HI ZOOT Fox 35 Crankshaft

This is the term Randy Smith refers to as his new Fox 35 crankshafts. I am informed they are out being Nitrited, which means they well be available soon, very soon.

To those who think $49.95 is to high, this crankshaft well do more for a Fox then an ABC Piston and Liner which is considerably more. Randy has made 100 of them.

Of the first three I got, two have been running very well and the results are excellent, the third I have no response back on yet. To put it in Pete Petersons words about my Jamison with the HI ZOOT Aero Crank Shaft "That's way too much motor to be a FOX".

Any questions on this or on reworking instructions for a Fox 35 I can be reached at my E-Mail [email protected]

Larry Foster

Larry,

Randy Smith makes these cranks, that's a positive.

You say they work as well as your modded shafts, plus they shouldn't break, that's two more positives.

And then you bring **Pete Peterson** and his unholy reputation to the party.

Next you'll be quoting Whitely or some other flake. Might want to get Unca' Mikey in on this, even if he is now up in the NE, probably under 18 feet of snow.

>Larry,

>Next you'll be quoting Whitely or some other flake. Might
>want to get Unca' Mikey in on this, even if he is now up in
>the NE, probably under 18 feet of snow.
>
>Dan

Us flakes gotta stay together, Someday maybe you can be one to if you work really hard at it.

Larry

>Us flakes gotta stay together, Someday maybe you can be one
>to if you work really hard at it.
>
>Larry

I just looked up "flake" in the dictionary...

It simply said:

flake: da dirt

>Larry,
>
>Randy Smith makes these cranks, that's a positive.
>
>You say they work as well as your modded shafts, plus they
>shouldn't break, that's two more positives.

Dan

They are better then anything I can do to a stock crankshaft, because they redeuce vibration more. This is because they are true and straight.

Just think you wouldn' have to keep a bunch of spares now.

Larry

Larry--- I have run the shaft on the bench only, so far. I mounted it on my regular test bench and checked for vibration. I noticed a slight improvement over the stock setups. But then I mounted it on the same bench but in a side mound to simulate a profile type of plane and there was a great improvement over the stock unit mounted the same way.
I haven,t flown it yet as the weather hasn't cooperated. TOO ##@*!!#* cold. I am having to go to Amarillo TX for the next two weeks, and will take the engine and plane down and perhaps get to fly it there. I will let you know. Sorry about dragging my feet.

Bigiron

Hey, Dirt...we're under only two feet of snow (or rather, WERE, before the current heat wave in the lower 20s).

Re those cranks: one thing's for certain -- if Foster sez they're good, that's enough for me. His engines are the rat's patoot!!!

Mike, I think it should be the cat's "Meow"
Going to get to VSC this year?
Bigiron

Or pajamas. My dictionary says that a rat's patoot is something one would not give in matters of indifference.

Howard (What would Strunk and White say?) Rush

Hmmm...that's right. So let's correct that to: "Foster's engines are the Bee's Knees!"

LAST EDITED ON Feb-07-04 AT 04:59 PM (CDT)
 
UM,

I think that "the Bee's Knees" is much more in keeping with the character of one who continually professes to be on the trailing edge of technology.

Warm regards from the far Northwest, where the addtional 14" of white stuff we received yesterday brings the yearly total to over 80 inches. Of course, because of compaction and a very minor thaw, it appears that we only have about 40" left on the ground.

Howard,

>>Howard (What would Strunk and White say?) Rush<<

Nothing. Their dead. "The Elements of Style" would condemn you to pugatory.

That's "They're dead." Stop writing like a combat flyer.

the same as "h*ll" for a boxer??

HI Larry and everyone.

The Smith H.Z cranks (thanks to Dan for the name "Hi Zoot") are now finished and in stock , Henry has just finished having them treated and hardened for me
I am building motors and have all versions with the Crank, ABC and lapped iron piston , in stock.

Regards

>Us flakes gotta stay together, Someday maybe you can be one
>to if you work really hard at it.
>
>Larry
I just looked up "flake" in the dictionary...

It simply said:

flake: da dirt

The City Smasher

Godzilla,

That's not a really good zinger; not bad, but nothing terrific.

In fact, it pales in comparison to the time I called you the Eddie Haskell of Stuka Stunt. And made it stick.

Randy has informed me that the crankshafts are slightly oversized, let me stress slightly. This is very smart as most Fox front bushing wear very quickly. This is caused mostly by the stock crankshaft not being round. They should fit good in most all used engines. If they are too tight simply lap them in. If you need advise on how to do this and what to use, contact Randy or myself and we will be happy to point you in the right direction and make it easy.

I've been contacted by a lot of people on getting the crankshafts. The easiest way is to get them from Randy directly. If you want an engine done by me then I will either have them in stock or can get them from Randy very quickly. This month the crankshafts are $45 then they go to $49.95. I will be selling them for the same price as Randy so there's no advantage getting just a crankshaft from me.

Now I have to get all the orders out that have been waiting for them, the PAMPA specials and the run for RSM.

