Castor Oil...Remember that?

Some Advice Needed ?

I have some unopened, sealed fuel. The AP NFX w/25% nitro has
synthetic lube and I want to run it in old (but still good) small
engines and I want to add some castor oil to it to take care of the
How much?
Again, I used to know these things but I have to remember so much now,
some things get buffered right out of my memory disc.
And whatever this amount is, would it be the same amount of added
castor oil for Mach 2 fuel with 15% nitro (but also with synthetic
lube)? I want to run it in some Max 15 - 35's?
Thank you guys...

Ken Cashion, AMA 69222.
Reply to
Ken Cashion
Loading thread data ...
Dont take it as gospel, but generally the ratio of ultra good sythetic to ordinary mineral to castor is about 1:2:4, so if its say 5% syntheic, id put in 15% castor to make it up to 20%.
Reply to
The Natural Philosopher
Thank noted...
Ken Cashion
Reply to
Ken Cashion
Depends a bit on the motor. The Cox guarantee was only good if you ran 20% castor oil in your fuel. Cox engines suffer from using a ball joint that is not well lubricated to hold the piston and connecting rod together. Other small engines say 20% oil with half of that being castor. Synthetic oils are good but generally less tollerant to lean runs which are easy to get with small engines. You can probably use the fuel but find out how much oil is already in it and add castor to bring it up to about 22% total oil. If you are running a Cox engine plan on resetting the connecting rod after about 10 runs. Bob Furr
Reply to
Yep...I have some other fuel for my .049s, of which I have a lot, but I was thinking about my OS Max, 10, 15s, 20s, and 30s. Either way, I am going to have a gunky model and the gooey stuff everywhere. That is what got me out of glow and into e-flight.
I might have to buy a modern engine so I can use synthetics and keep the gunk down. I dislike the grease to the point I would be content to buy a new engine and face the wear just to be rid of the goop.
I might need to invent a "goop collector" and drain it after each flight. This could be done.
I have a resetting tool and have used it often when abusing some of the little engines...and I have a few rod/piston key ring novelties...with holes worn in the piston top from the pounding rod ball.
Ken Cashion
Reply to
Ken Cashion
Ted shuffled out of his cave and grunted these great (and sometimes not so great) words of knowledge:
I ALWAYS add 4 oz of castor oil per 1 gallon of fuel.
Yes, it does create somewhat of a mess, however, all you need is 1 lean run and your engine could very well be toast (needing a complete rebuild anyway).
To me, it is cheap insurance, and Windex and paper towels are cheap.
Reply to
Ted Campanelli
If a person hates the goop as much as you do Ken, why would you even think of returning to glow engine usage?
Things have come a long way in power-to-weight ratios regarding electric flying since you have been gone. If it is all out performance that you seek, the electric systems are much closer in power ouput versus weight than they were when you left the hobby some time ago.
I don't mind cleaning up the goop from larger engines because the goop is directed away from the model mostly, but the one half A engines blow it everywhere. That and the annoying sound of tiny high revving engines have made me go electric on the smaller models.
Ed Cregger
Reply to
Ed Cregger
Thanks a bunch for the input. This is twice what one modeler recommended. I will consider an average?
A roll of paper towels and squirt gun is part of my flight box. I will put a sheet of ply in the back of the Buick Estate Wagon to protect that carpet... (This wasn't necessary with e-power. )
And yes, my engines are in good shape after many years because I used good lube...well, the TD .049 on pressure and bored out has seen better days, I guess.
Reply to
Ken Cashion
Superb question, Ed, and one deserving a full answer rather than something flip.
I am aware of the improvements in e-power over the years, but I got a little tired of the tinkering...this tinkering is what got me turned on to e-power, but it got a little old and tiresome keeping up with the technology. I finally decided that I wanted to tinker less and fly more.
Brushless and LiPo is a whole 'nuther technology and glow is old, old. I remember having models sit for months, squirting some 3-in-1 in them and going flying.
There is a whole lot more support equipment (and expense) with most advanced e-power than with glow. I wanted to go fly when the mood hit me.
I have kept flying e-power though, and I will continue to. I am just returning to glow. We too often think in exclusives...either you fly electrics or wet. No, we can fly both -- just not on the same outing.
When I used to take both to the flying field, the wet engines stayed in the car and I flew e-power. I am taking about five e-planes to the field now and haven't gotten a glow plane going yet, though just today I did send in an order for some stuff I needed to replace for glow flight.
I have ordered a little radio system for a twin-400 He-111 I want to design and build. It will be about 44" wing span and have retracts using the modified servos I did the article on in AM...only this time, it will be operating some landing gear with a worm drive from a guitar tuner. I will still be flying e-power -- just not competitively.
Ed, I stated this wrong, earlier. I am not returning to the hobby but to glow. I find this funny because I swore on a stack of Bibles (big one) that I'd never fly another glow plane. (Never say "Never." ) And I have an Oe-FB in MO who is hardly speaking to me since he learned I was going back into glow.
I have mufflers on my TD .049s, use low-compression heads, and a bad prop. I want my Storch to fly at scale speeds...and it will ROG. Fire it up, set it down, stand on the trailing antenna and when ready for take off, I raise my foot.
I don't fly my pressured .049s anymore. It makes my fillings hurt.
Ken Cashion
Reply to
Ken Cashion
That was a terrific reply, Ken.
And yes, I misunderstood some of your original content.
Like many aircraft modelers I began flying models using .049 engines back in the late Fifties. Most were discards that I picked from other folk's trash a few weeks after Christmas. Usually all they needed was a new screw to hold on the prop. Some were missing mounting ears, but you could get by with at least one mounting ear on the top and bottom of the engine, hopefully they were on different sides.
I'm am still a rank newby when it comes to electric powered flight. I have a lot of gear accumulated, but most of it is outdated. Still, so am I, so any electric experience will likely be a good experience. LiPo packs scare me - still.
Nice chatting with you.
Ed Cregger
Reply to
Ed Cregger
I mis-speak sometimes.
There were three of us who would gather these reed valve engines and then use Teflon reeds, bore out the intakes, use the dual-port cylinders (270s I believe), reseat the ball sockets, use high compression heads, small props, and lots of nitro...on little air-boats.
We had marathons. We would race the circuit, come in, refill without killing the engine and send them back out. The water was maybe four inches deep.
We would run the engines one afternoon and have to completely rebuild them...they were worn out in one outing.
And I gained a new respect for Cox when I was flying some events using the Texaco .049. A 7-7 in the still a.m. and turning only 5,500 rpm gave a long flight.
I have been on a schedule for sometime now and I must maintain it...this sounds medical but isn' is just the only way I can get the stuff done I want to do. I will not spend the time in the shop I used to because it cut into the other two things I enjoy...and one is a passion and calling; the others are just fun.
Same here, Ed.
Ken Cashion
Reply to
Ken Cashion
"Ted Campanelli" wrote
Yep. Meeee toooo!
Reply to

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.