Exactly How Long WOULD a Testor's McCoy keep running?

Stuka Stunt Main Forum · 7 of 7 known posts recovered

The Kiwi · Mar 14, 2001 04:57 PM

Exactly *How Long* WOULD a Testor's McCoy keep running?#0 source

So: tell us your McCoy Tales! Not having been a fan of the brand at any point, I'm unable to offer direct encouragement to the query at "That OTHER Place," the one you have to re-register at every two or three months, which asked if a McCoy 35 would actually keep on running for any great length of time if treated to 29% castor fuel and carefully prevented from overheating.

Personally, I would 'use em up' as cheap spares, paying little attention to the fuel or heat-up, and literally throwing the (rapidly) worn out ones in the trash. Didn't even save old ones as spare cases or for any other parts that weren't worn out.

I suspect that Ed Southwick wouldn't have started using them regularly if some of them hadn't managed to keep on running long after the average McCoy was just so much scrap. It is my understanding, however, that Ed and (Name) McCoy were acquainted, and that (Name) helped hand-pick parts for the best possible fit in Ed's engines.

I have no long-life stories for the Testor's engine similar to those for a Fox (several such) or a Torp (just one) that I got extended life from. I also was only barely conscious of the "pre-Testor's" products before Testors took over. No one I knew used them when they were actively being sold, or at least I wasn't aware that they did so (I was pleasantly surprised years later to learn how attractive and usable some of the original Duromatic engines had been before (Name) sold out).

(I did admire the RR racing engines, and was aware that Testors was just assembling them from parts on hand.) I never knew that there was a black case RH 29 RR engine until John Goodwin put one of his up for sale on eBay. That's a "pretty" engine, folks!

(http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=568116364)

Finally, it was only as the 1960's faded into the 1970's, and the Testor's RH engines were about to be replaced by the Series 21 BH's, that I had occasion to witness the running of a couple of the pre-1955 engines. I wasn't particularly well impressed at the time. I thought that an average Testors' engine had more power. Maybe the two Super Stunt McCoys were below average, but I don't think so.

So: who out there has had a Mac (several Macs?) that soldiered on year after year without losing so much compression it (they?) wouldn't start any more?

Kiwi

._.

denlip · Mar 14, 2001 07:13 PM

RE: Exactly *How Long* WOULD a Testor's McCoy keep running?#1 source

Kiwi, I can't offer any encouragement here. they were cheap engines and in the 50s and 60's I was a lad concerned with growing up and mainly flying my models. As a result of them being cheap and readilly available they were cannon fodder for the mill. We consumed vast quantities of these motors. Remember that most fuels of the time had at least 22% oil and 25% was common, it didn't do much to preserve any McCoy that I had.
the earlier sportsman series was no better then the redhead in my opinion. And have had my share of them that wore out so quickly it was common to squirt some 30 wt oil in and then a prime and quickly flip it to start the motor. This worked for awhile, but in answer to your question. A summer was considered outstanding for a mcCoy 35 redhead

Jim T. · Mar 14, 2001 08:46 PM

RE: Exactly *How Long* WOULD a Testor's McCoy keep running?#2 source

I put between 100 and 200 flights on a redhead 35 in a Yak 9 for OTS. It was a one-flip starter until I put a lean run on it; then it became a 3-4 flip starter. I don't recall what fuel I was running, but I'm sure it was a castor/synthetic mix with adequate oil. I crashed it in 1980 and did not fly it again. within the last couple of years I ran it on the bench and it started and ran like it did when new. I got it used. I had three or four of them and they were fine, except one which was a junker. All were bought used. The Redhead 35 is a more powerful engine than the Fox 35. I got rid of mine because I saw no future use for them.

On the other hand I have put some 300 flights on a redhead 19, also bought used, and it starts and runs like the day I got it. That was with Sig Champion 10% 50/50. I have several, all bought used, and they are all similar on the bench, except for one bought at the VSC last year. It is 1500 RPM up on the others. I think the redhead 19 is a fine little engine. They are a little more powerful (flight test) than a Cameron 19, but considerably less powerful than a ST G20-15 diesel. Probably not as powerful as a Torp or Veco 19, but I havn't made a direct comparison.

Jim

Big Country Joe · Mar 15, 2001 11:51 AM

RE: Exactly *How Long* WOULD a Testor's McCoy keep running?#3 source

I have several 35's and 19's that I have been using for the last 20+ years, and just love them! I also have nearly 100 of these in various conditions and am always buying more. (not a hobby, a DISEASE!)
I've been of the opinion that while they will wear out after a great number of runs, keeping them running on the rich side prolongs their life. One good thing is that with the fairly low cost of these engines, it is often possible to refit pistons and liners from the "junk" pile with good results. My only problem is finding engines with complete needle valve assemblies.
Have been know to buy an engine just to get the NVA.I also think that the 19's by in large outlast the 35's, and the 40 is the best of the lot. Only have a few of the 29's so cant give a reliable answer as to their reliability.
Anyone want to send me their NV's or NVA's they dont want?

The Kiwi · Mar 17, 2001 09:52 AM

RE: Exactly *How Long* WOULD a Testor's McCoy keep running?#6 source

LAST EDITED ON Mar-17-01 AT 02:21 PM (EST)

Given the constant "Busy Right Now, Call Back Later" situation at the forum where the subject got started, I'm quite surprised over how many responses that question generated there. One person was naming rpm figures showing most (Series 20, I believe) RH 35's had a 300 rpm advantage over most Foxes, and the pre-Testors Super Stunts had as much or more of an advantage over the Testors engines.

Duromatic tended to "experiment" with a variety of technologies, such that one old 36 might have a chrome piston, while the next had a chrome cylinder, or a ringed piston. It's therefore going to be harder to compare those to the Testors 35's, unless exact Super Stunt descriptions are offered. {Amended in edit here. My previous comment in this part of this paragraph related to still a THIRD thread about old McCoys, one that apparently was about the Series 21's, but I'd missed a reference to NVA body length that ID'd the model for Leonard, but not for myself, & began to wonder (in print) how a piston ring had gotten into any Testor's RH 40's.}

._.

Larry F · Mar 15, 2001 10:32 PM

RE: Exactly *How Long* WOULD a Testor's McCoy keep running?#4 source

Had one.

Lean Run.

Started shaking.

Stab breaking.

In a flash,

A pile of trash,

McCoy, airplane, and all.

Larry F

G.Man · Mar 17, 2001 09:13 AM

RE: Exactly *How Long* WOULD a Testor's McCoy keep running?#5 source

To be honest with you, I have found that the Testors engines have performed quite well over the years! I not being a pro by
any stretch of the immagination, when it comes to c/l stunt flying have found that the 21 series engines pack more power than the Fox engines, and turn higher RPM's.
Actually the Testors engines I have today dating back to the
early 60's at a glance, seem to have little or no compression at all, but when started run like a charm. And if I may add they
have have a limited amount of hours on them to begin with,,,, go figure!
To answer your question, the Testors enginers were realy the
only engines thatI could afford back in the early 60s and for what they were have performed quite well, and still do!

G. Man