Also everyone, let people know about my special for PAMPA. I have extended it to JULY. Membership is important. Now that Mike Keville has stepped down we all need to work on this and support the person who takes his place. There are a lot of us that wanted Keith as President but that does not mean we don’t support John, John has been successful in everything he has set out to do, but he needs all of us to be successful in this.

Larry

LAST EDITED ON Feb-06-04 AT 01:06 PM (CDT)
 
Ron B.
F4Fguy

O.K.,lemme see if I've got this right:
1.Open your wallet
2.You buy a Fox 35.
3.Throw away everything everything but the case,drive washer,prop washer,conrod and prop nut.
4.Buy a Hi Zoot crank.
5. " " " " "stuffer".
6. " " " " hemi head.
7. " " " " piston/liner.
8.Send it off for an unknown period of time for massaging by a Hi Zoot tuner.
9.Close your wallet.
10.End up with a Fox 35 you can depend on until it's totally worn out.
That about it?

Why not:
1.Open your wallet.
2.Buy a Rojett(or other Hi Zoot dedicated stunt engine).
3.Close your wallet.
4.End up with an engine you can rely on until you are totally worn out.

No offense to the makers of the parts and services mentioned,they do a good job,and the part's work,BUT.......
It's still a FOX for crying out loud!Buy it,run a couple of gallons through it,then throw it away and get another one if you must have a Fox.

Ron B.

P.S.
Better buy three and be sure of getting enough good pieces to make one good one.WHOOPS,that puts us back to the Rojett,doesn't it.

Ron,

From one perspective you've got it exactly right.

From another, you couldn't more be more wrong.

When beginning to compete in Classic, and to a certain extent in OTS, I didn't get it when it came to what I was really doing: Reliving the Good Old Days of CL Stunt, or in my case living them for the first time.

As it happens, there are a great many times in our lives where we simply cannot go back, recreating experiences remembered and treasured. But we can in fact do so with Classic Stunt.

Per the rules we are limited to certain airframe designs, this is a constant in that old planes litter the pits.

As it is a competition event, there are of course those who see opportunity to make the old buggers fly even better than they did back then, newer powerplants being a favored option. Of course. Used to belong to this crowd myself, entertaining thoughts of Killer Motors--even those of the Pond Scum persuasion--being appropriate as in the ends justify the means.

Some plain don't like the Fox 35 or any other period-correct motor and so they use current pieces in order to increase their enjoyment of the event, no matter to me how they define this enjoyment.

But for me that sullies the very concept of recreating what we used to enjoy so much. Or, again in my case, missed out on first time through.

So it comes down to the Fox 35, still in production after all these years, so widely used in a great many designs during the Classic Era, as not just the only choice but the very best choice for me. And a great many other fliers.

It's really no sillier than Ardun heads on a flat-head Ford, twin turbos on a rice-burner, aluminum blocks, heads and manifolds on small- and big-block Chivvys. Or building a fabulous CL scale model, misunderstanding directions to the competition circles and ending up entering CL Stunt. Someone such as yourself, don't you know...

Is sticking with a Fox 35, tarted up with new parts and all, an investment that makes sense, is cost-effective?

Nope. But I see very little in this hobby that both makes sense and is cost-effective to boot.

As long as there are people like me who see Classic as an event which is best enjoyed--recreated, if you will--with equipment from that era, right down to shiny metal spinners, B-Y&O props, fuel with loads of castor and Fox 35s thrumming around, sometimes breaking into a short burst of two-stroking, we will be seeing period-correct equipment in use. It is additive in nature, not the other way 'round.

So very glad to finally come across an issue on which we disagree.

by any act, error, or omission, I have, intentionally or
unintentionally, displayed any breedist, disciplinist, sexist, racist,
culturalist, nationalist, regionalist, localist, ageist, lookist, ableist,
sizeist, speciesist, intellectualist, socioeconomicist, ethnocentrist,
phallocentrist, heteropatriarchalist, or other violation of the rules of
political correctness, known or unknown, I am not sorry and I encourage you
to get over it.

Well Dan, I'm so glad that those rat motors that I used as a kid had hi zoot cranks,ABC pistons and hemi heads and stuffer back plates and allen screws and didn't vibrate.
If your 'enjoying' it for the first time I'd suggest that you keep a Fox motor exactly the way it was 50 years ago. It was a P.O.S. then and I maintain that it hasn't changed one iota since

>>If your 'enjoying' it for the first time I'd suggest that
>you keep a Fox motor exactly the way it was 50 years ago. It
>was a P.O.S. then and I maintain that it hasn't changed one
>iota since

Many Nats Walker Cup winners used the Fox .35. If it was such a
P.O.S.,why then did they use it?

>>>If your 'enjoying' it for the first time I'd suggest that
>>you keep a Fox motor exactly the way it was 50 years ago. It
>>was a P.O.S. then and I maintain that it hasn't changed one
>>iota since
>
>Many Nats Walker Cup winners used the Fox .35. If it was
>such a
>P.O.S.,why then did they use it?

by any act, error, or omission, I have, intentionally or
unintentionally, displayed any breedist, disciplinist, sexist, racist,
culturalist, nationalist, regionalist, localist, ageist, lookist, ableist,
sizeist, speciesist, intellectualist, socioeconomicist, ethnocentrist,
phallocentrist, heteropatriarchalist, or other violation of the rules of
political correctness, known or unknown, I am not sorry and I encourage you
to get over it..

