 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / Radio Controlled / Air Models / June 2006Davis Diesel experiences?
Anybody here running Davis Diesel Development heads on engines in the .40 -45 range? What results have you had? What about engines in the .10-.15 range? How much quieter are they? > Anybody here running Davis Diesel Development heads on > engines in the > .40 -45 range? What results have you had? What about > engines in the > .10-.15 range? How much quieter are they? I had a converted OS.32F-H ringed. It was much, much quieter than when ran on glow. I have also ran a friend's OS .60FSR on Davis's Diesel Conversion head and fuel. It too was very much quieter than on glow. It handled about the same as my .32. The smell and cantakerous nature of handling the fuel is what made me return the engine to glow use, although it was fun to operate it as a Diesel. If that engine hadn't been such a fantastic glow engine, I would probably have left it a Diesel and just toughed it out through the smell and quickly evaporating fuel of the Diesel. NI > Anybody here running Davis Diesel Development heads on engines in the > .40 -45 range? What results have you had? What about engines in the > .10-.15 range? How much quieter are they? I converted a .75 to diesel and was impressed with the starting, noise, and idle. I didnt keep it as I didnt like the smells. Between the noise and the stink, I will settle for the stink. But enough about my sex life! :-) Mike Mandaville Austin, Texas > Anybody here running Davis Diesel Development heads on engines in the > .40 -45 range? What results have you had? What about engines in the > .10-.15 range? How much quieter are they? I have no experience of Davis diesel conversions, but do know of their existence. On this side of the pond, there are specialist diesel engine makers and, over the years, I have had a wide cross section of these. Generally speaking, diesels are considerably quieter than their glow equivalents, can comfortably swing larger props at lower revs with therefore less prop noise, and can handle a greater range of prop sizes because of the variable compression. They are also, as a rule, much more economical with fuel. The fuel isn't as agressive as glow fuels especially those with Nitro, so "high spec" fuel proofer isn't needed. There is a "down" side - the fuel is more expensive than glow fuel (partly offset by the economy), and the exhaust residue is "dirtier" leaving black streaks on the airframe. Plastic film coverings suffer - wrinkle up, go slack and peel off. Solartex seems to be unaffected but, unless given a coat of some clear lacquer soon looks very grubby as the exhaust "gunge" sticks in the weave. HTH Malcolm >> Anybody here running Davis Diesel Development heads on engines in the >> .40 -45 range? What results have you had? What about engines in the >> .10-.15 range? How much quieter are they? I had nothing but bad luck with the diesel heads and even worse luck talking to the nitwit that owned the place. "Sullen" "moody" and "grouchy" all come to mine when I think back on my dealings with Davis. I'd have to recommend looking elsewhere. Cheers, jc >>>Anybody here running Davis Diesel Development heads on engines in the >>>.40 -45 range? What results have you had? What about engines in the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Cheers, > jc The trick is you dont talk to him, you dont have an opinion, and you just listen. Problem was I didnt know when he was done. He didnt give me a very friendly experience on the phone in the past. > >>>Anybody here running Davis Diesel Development heads on engines in the > >>>.40 -45 range? What results have you had? What about engines in the [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > just listen. Problem was I didnt know when he was done. He didnt give me > a very friendly experience on the phone in the past. Judging by what has been said here, and on previous posts re Davis Diesels, I would recommend going directly for a purpose made diesel. There is a considerable choice of makers and capacities. Just my two pennorth, Malcolm >> >>>Anybody here running Davis Diesel Development heads on >> >>>engines in the [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Malcolm Having ran both purpose made model diesel engines and the DDC (Davis Diesel Conversion) heads, I can understand why people buy the latter. First of all, they probably already have the engine that they might convert to Diesel operation. The price of the conversion head is much less than buying a comparably sized purpose built model Diesel here in the USA. Second, if they don't like Diesel operation, the DDC user can return their engine to stock and then sell the DDC head very quickly at a small loss, as long as they bought a head for a popularly owned/used engine. The DDC heads perform close enough to a purpose made Diesel engine to let the owner/operator know if they want to continue this type of operation. If the stink and finicky handling