Magnum 36
Stuka Stunt Main Forum · 19 of 19 known posts recovered
>Granderson, for discovering this engine and its performance
>on a pipe. And also to Chris Cox for insisting that I invest
>the time and money in this combo and also for going to the
>trouble of borrowing a prop from Texas and producing a mould
>and letting me have the first off the production line.This
>is one very pleasant combination of engine and plane .
>Keith.I can hardly believe that an engine costing $70. and
>weighing just over eight ounces can perform like this.
What is the prop he is making? I thought about putting one on my P-force.
The City Smasher
Brad; What we are talking about is a carbon three blade 11/4.as manufactured by Bill Lee. He has a web site but it appears as if he isnt interested in producing any this yesr cause he is too busy running the worlds control line. Chris isnt into making a business either cause he is completely involved building his R.V.8 but since he was so impressed with Phils plane he thought he might like to have one for himself one day. Phil says that very soon a construction article will appear in Model Aviation for his Diva. Right now Pat Johnson is making the plans on auto cad. I found that the A.P.C. 11/4 is very close in performance. R.P.M etc. These carbon props are very thin , narrow blades. I feel sure that you couldnt use this size of prop successfully on that engine without a pipe. Keith V
Bill Little · Feb 21, 2004 11:34 AM
#4 sourceHi Keith,
I am very interested in this set up. My son, Aaron, has a Magnum set up like phil says courtesy of Brett's post.
We are running a Bolly 10 1/2 3 bld. pitched to just under 4. It has made a TREMENDOUS difference in the plane compared to a very good Randy Smith OS 32F.
We have not tried the engine on a pipe.
Bill <><
Just an Old Advanced flyer.
Brett Buck · Feb 21, 2004 12:59 PM
#5 source>Granderson, for discovering this engine and its performance
>on a pipe. And also to Chris Cox for insisting that I invest
>the time and money in this combo and also for going to the
>trouble of borrowing a prop from Texas and producing a mould
>and letting me have the first off the production line.This
>is one very pleasant combination of engine and plane .
>Keith.I can hardly believe that an engine costing $70. and
>weighing just over eight ounces can perform like this.
Hey, Phil did the smartest thing possible - tried it LIKE IT CAME, instead of immediately assuming it wouldn't work and embarking on head shim and timing changes. All he did was start fiddling with prop and venturi, and came up with something that worked. What he didn't do was start out by buying a jumbo pack of head gaskets and then applying 30 year old engine "magic numbers" to get a good "stunt run".
This should be an object lesson about how you undertake engine development. I doubt there's anything special about the Magnum - it's quite likely to work with a lot of others.
Brett
Bill Little · Feb 21, 2004 02:36 PM
#6 sourceThanks to Phil, and to you for relaying the "set up".
Bill <><
Just an Old Advanced flyer.
If you think it runs great on the pipe,which it does.But also runs great in a 4cycle With no pipe.There is one running here in the Salt Lake City, area that runs great too.
Hope to see you soon Alan.
Gordy
Gordan Delaney
Alan Resinger · Feb 21, 2004 09:01 PM
#13 sourceI'm really planning on making it down to the Regionals. The new Sukhoi is done but hasn't been in the air yet. Went to the 72 on this one. Hope it flys like last years version.
Alan
Read this post and went looking online for this engine. Is this it?
http://www.hobbypeople.net/gallery/210640.asp
Mine weighs in at 8.2 ozs. without the muffler setup like PTG's.
Zuriel
Zuriel D. Armstrong
Bill Little · Feb 21, 2004 06:23 PM
#11 source>this it?
>http://www.hobbypeople.net/gallery/210640.asp
Mitch,
That's the one. XL36AII I got ours from there. The venturi from our OS 32F fits right in.
I know you will not be disappointed if you run it like Phil says, and it sure seems to put out a LOT more power than a 36 should.
Bill <><
Just an Old Advanced flyer.
Do you remember when I sold the OS 32 to Aaron? I sold that then because I had replaced it with the Magnum .36 Pro SE (square head) on the same pipe that the 32 was attached to on The Force. I did have Randy replace the bearings later with better ones, but the .36 went on box stock except for the venturi. I didn't know that at the time but it did. Wasn't that somewheres back around '94, '95? I know I had the 32 on the Force at the '92 Nats, and sometime shortly after that upgraded it to the .36 and flew it at Huntersville for years.
I now have a modified Magnum Pro SE (muffled)ready to go into a G' Nobler, a Thunder Tiger AAC (muffled)in my Cavalier profile, and another TT 36 (stock) on a pipe in my 92.5% Saturn. Both of these engines are identical to my knowledge, except for the insignia on the bypass.
Good little motor, no? Good luck with the round head! Let me know how it works out...
Ward
Bill Little · Feb 22, 2004 01:42 PM
#18 source
Have another fresher OS 32, also.Both are STILL great running engines, but they don't have the power of the Magnum 36.
I haven't got my Aero Tiger 36 broke in yet, but I do have a Barker TT 36, and Aaron's "new" Magnum 36 XLS. The round head Magnum should be interesting! I expect the high rpm, low pitch set up from it.
Will let you know!
Bill <><
Just an Old Advanced flyer.
If the engine is indeed hauling the regular Saturn, that's a lot of engine!
I plan on running one this season with wrap around header & pipe on a 630 sq in SV design.
Rick Campbell
>you downsize it for the Mag .36? What does the ship weigh?
>
>If the engine is indeed hauling the regular Saturn, that's a
>lot of engine!
Not way off most modern 35-40's - it works, but I doubt it's a lot different from a lot of other R/C motors powerwise.
Brett
The Cat Whisperer