Simply because it was there at the time.!

>>Many Nats Walker Cup winners used the Fox .35. If it was
>>such a
>>P.O.S.,why then did they use it?
>
>Simply because it was there at the time.!
-----snip----------------------------------
I looked in an old America's Hobby Center Catalogue from 1952. Some of the glow engines listed are the Forster F-29 & F31, the K&B Glow Torp .29 & .32, McCoy .19, .29, and .60, Mohawk Chief, Ohlsson .19-.23-29.-.33 and .60, and the Veco .29 & .31.

All of these engines were there at the time, yet the Fox .35 was the engine of choice for the majority of the top controline stunt competitors, and remained there until the mid to late 1960's. I notice that Fox is still in business, and the others aren't.

I think your dislike of Fox engines stems from some other reason than your premise that they are p.o.s.

Well Dan, I'm so glad that those rat motors that I used as a kid had hi zoot cranks,ABC pistons and hemi heads and stuffer back plates and allen screws and didn't vibrate.
If your 'enjoying' it for the first time I'd suggest that you keep a Fox motor exactly the way it was 50 years ago. It was a P.O.S. then and I maintain that it hasn't changed one iota since

"Rat motors" are more correctly identified as big-block Amurricun Chivvys; i.e., 427 and 454 cubic-inch thumpers.

I agree that in order to be an absolute purist--which I am not--would require obtaining box-stock Fox 35s from the 60s.

Rather than being a purist, I am attempting to keep the architecture of the motor, the light weight, it's running characteristics while improving the reliability, upping my enjoyment.

I do believe that if you were to attend a NW contest, see the Fox 35s of Don McClave, Paul Walker, myself and others in action you would grin at the memories and reconsider your position.

LAST EDITED ON Feb-06-04 AT 02:50 PM (CDT)
 
I don’t usually wander into this area of discussion but it’s slow at work. I’m constantly amazed at the give and take (trying to be nice here) on such items as a fox engine with, or without, all the trimmings. One is a POS and the other is ridiculous and too much money for what you get. The beauty of this hobby is you can do what you want. Why worry about what the other fellow is doing? Among my engines is a Nelson combat. Is $260 too much to pay for a model airplane engine? Some would say yes, and have, but I’m happy traveling along at 120 from time to time. Regardless this is the most inexpensive hobby I have – a new set of SCUBA fins is now $200 and Motorcycle tires are what?

Relax and enjoy the hobby!

LAST EDITED ON Feb-06-04 AT 03:46 PM (CDT)
 
I'd suggest that
>you keep a Fox motor exactly the way it was 50 years ago. It
>was a P.O.S. then and I maintain that it hasn't changed one
>iota since

Marvin Denny, Lew Woolard, De Hill, GMA, just to mention a few used the P.O.S. I have allot of problems with balsa, glue, dope, paint, but have NEVER had a significant problem with a P.O.S. Fox, even those that are just like the ones 50 years ago. Maybe the people that do, really don't know engines as well as they think they do.

For people that truely appreciate a real 4-2-4 break there is no substitute.

regards,
Rick "I like my P.O.S. Fox 35" Blankenship

>Ron,
>
>From one perspective you've got it exactly right.
>
>From another, you couldn't more be more wrong.
>
>When beginning to compete in Classic, and to a certain
>extent in OTS, I didn't get it when it came to what I was
>really doing: Reliving the Good Old Days of CL Stunt, or in
>my case living them for the first time.
>
>As it happens, there are a great many times in our lives
>where we simply cannot go back, recreating experiences
>remembered and treasured. But we can in fact do so with
>Classic Stunt.
>
>Per the rules we are limited to certain airframe designs,
>this is a constant in that old planes litter the pits.
>
>As it is a competition event, there are of course those who
>see opportunity to make the old buggers fly even better than
>they did back then, newer powerplants being a favored
>option. Of course. Used to belong to this crowd myself,
>entertaining thoughts of Killer Motors--even those of the
>Pond Scum persuasion--being appropriate as in the ends
>justify the means.
>
>Some plain don't like the Fox 35 or any other period-correct
>motor and so they use current pieces in order to increase
>their enjoyment of the event, no matter to me how they
>define this enjoyment.
>
>But for me that sullies the very concept of recreating what
>we used to enjoy so much. Or, again in my case, missed out
>on first time through.
>
>So it comes down to the Fox 35, still in production after
>all these years, so widely used in a great many designs
>during the Classic Era, as not just the only choice but the
>very best choice for me. And a great many other fliers.
>
>It's really no sillier than Ardun heads on a flat-head Ford,
>twin turbos on a rice-burner, aluminum blocks, heads and
>manifolds on small- and big-block Chivvys. Or building a
>fabulous CL scale model, misunderstanding directions to the
>competition circles and ending up entering CL Stunt. Someone
>such as yourself, don't you know...
>
>Is sticking with a Fox 35, tarted up with new parts and all,
>an investment that makes sense, is cost-effective?
>
>Nope. But I see very little in this hobby that both makes
>sense and is cost-effective to boot.
>
>As long as there are people like me who see Classic as an
>event which is best enjoyed--recreated, if you will--with
>equipment from that era, right down to shiny metal spinners,
>B-Y&O props, fuel with loads of castor and Fox 35s thrumming
>around, sometimes breaking into a short burst of
>two-stroking, we will be seeing period-correct equipment in
>use. It is additive in nature, not the other way 'round.
>
>So very glad to finally come across an issue on which we
>disagree.
>
>Dan
>
>
>
>

Ron B.

