Re: Does exhaust put crap in tank?

I've never known a diesel that would need exhaust pressure - have never seen one fitted with the necessary nipple either.

Most of mine are capable of sucking fuel from a tank considerably lower than the carburettor be that with a throttle or just a "simple" venturi.

Malcolm

The problem is that most American diesels are not sold as true diesels, but are converted glow engines, which are equipped with muffler nipples and oversized carbs.

I'm surprised that some eager entrepreneur hasn't offered some true diesels at reasonable prices in the US. Something with carbs sized for R/C diesel operation.

Ed Cregger

Snip>

Pity one of the hobby outlets doesn't import some - there are a number of manufacturers in Europe and Australia - at least there used to be :-(

Malcolm

For a while we could buy the MVVS .15 Diesel at a good price. Due to procrastination, I missed my opportunity to pick up two or three during a $50 a piece sale. 8>(

Ed Cregger

Yes, diesels really suck! :-}

Mfgs will never put a "pressure" manifold on the exhaust outlet though for the abovementioned contaminants reasoning. Irvine, for example specifically forbid "pressure", although if you do need it the usua method used to be a crankcase tap.

Let's not go through the "how do you pressurise something with a bi hole in the back of it" routine!

Cha

-- Cha

----------------------------------------------------------------------- Chas's Profile:

this thread:

True diesels have a lot of draw, therefore do not need exhaust pressure in order to run. In fact, those with throttle will not run well with exhaust pressure added.

There are no American diesels, only conversion heads for glow engines. I owned one. I now own two PAW (Progress Aero Works) diesels, and 0.49in^3 and a 0.60in^3. Both have twin ball bearings and great carburetors. Compression and needle settings interact, and cause newcomers to be puzzled. But, they will run even if way off the proper setting. I have never had one die in the air. If I am way off on my settings the engine may slow down due to overheat, but it won't quit.

PAW's are not American engines, but they have an American distributor who also sells diesel fuels. There are other American manufacturers of diesel fuels, but I would never buy another gallon from the one that makes the diesel conversion heads.

The distributor I am speaking of is Eric Clutton, email snipped-for-privacy@cafes.net. He is a fine person, with a small, but very responsive business. You may run into him at a flying event sometime.

Eric is a fine man! He is always ready to help with advice, too, and i

responsible for a great series of "cartoon" aircraft dating back t the early sixties (Kwod, Sharkface, Fishface, etc etc).

I was lucky enough to visit the PAW factory in Macclesfield this year and the guys there were terrific. They even machined up a few 3 BA pro retaining nuts for my DC Merlin (koff) engine which I just happened t have with me (koff koff), on the venerable and hallowed lathes Considering that this was a competitor's engine, I think that speak volumes for the spirit of the enterprise.

It was always said that diesels couldn't throttle down well, even b experts like the late Peter Chinn. PAW have pretty well nailed that on dead.

Happy flicking!

Cha

-- Cha

----------------------------------------------------------------------- Chas's Profile:

this thread:

| Let's not go through the "how do you pressurise something with a big | hole in the back of it" routine!

Actually, let's go into that routine.

It's really quite simple.

1) It's not a straight shot -- there's generally a baffle in the muffler that helps ... muffle ... the sound. This baffle increases the pressure inside the muffler and the backpressure into the engine.

2) and the overpressure at the nipple is very slight -- like maybe

1/10th of an atmosphere anyways.

You don't need much pressure to help push the fuel to the engine -- the 1/10th or so of an atmosphere is enough.

Eric Clutton?

I built his 'sharkface' around 1967 ...most fun with a plane I had ever had up till then..if you see him say 'thanks' ;-)

DC no longer make model engines so are hardly "competition".

I still have some DC engines - Merlin, Spitfire and Sabre but the PAW equivalents deliver much more power IMO.

Gig Eifflander, PAW founder, used to do a rebore service for ANY make of diesel engine - I remeber an add quoting 7/6 for a rebore on a ED Bee for example.

Those were the days...

Malcolm

Well you can bugger me gently with a conrod, I swear if I said "Deat is Final" there would be some clever geek to argue the shout. What i your bloody problem?

I said "Considering that this was a competitor's engine...". Which i was. Which was remarked upon by Paul Eifflander, in exactly thos terms.

Why not brush up on your English comprehension before posting thes pointless quibbles? Yes, I am pissed off, because this forum i populated by and ruined by nitpicking binaries who incorrigibly siez upon and adhere to the wrong end of the bloody stick. Get a life fo Christ's sake.

Moderator you can ban me I no longer give a toss.

Cha

-- Cha

----------------------------------------------------------------------- Chas's Profile:

this thread:

I don't have any "problem". I did point out that the founder of PAW would undertake repairs to ANY diesel engine. Since DC no longer makes engines and PAW still does, DC is hardly a "competitor".

I'm surprised that

As a "native" English speaker for over 60 years, I have no need to "brush up on my English comprehension".

I have a life, and was not "nit picking". I have engines from both makers, and I thought that, in my post, I had indicated that PAW were superior engines - particularly as they make throttled, silenced versions. I don't remember ever seeing a throttle for a DC, and the after market "mufflers" robbed the engines of much of their available power, in my experience. I admit I may not have tuned the engine for best results after fitting said muffler, but it did make a considerable difference to the performance.

If you don't "give a toss" why bother responding in such a vituperative manner?

Malcolm

It is because you can't understand basic English yet you pick people u

on it.

I didn't say DC are competition to PAW. I know that DC are out of th diesel model engine business.

I said that the DC Merlin "was a competitor's engine". Paul Eifflande said this too; it is a fact.

DC were a competitor to PAW. DC made the Merlin. Ergo the DC Merlin was an engine made by the competitors of PAW. IE., "it was a competitor's engine".

I responded in a vituperative manner because you mightily pissed m off. I -do- give a toss about this.

I do not give a toss about being banned.

Which is exactly what I said in the first place.

You -do- need to brush up your comprehension of English; it is at th Mr. Magoo level. I do agree that you probably speak it like a native but sixty years is not too late.

Still pissed off

Cha

-- Cha

----------------------------------------------------------------------- Chas's Profile:

this thread:

Heh...well put. I'd never thought of it in quite that way.

PMFBI, but this is an unmoderated Usenet newsgroup. You *can't* be banned from it. In fact, many people flee to the websites because they fear the freedom.

PRose

This comment is what started the feud between you two, Chas and Malcolm. IMHO it was uncalled for, but the reaction that followed was also uncalled for. There must be some animosity brewing from a former conflict, because I see no reason to get so steamed.

Relax guys!

So who are those "moderator" guys who issue warning strikes, clos

threads, deem language unacceptable ....?

-- Cha

----------------------------------------------------------------------- Chas's Profile:

this thread:

No animosity Brian, just "camel's back" irritation (at least on m

part).

Look, I do apologise, but this Forum is a fantastic idea and it i ruined by semantics and pedantry. I have been involved in countles fueds over complete nonsense, because someone picks up on a pett inflection or grammatical slip; very often, as in this case, th original criticism is unfounded and in error, and is patentl patronising. The only motive in making the post is to air some imagine superiority in knowledge, and not to advance the knowledge base of th Forum.

I was out of order but I had just had a bellyful. It is typical that fellow diesel-flicker, the last type of bod that I should rant against should be the recipient; for this I offer my regrets.

Cha

-- Cha

----------------------------------------------------------------------- Chas's Profile:

this thread:

Chas, If that is a sort of apology, I accept it gladly.

Like you, I had had a bellyful - not, I may add form Usenet, and over reacted.

My apologies are also offered.

Malcolm