhow. Compact size really helps there. I'm thinking about getting the tiny H9 because of that. Not sure why I would want to take it standing 6ft away. I actually have 2 laser and contact tachometers for work related stuff, one of which we are required to keep NIST traceable calibrated yearly. Every once in a while I get bored and use them to benchmark the hobby grade ones, which are usually surprisingly accurate.
Posted on: 11/15/2006 1:00 AM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Tachometer Readings"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=4998036

RE: zenoah transfer to husqvarna
The hobby engine division no doubt is a very small part of Komatsu/Zenoah's power equipment business. It is also probably very high profit margin compared to hawking weedies and chainsaws. I doubt they would willingly kill a cash cow. Hey, may be we'll see a Husky 88cc single added to the hobby engine line.[:)]
Posted on: 11/14/2006 3:52 PM by Author "Volfy" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=4995609