Dan:
I must disagree.We don't disagree.My opinion of Foxes was formed in those golden days of yesteryear and I've seen little reason to change.There were better engines then as now.The "McCoy" McCoys come to mind as do several others.Putting a Fox in a plane that was designed for an Ohlsson ignition engine is every bit as sacreligious as a Magnum 36 in a Nobler,ARF or not.If you want to tart up your Fox with period correct parts,the equivalent of Ardun heads on the flathead,fine,have at it.But the mods I was talking about are designed to make the Fox have the performance of the Magnum.Why not buy the Magnum?
Sure we can improve reliability,Relative to some of the early engines that's what Fox did,most of the others were"fussy".Foxes were also cheap vs most engines of their time.
But if you're talking about the spirit of the event,then take the plunge all the way.Try to tame a Hurricane .24,or an O.K.60,or a Madewell or Tiger Aero.Or,if you're not into tinkering how about a Johnson 35S.
I really believe,as I think you do,that old time and classic are,or should be,about re-creating the feeling(gee,I'm getting all warm and fuzzy)of their respective eras.This includes the frustrations of dealing with period equipment.Incidentally(or not),a lot of that frustration had more to do with lack of knowlege than quality of equipment.

Attached are some pics of my Humoungous,with a Triumph.49,silk,jap tissue trim,banner wheels,B&D spinner,and handcarved pilot.

Ron B.

F4Fguy

-----------snip----------------------------------
There were better engines then as now.The "McCoy" McCoys come to mind as do several others.

Ron, what is a "Mccoy" McCoy?
If you are talking about a Red head rear intake McCoy, they were racing, not stunt engines. The front intake Duromatics were underpowered for their displacement. The Red Head front intake McCoys had horrible quality control problems. We used to call them "summer" engines because that is as long as they usually lasted. There were good ones though, I own a few.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Foxes were also cheap vs most engines of their time.
------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of engine prices from the winter 1952 America's Hobby Center catalogue.

Forster F-29 glow $14.25
Forster F-31 glow $14.25
Fox .29 $14.95
Fox .35 $14.95
McCoy .29 Redhead glow $14.95
McCoy .29 glow $11.95
Mohawk Chief glow $9.95
Ohlsson .29 glow $13.95
Ohlsson .33 glow $13.95
OK Hothead .29 $10.95
Veco .29 glow $14.95
Veco .31 glow $14.95

The way it looks here, Fox was not cheaper than any of these engines.

LAST EDITED ON Feb-06-04 AT 06:03 PM (CDT)
 
>Ron B.
>F4Fguy
>
> O.K.,lemme see if I've got this right:
>1.Open your wallet
>2.You buy a Fox 35.
>3.Throw away everything everything but the case,drive
>washer,prop washer,conrod and prop nut.
>4.Buy a Hi Zoot crank.
>5. " " " " "stuffer".
>6. " " " " hemi head.
>7. " " " " piston/liner.
>8.Send it off for an unknown period of time for massaging by
>a Hi Zoot tuner.
>9.Close your wallet.
>10.End up with a Fox 35 you can depend on until it's totally
>worn out.
>That about it?
>
>Why not:
>1.Open your wallet.
>2.Buy a Rojett(or other Hi Zoot dedicated stunt engine).
>3.Close your wallet.
>4.End up with an engine you can rely on until you are
>totally worn out.
>
>No offense to the makers of the parts and services
>mentioned,they do a good job,and the part's work,BUT.......
> It's still a FOX for crying out loud!Buy it,run a couple of
>gallons through it,then throw it away and get another one if
>you must have a Fox.
>
> Ron B.
>
>P.S.
> Better buy three and be sure of getting enough good pieces
>to make one good one.WHOOPS,that puts us back to the
>Rojett,doesn't it.

You nailed this dead on. You would have to have your head examined to pay close to $200 for a Hi-Zoot Fox 35. I'm mean no disrespect, but it just sounds crazy to me. So many engine choices in this class and the $100 Brodak 40 is sounding better all of the time. Just hard to swallow spending $65 on a brand new Fox 35, then another $135 making it run Hi-Zoot. Just for comparison, a OS 70 four stroke is just over $200, it has triple the parts, and is super high quality, plus you don't need to do a darn thing to it.....My point is buy a better engine to begin with!

I have all the respect in the world for the Fox 35 and it's history....but $200??

Ok so where do I order one )

LAST EDITED ON Feb-06-04 AT 03:46 PM (CDT)
 
Agree or disagree, it really makes no difference to me as to what I will choose to use in my Classic and OTS models. And I have illustrated why I choose to continue with the Fox 35.