required of model Diesel fuel doesn't turn you off, the Davis setup will serve you quite nicely. Purpose made model Diesel engines are expensive and unfamiliar here in the US. The down side of DDC conversions is that a converted engine may not be as easy to set up/handle as a purpose made Diesel. It is also possible that the glow engine that has been converted may not be up to the task of handling the higher cylinder pressure that is developed, IF the engine is ran overcompressed for a lengthy period. Although, I have to admit that the DDC conversion heads do not permit you to run excessive compression ratios on the engines that I have fiddled with. Higher than optimum? Yes. Damaging? Well, it is less prone to damage the engine than were it fitted with a conventional contra-piston setup. If I lived in England, where there are/were a few manufacturers of model Diesels, I might be tempted to go with those engines instead of a DDC. But here in America, it would be a close call. NI Davis Diesel is now on the web: http://www.davisdieseldevelopment.com/home.htm I paid fifty-five dollars for my OS40LA, and I see that it would cost me another fifty-five dollars to convert it into a diesel. To purchase a cylinder head for the price of an engine seems unreasonable to me. Who else makes diesel conversion heads? Mike Mandaville Austin The United States of Texas > Davis Diesel is now on the web: > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Austin > The United States of Texas The reason for the seemingly high price of DDC heads is simply a matter of scale. OS is a very large organization, relatively speaking, that can amortize its R&D, machine equipment and labor over a lot more engines than Mr. Davis will ever produce. The more you make, the cheaper they get. NI > > Davis Diesel is now on the web: > > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > NI Well, thank you for the lesson in economics, Mister Notimprest, but since I have the economic advantage of being already tooled up to produce my own diesel conversion head, should I choose to do so, there is no way in hell that I am going to pay that much. I am still looking for those alternative diesel conversion head suppliers. Mike Mandaville self-employed in my twenty-first year of business >> > Davis Diesel is now on the web: >> > [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > self-employed > in my twenty-first year of business Damn, Mike. I didn't mean to step on your toes. Since you are a businessman, you know that you charge whatever the market will bear. Right? If not, you won't be in business for long. You make the money while you can because it won't be long until what you are selling today won't be in demand tomorrow. But why am I telling you this? You already know everything. Still, that doesn't explain the stupid question. NI Hello, Mister Notimprest. That is a very impressive name, by the way. Do you use it at your place of work, or only when you are socializing? > Damn, Mike. I didn't mean to step on your toes> Well, Mister Notimprest, I am happy to inform you that you are quite incapable of stepping on my toes. Whatever gave you the impression that you possessed that ability? Please be specific, for I am finding you to be quite entertaining. > Since you are a businessman, you know that you charge > whatever the market will bear. Right? Absolutely not. So far, I have worked in at least three seperate service service fields where my tips _far exceeded_ my official authorized rate. If not, you won't be > in business for long. Mister Unimprest, I have been in business for twenty years, and I have yet to set a single price. My customers set their own price, and they compete against one another to do so. You make the money while you can > because it won't be long until what you are selling today > won't be in demand tomorrow. Mister Unimprest, "Take the Money and Run" was a wonderful movie, and a wonderful song. They were both meant to be comedies. Neither was meant to be taken seriously. And my present service will be in demand for as long as the grassn grows. How long do you think that wuill be? > But why am I telling you this? You already know everything. No I do not, nor have I made such a claim. You are making an insulting false accusation. > Still, that doesn't explain the stupid question. What stupid question? You have not made yourself clear. You obviously percieve yourself to be speaking with authority, but I don't think that anyone here could have any idea what the hell you are talking about > NI Mister Notimprest, anyone who would try to impress you would be a fool. Should we all be trying to impress you? Mike Mandaville > Hello, Mister Notimprest. That is a very impressive name, > by the way. [quoted text clipped - 65 lines] > > Mike Mandaville Whatever... NI | I paid fifty-five dollars for my OS40LA, A pity -- it's not a very good engine. Oh, it works, but it's lacking in power and I've heard they're finicky. A Thunder Tiger 36 or 46 at $75 or $79 would be a lot better. But more money, so ... | and I see that it would cost me another fifty-five dollars to | convert it into a diesel. To purchase a cylinder head for the price | of an engine seems unreasonable to me. As suggested, it's very much a niche market. Davis wants to make some money, but doesn't sell too many, so he charges a lot. | Who else makes diesel conversion heads? As far as I know, nobody. There's little demand for diesel R/C engines (though our stock engines work on the same principle, except that the glow plug helps the fuel ignite) so there aren't many sold. Why? I know some people don't like the smell of the fuel. Beyond that, I don't know, but it's true -- they're rare. I've heard that the diesel conversion heads are very finicky to make work, but that the engines that were designed as diesel from the beginning are not. From what I can tell, you've got a very limited budget. So I'd suggest not messing with diesel for a long time, if ever. You mentioned you wanted to do it to keep the noise down -- well, if you want something really quiet, you go electric or unpowered glider. But you can quiet a glow engine too by using a prop on the larger end of what's suggested, and sometimes you can improve on the muffler. | Mike Mandaville | Austin | The United States of Texas Wouldn't we be the `United State of Texas'? Not that Texas is united in anything, but ...  SignatureDoug McLaren, dougmc@frenzy.com If two wrongs don't make a right, try three. > | I paid fifty-five dollars for my OS40LA, > A pity -- it's not a very good engine. Oh, it works, but it's lacking > in power and I've heard they're finicky. A Thunder Tiger 36 or 46 at > $75 or $79 would be a lot better. But more money, so ... Hello, Doug. Thank you for your offer of pity. However, since I myself am pleased with my purchase, your offer is therefore inappropriate. And now I will return your offer. Doug, I pity you for imagining that I care what you think about my engine. I honestly don't give a damn. Mike Mandaville > > | I paid fifty-five dollars for my OS40LA, > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Mike Mandaville Whatever you paid for your engine, if it does what you want and YOU are satisfied with its power output, whatever anyone else thinks doesn't matter a jot. Don't waste your pity on those who think you should have gone to a higher spec engine - you're right to "not give a damn". Malcolm >> > In article >> > <1115097830.003851.44440@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > Malcolm What neither you nor Mike seems to understand is that what Doug said was not meant as a put down. Pity. Mike looks for issues to fight over, as I have recently discovered. I have no time for that behavior or attitude. And I really don't care if you don't like it, Mike, so save your fingers some unnecessary typing. Ed Cregger Mecoa makes one for the OS FP .40, reasonable price too! http://www.mecoa.com/acc/diesel/index.htm | What neither you nor Mike seems to understand is that what | Doug said was not meant as a put down. Pity. Right. It was not a put down, and I was not offering pity either. It seems that whenever you're looking at products of some particular type, there's the low end, the middle end and the high end stuff. The low end stuff generally performs poorly, the middle end stuff performs a lot better and costs a little more, and then the high end stuff performs a bit better than the middle end stuff, but costs a whole lot more. Ulitimately there's almost always a `sweet spot' where you pay a little more than the low end stuff, but get most of the performance of the high end stuff. This seems to be most pronounced in things like computer CPUs (where it's not so confused by many different brands), but it seems to apply to R/C engines too. And in the case of the 0.40 sized two stroke engine, the `sweet spot' appears to be the Thunder Tiger 0.46 or 0.36 Pro engines. I've heard the GMS engines are good too but have no personal experience with them. The OS LA engines are definately the low end. I've got a few, and they work, but they just don't work that well. It just seems that any ball bearing engine is a lot better than any bushing engine, and well worth the small amount of extra money. It's also a pity because I was thinking I had some old engines that Mike might find useful that I'd give him -- after all, he only lives about 30 miles away, and it sounds like money is tight. If he's going to have a marginal engine, he might as well get it for free or at least cheap. But I hadn't really done anything more than consider it, so I shouldn't be surprised that he went out and bought something. | Mike looks for issues to fight over, as I have recently | discovered. I hadn't noticed it before (as I've talked to Mike here before, many months ago), but I've certainly noticed it recently. And since it's even been directed at me lately, I don't really feel so helpful anymore. | I have no time for that behavior or attitude. Looking for