I do think it worth noting that for quite a number of us all the advances in engine design and manufacture, the supposed clean-sheet approach to the hundred-dollar Brodak 40, do not seem to have hurt demand for the spiffed up Fox 35, even at a much higher price point.

There is something going on here that the naysayers aren't understanding. As I was once one of them, it's not really an issue of consequence.

Gee. custom parts to take an old motor design, make more HP, less vibration out of it, better reliability.

People LOVE to to that kind of stuff.

People spend $$$$ on old Harley Davidson V twins, when you might to better off spending it in a bike from Europe or the far east. I have seen people lay out more than the price of new Honda just for engine parts.

People are still hopping up VW beetles motors.

Kids spend $$$$ to turn a POS Honda civic into a street racer.

This is nothing new.

I won't be first in line for one of the motors but I can understand why people do it.

Old Fox 35s have their own appeal, and are fun to play with, and I have a few.

Don't be so judgmental. This is all for fun.

As the rage continues to build, I'll vote with my own money:

Larry,

Put me down for one of your custom Fox 35s. With the High Zoot shaft option from Randy. Either built into the motor or as a separate item which is believed to be something I can make fit the case.

Randy,

You have no idea how upset I am over you stealing the phrase "High Zoot" from po' lil' ol' Dirt. I mean, after I stole it from "Dirt Bike" magazine, after they stole it from a narrow segment of the Mexican culture, the Zoot Suiters, one would think this process is one which would have, clearly should have, stopped years ago.

Y'all tell Henry I think it very funny he is now cranking out replacement Fox 35 crankshafts on his machine tools, all of which truly are High Zoot.

For what it's worth, and having broken more than my fair share of Fox 35 crankshafts, thanks for the efforts made in substantially increasing the reliability and usefulness of a favored icon of the U.S. Stunt scene, the Fox 35.

Dan

Zoot Suit Riots eh?

If YOU all can spend 200 bucks on the motor for your toy plane, why can't I spend 200 dollars on the motor for mine? I know I could have a Magnum or an OS 25 or any number of other alternatives cheaper. Heck, I could have a Fox straight outta the box cheaper, but it isn't what I want. And that's what it all comes down too, what we want.

What I'd like is for someone to just once stop hijacking a thread with their vehement blather when all this thread was supposed to do was announce to a group that this crankshaft, in high demand by some, was now available. If you weren't one of these folks, start your own thread intitled Why I hate Foxes, and go on from there. At least you'd be staying on topic.

Enjoy, and while you're at it, get outta my face.

What he said!!!!!

>As the rage continues to build, I'll vote with my own money:
>
>Larry,
>
>Put me down for one of your custom Fox 35s. With the High
>Zoot shaft option from Randy. Either built into the motor or
>as a separate item which is believed to be something I can
>make fit the case.
>

Dan:

Thanks for your support and William I did Love how you put it.

I have no clue where these Guy's got $200 dollars for a motor with a H-Z crankshaft but they; well I'll keep my suck shut on what I think.

Hey Dan if you want an extra H-Z crankshaft with that motor I could get the bill up to $200.

Larry

>>No offense to the makers of the parts and services
>>mentioned,they do a good job,and the part's work,BUT.......
>> It's still a FOX for crying out loud!Buy it,run a couple of
>>gallons through it,then throw it away and get another one if
>>you must have a Fox.
>>
>> Ron B.
>>
>>P.S.
>> Better buy three and be sure of getting enough good pieces
>>to make one good one.WHOOPS,that puts us back to the
>>Rojett,doesn't it.
>
>You nailed this dead on. You would have to have your head
>examined to pay close to $200 for a Hi-Zoot Fox 35.

Guys, you may have a point of sorts, but no one is forcing anyone to buy $200 Foxes. There is a market for such things, and Larry, Randy, et. al. are providing a service for this market. If you don't want it, don't get one.

But I don't even think your point is all that valid. I would agree, that in an objective sense, there are better engines than a Fox. Some a lot betterBut for whatever reason, if you do decide to use them, consider that a broken crankshaft is not just a matter of buying a new crank. Everybody spends a lot of money getting to contests, and a lot of time and effort to build airplanes and practice. It's a real shame of you go to say, VSC, and break a crank on your final practice flight. It's a lot more than getting a new one, or another engine. It pretty much shoots a day, or a whole week. To me, that could easily make the $50 crank seem like a bargain.

I would also point out that there are a lot of engines sold that AREN'T better than a Fox- Stalker 35/40, Double Star 40, and their ilk. They'll last forever, but frequently don't run as powerfully and if you have a classic Fox-sized plane with a full fuse, a Fox provides better performance. And a hot-rod Fox provides much better performance. I have a reputation as a Fox-basher, but heck, used in their proper application they aren't dogs and there were A LOT of good reasons they won all those contests.

I'm probably not headed towards getting a high-zoot Fox crank. But no one is holding a gun to my head to buy it, and if someone else want's it, where's the harm?

Ron,

THE GENERAL SURGEON WARNS: SAYING ANYTHING BUT WORDS OF PRAISE ABOUT THE FOX STUNT .35 MIGHT BE HAZARDOUS TO YOUR HEALTH.

I personally don't care for them Foxes, but I keep my big mouth shut.

Ion

PS - Randy Smith is - by no means - an idiot, and if he lost his time and effort - considering the standards of aything he puts on his store - on that Fox ZS crankshaft gotta be something REALLY special.

He doesn't need the money. He has a reputation. He ain't crazy.
If I had the bucks to spend I'd buy all that stuff.

>Ron B.
>F4Fguy
>
> O.K.,lemme see if I've got this right:
>1.Open your wallet
>2.You buy a Fox 35.
>3.Throw away everything everything but the case,drive
>washer,prop washer,conrod and prop nut.
>4.Buy a Hi Zoot crank.
>5. " " " " "stuffer".
>6. " " " " hemi head.
>7. " " " " piston/liner.
>8.Send it off for an unknown period of time for massaging by
>a Hi Zoot tuner.
>9.Close your wallet.
>10.End up with a Fox 35 you can depend on until it's totally
>worn out.
>That about it?
>
>Why not:
>1.Open your wallet.
>2.Buy a Rojett(or other Hi Zoot dedicated stunt engine).
>3.Close your wallet.
>4.End up with an engine you can rely on until you are
>totally worn out.
>
>No offense to the makers of the parts and services
>mentioned,they do a good job,and the part's work,BUT.......
> It's still a FOX for crying out loud!Buy it,run a couple of
>gallons through it,then throw it away and get another one if
>you must have a Fox.
>
> Ron B.
>
>P.S.
> Better buy three and be sure of getting enough good pieces
>to make one good one.WHOOPS,that puts us back to the
>Rojett,doesn't it.

Ron:
One is entitled to his opinion. So since yours was so negative mine well be too. I’ve really tried to take Dan’s advice and let it roll off. Do to all the motors I’ve been doing at 21 dollars a flipping motor and the FREE ones for new PAMPA members, I’ve got squat for building done and well suffer not having a Plane ready for VSC. Is it worth it to me, YES

I see your comments as hang the guys who try to improve this hobby and make it more fun. Of course if I rework 28 engines at 5 hours apiece I could make a normal house payment now that I have increased my labor to $40. OOOO I'm getting rich on Fox 35's, and Randy’s going to retire making Fox Cranks.

The L&J Fox 35's have a great track record. Multiple OT Nats wins; Multiple VSC wins in both Classic and OT.

As for Buying a Ro-Jett. I'll stay with the PA as they also have Multiple NATS wins and Have Dominated the NATS and Classic at VSC. I've never seen a PA piss black out the exhaust and come apart.

The bottom line is no matter what you say people well Love the Fox 35, I well continue to enjoy reworking them and the PA motor well always be UNO number one in my book.

Larry

Gee,

I just hope weather in the US gets flyable, and fast!

All this BS being posted is lack of burnin' that fuel on the field...

Ion (It's too darn hot down here) Muniz

Ron B.
F4Fguy

Larry:
Sorry if I offended you.It was not intended nor(I think)implied.I tried to make clear that you,Randy et al,do good work,and that the pieces supplied were truly"high zoot".I have no experience with your stuff,but your reputation is impeccable.Randy Smith's products are the very best.I also understand that you are filling a demand,and you'll find no stronger supporter of entreprenurial spirit than myself.More power to you!

My criticism was directed primarily to the Fox 35 in any of it's iterations.To put it terms that "Dirt" may understand;if you're competing in a Vintage Sports Car race,it's outside the SPIRIT of the rules to use fuel injection,unless the system you're using was available at the time the car was built.If you're competing in current FI racing,your 1954 4.5L. Ferarri is going to be sucking the hind one no matter what you do to it.

I also realize that there is a loyal cult following of the Fox,and that my views are not going to change the mystique surrounding the "35".The thing had it's place in the history of our event,but it's time is long past.

In closing,I agree,the PAs are awesome.I was only using the Rojett as an example.

In abject apology for having offended you,I remain;
Your's:

>Ron B.
>F4Fguy
>
>Larry:
> Sorry if I offended you.It was not intended nor(I
>think)implied.I tried to make clear that you,Randy et al,do
>good work,and that the pieces supplied were truly"high
>zoot".I have no experience with your stuff,but your
>reputation is impeccable.Randy Smith's products are the very
>best.I also understand that you are filling a demand,and
>you'll find no stronger supporter of entreprenurial spirit
>than myself.More power to you!
>
> My criticism was directed primarily to the Fox 35 in any
>of it's iterations.To put it terms that "Dirt" may
>understand;if you're competing in a Vintage Sports Car
>race,it's outside the SPIRIT of the rules to use fuel
>injection,unless the system you're using was available at
>the time the car was built.If you're competing in current FI
>racing,your 1954 4.5L. Ferarri is going to be sucking the
>hind one no matter what you do to it.
>
>I also realize that there is a loyal cult following of the
>Fox,and that my views are not going to change the mystique
>surrounding the "35".The thing had it's place in the history
>of our event,but it's time is long past.
>
> In closing,I agree,the PAs are awesome.I was only using
>the Rojett as an example.
>
> In abject apology for having offended you,I remain;
> Your's:
>
> Ron B.