issues to fight about isn't so bad, as long as you pick good ones. I wouldn't consider following up to spam just to say `spam!' a good fight, but some seem to differ. | And I really don't care if you don't like it, Mike, so save your | fingers some unnecessary typing. Sounds reasonable, though people rarely seem to listen to this sort of request. Getting the last word in is pretty important to many, even if it ends up cluttering the group with lots of off-topic junk. SignatureDoug McLaren, dougmc@frenzy.com Great minds think alike. Fools seldom differ. I couldnt agree more with Ed and Dou -- jeepXJking9 I have used the DDD heads on 3 engines: OS 61 fsr, Fox 74, and ST 90. I have got them all to run, but am a little disappointed in them. could never get them to turn up like the ads say. I did experimen with the same prop's with a glo head for comparison. The engine always made 200 to 300 rpm lower than glo, but the diesel could run a a cooler temp and give you the ability to run that prop without burnin up( if you needed that). Now mind you, I don't claim to be a diese expert so a learned diesel needle guy might could have eecked out better compression/ mixture setting. It was the best I could get it t run with my experience, and setting compression and air fuel for caramel color exhaust. I was never happy with the transition-- to slow. I did like the idle and restarting traits. I have used a RJL conversion for the OS 40 fp($20) and like it alot. also decided to try a designed diesel, the PAW 35. IMO, the diese advantage is better with the smaller engines. I have seen some buddie use .15's and under and they are fantastic. I will try the small one next. Just for the record, the RJL conversion has a 20 fp carb on it. I runs every bit as good as the PAW. I think the small carb has made BIG difference in that conversion. Throttle response is so much bette I don't think it is the brand of head, only a good test bed by luck o the draw-- this engines porting and timing/ carb lend themselves t good diesel operation. I will try some more in the future. They ar expensive enough to be frustrating when you are unhappy with th result. I think that most of those heads run in the $50 range. Please don't take this as a negative. I just wanted to give you m honest opinion. I will try more. The diesel engines have alot o torque on the low end of the power curve( from idle to 1/2 power). I is amazing. I also think that propping for that power curve is different science, and I need to try a few more to be sure. They are much quieter in operation. In fact, they sound very cool. They almost sound like a little Harley chugging at idle. The exhaus note is alot softer. The only gripe will be the smell of the fuel. I is very strong. good luck, turb -- turbo.gs hi there where can i find the kit to convert a OS .46 sf to diesel? someone can help me please? or what is the basic of an diesel engine so i can do it myself thanks pa -- Patrizio_ > hi there > where can i find the kit to convert a OS .46 sf to diesel? > someone can help me please? > or what is the basic of an diesel engine so i can do it myself > thanks > pat Do you really want to? Diesels have higher and adjustable compression ratios, need re jetting, and throttle not very well..the conrods need beefing up and the piston cylinder fits are more crucial. Why not get a nice PAW diesel that has all these issues sorted already? PAW 49 is £125 and will last for ever.. http://www.eifflaender.com/quoteform.doc > hi there > where can i find the kit to convert a OS .46 sf to diesel? > someone can help me please? > or what is the basic of an diesel engine so i can do it myself > thanks > pat Look up Davis Diesel Conversion Heads, they do heads for a vast range of engines. Many people are using these heads and they are very good. The advantage of converting a modern glow to diesel is... better performance and better carbi control as opposed to older style diesel engines. Most glow engines just need the head conversion and don't need any other modifications... you will find that you probably only need to open the throttle to 3/4 for full revs as the diesel is more efficient and uses less fuel. Have a look on rc-universe in the forum... everything diesel, there you will be among people who know what they are doing and will be able to help you. Reg > hi there > where can i find the kit to convert a OS .46 sf to diesel? > someone can help me please? > or what is the basic of an diesel engine so i can do it myself > thanks > pat I have done that with mixed results. The diesel heads don't have a lot of adjustment range for compression, and using the fuel of the head manufacturer caused carbon buildup which required disassembly and cleaning. I wore out an OS-40FP. I have since purchased two PAW engines, which I highly recommend for ease of operation and reliability. SignatureBrian "Diesels don't deadstick." Thanks guys i will check it thanks Pat.. -- Patrizio_ |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.