Ron:
Your apology is not necessary but appreciated. This thread was started to inform people of what Randy has made available. Randy has put a lot of time and effort in providing this product and I know for a fact he's not getting near enough return for it.
I'll give you credit you did stir some people up and it made good reading.

Larry

>Ron:
> One is entitled to his opinion. So since yours was so
>negative mine well be too. I’ve really tried to take Dan’s
>advice and let it roll off. Do to all the motors I’ve been
>doing at 21 dollars a flipping motor and the FREE ones for
>new PAMPA members, I’ve got squat for building done and well
>suffer not having a Plane ready for VSC. Is it worth it to
>me, YES
>
>I see your comments as hang the guys who try to improve this
>hobby and make it more fun. Of course if I rework 28 engines
>at 5 hours apiece I could make a normal house payment now
>that I have increased my labor to $40. OOOO I'm getting
>rich on Fox 35's, and Randy’s going to retire making Fox
>Cranks.
>
>The L&J Fox 35's have a great track record. Multiple OT Nats
>wins; Multiple VSC wins in both Classic and OT.
>
> As for Buying a Ro-Jett. I'll stay with the PA as they
>also have Multiple NATS wins and Have Dominated the NATS and
>Classic at VSC. I've never seen a PA piss black out the
>exhaust and come apart.
>
>The bottom line is no matter what you say people well Love
>the Fox 35, I well continue to enjoy reworking them and the
>PA motor well always be UNO number one in my book.
>
>Larry

I must apologize to Ro-Jett for my comments made in this thread. I was totally out of line and know their engines run at the highest level of competition with success. I believe that Richard stands behind all of his products. There could be many factors that cause an engine to degrade that are of no cause by manufacturing or design.

Larry Foster

Ron B wrote

""P.S.
Better buy three and be sure of getting enough good pieces to make one good one.WHOOPS""""""

You will not have to buy three to get one good one. All of the cranks are good and you will only need one .

Regards

LAST EDITED ON Feb-09-04 AT 02:05 PM (CDT)
 
I have received the crankshafts from Randy and am the process of catching up on the orders for them. They are extremely high quality. You will only need one per motor and they should outlast the life of the Piston and Liner several times.

Larry

Randy, Larry,

Not attempting to speak for Ron, but I took it as him saying that you would have to buy three box stock Fox engines to get enough parts for one good engine. Not three crankshafts.

Larry, wish I would have waited now for the new crank!! LOL!!

Thanks
Bill <><

Ron B.
F4Fguy

Randy:
Sorry if I wasn,t clear,I was referring to the present day,off shelf Fox 35,and to my experience with them,which is ,basically that you have to "mix and match"to get a good one.If Fox did a better job of manufacturing,there would be no need for aftermarket parts.I,apologise if I seemed to cast a wider net.

I have the highest regard for your products,I've never seen,or heard of anyone else who's seen,a less than excellent part from your shop.This is true in spades of the PA engines.

"">Ron B.
>F4Fguy
>
>Randy:
> Sorry if I wasn,t clear,I was referring to the present
>day,off shelf Fox 35,and to my experience with them,which is
>,basically that you have to "mix and match"to get a good
>one.""

Hello Ron

Yes I agree your 100% right about that, That is the reason all of my Super Foxes and hand built ones are all made NEW, from parts that I handpick, and never from whole put together engines that have been run at the FOX plant
however it wasn't clear at all whether it was the cranks or engines, I had people call and email about it, so I just wanted to clear it up for them.

have fun

Regards

LAST EDITED ON Feb-07-04 AT 12:28 PM (CDT)
 
Man, such "passion" from the Fox haters!

I use what ever engine I like. I like Vecos, McCoy Red Heads, OS 35S and yes, FOX 35s!
Some like Ro Jetts, some PAs.
Some like Foxes, Some OS 35S's.
Some ST 46, some OS 46.
etc., etc.,........

I know now, first hand, that Larry Foster makes a great Fox 35. There are others that do also, I am sure.

Brett mentions the factor of breakage at an in-opertune (sp?) time, which makes sense! If you want a bullet proof (as much as possible) Fox, thias sounds like the way to go.

My 2 cents? Fly what you want, but don't knock what someone else likes. This includes aircraft designs, engines, etc., we all are in this for the enjoyment of the sport no matter WHAT level we are at.

Bill <><

Geez..... am I ACTUALLY in AGREEMENT with da Dirt on this one??????

>Man, such "passion" from the Fox haters!
>

Of course, this is kind of the same thing, in reverse. People who have legitimate criticism, or as Ion points out, less than effusive praise, are not necessarily Fox-haters.

I find the tendency for valid criticism and fair argument to break down into "us vs. them" camp labelling to be one of the less attractive aspects of this event. I see no reason to categorize people and their opinions by dividing them into opposing or warring groups.

Coming from a guy who has maybe two dozen Fox Stunts, Sandcast 2 bolt backplates to gold and black 50th Anniversary collectible ones, with gold anodized 25th Anniv special and just about everything else in between, including various trick heads, backplates, etc (haven't tried the new crank yet, though)...and has run and flown most of them...

Sometimes, the best one you have is a $20 Swap Meet Special with maybe 30 hours on it...Flip it dry, and the prop bouces back and forth maybe 5 times.

Ron B.
F4Fguy

Brett:
Thank you!Amen!

LAST EDITED ON Feb-08-04 AT 10:49 AM (CDT)
 
I now realize the folly of my ways. I didn't put "LOL" or a laughing face behind my remark about "passion". I really fall short in conveying sarcasm through the written internet word. I have great respect for Ron, in particular, and in no way was I trying to belittle his views/opinions.

I have seen the posts before from many here that blast the old Fox 35, and find it very silly. The only person we have to please in this hobby/sport is ourself.

As to grouping an "us vs. them" situation, that is usually the prevalent theme in most discussions here. Like it or not.

As I said, we choose our own paths and make ourselves happy.

Bill <><

Sort of reminds me of Ford vs Chevy!

What he said.

I find if ironic that the same person that will spend large dollars on building a scratch build semi scale airplane, big dollars in tooling etc, graphite, auto paint tooling. The same guy will complain about the cost of a new crank for a Fox, or the time to fiddle with it to get it to run right. He'd be better off money and time wise buying and money wise ARF nobler and just going to the field.

The bottom line we all have our "things". For some it is motors, and some it is the perfect paint job. We are all sick in our own twisted ways.

Live and let live

Er ....
Fly and let fly

Dave:D

>What he said.
>
>
>I find if ironic that the same person that will spend large
>dollars on building a scratch build semi scale airplane, big
>dollars in tooling etc, graphite, auto paint tooling. The
>same guy will complain about the cost of a new crank for a
>Fox, or the time to fiddle with it to get it to run right.
>He'd be better off money and time wise buying and money wise
>ARF nobler and just going to the field.
>
>The bottom line we all have our "things". For some it is
>motors, and some it is the perfect paint job. We are all
>sick in our own twisted ways.
>
>Live and let live
>
>Er ....
>Fly and let fly
>
>Dave:D

Ron B.
F4Fguy

Dave:

A few points:
1.I don't use automotive paints(and I would NEVER pay someone to paint for me).
2.I don't mind spending whatever it takes to get the best engine I can for an airplane which is an equally large investment.
3.The best engines I have are piped Moki 61s which I tuned myself.That includes new retimed sleeves ,and new rods,all of which I made myself,except for the chroming.
4.I don't know anything about "motors" I do know about engines.My entire adult working life(39yrs)was as a designer/developer of internal combustion engines and other related items,in a major corporate R&D lab.
5.My comments were directed at the Fox 35,not in any way toward the people who can make them into a decent engine.The things they do cost time and money,and I doubt that any of them are getting rich from this endeavor.They do it for the joy of doing something very well,and the love of this crazy obsession of ours.

Personally I quit flying combat and used to fly all forms of it so I have 8 Fox 35's that are just sitting there or at least were and completely going to waste so why not spend money on what I have and have a couple of good reliable motors rebuilt with the add ons Larry is putting in them to me it is cheaper and more sense to do this than buy new motors and throw the Foxes in the trash besides are the other motors people mentioned in this thread as light as the Fox as it seems motors have seemed to get heavier than they were when I last flew stunt in the late 60's up to the mid 70's.
Keep up the good work Larry and Randy I like to see inovation and improvement.

...... DONT LET THEM GRIND YOU DOWN JUST KEEP ON FLYING!!! ......

To All,
I just had to tell ya'll that this Tigre and OS and PA lover just laid down the $$$ for one of Larry's Fox 35 engines with the Hot Zoot crank because,....drum roll please...I want to build a Gieske Nobler with the same weights as Bob had in '68 or when ever.

Like Dirt, I have that idea of weight, architecture, plain old " kinda like when I was young", look and feel without the cranky stuff. I've seen Ted try his old Johnson Stunt Supreme, meat-lovers or what ever it was, in that cool Chief and the darn thing wouldn't hold a needle setting. Ted said "just like when it was in my old model in the old days". Great, that is what I want to avoid.

I like flying more than building so I want to fly a lot after I put in the 9 months gestation of a stunt ship's creation. Light, powerful, looks like the old one, starts and runs well, I'll take it!

I'm gonna use old props and spinners and stuff on the out side and ball links on the inside. Kinda like puttin' disc brakes on a '68 Skylark, you know, just so it'll stop.

Chris - You're a freak . . . and I like that!

Rick Campbell

Rick,
I knew you would understand.
Chris...

Okay, you guys saw me place an order to Larry Foster for an L&J Custom Fox 35 with High Zoot crankshaft, and I believe it was just one week ago.

The motor showed up yesterday. Excellent service.

The crank looks cool, although I have not had it in my hands. Personally, I think if one is to pay money for rework and assembly, it is nothing short of foolish to take the motor apart just to look at stuff. The very act of assembling a motor *properly* is important; it is a lot more important with something like a Fox 35.

It is also a minor annoyance that due to the baffled piston I can't see the sculpting of the bypass.

The Oriental is ready to go, will try to fly this weekend.

Thanks Larry! And Randy! And Henry!