Tower Hobbies .61 ABC engine

That "old" SF is one heck of a good motor. I'd take it over a brand new Tower any day. This series was discontinued so they could make the more cost competitive FX series. I prefer the SF any day, and my daily knock around flyer, a Stick, uses the 46 SF. You'll find a lot of planes at the field still running them.

The old SF's are great. Use it. I have 4 of the 61 SF's, and 1 61 SF-P (pumped). Just put bearings in once in a while and they just keep on going strong.

Hall

==============

Definitely run what you already have. A few of the guys in our club have OS SF's that have been flying for many many years. They'd be thrilled to get their hands on one that's NIB.

Carrell

Yea, what do you think, should I get rid of my 10 year old, zero mileage, Ferrari that's in my garage and buy a brand new Volkswagon?

MJC

Let me know what color you want and I'll order a Golf and swap with you :)

Yea, because it will cost you more to fix all the rusted metal and shot seals than the car is worth! ;^)

You overlook the part where the Ferrari has "zero mileage", just like the "old" .61SF the original poster has. Ain't no rust or bad rubber on either one :-)

MJC

Check out this article

Yuri

You overlook the part that the Ferrari has zero mileage. That means it has been sitting with the seals drying out and the engine internals exposed to air with no oil circulated. I used to work at Sacramento Sports Car Center and the worst ones were ones that sat in a garage for a few years with "zero mileage".

You guys crack me up, you're now arguing about the condition of an imaginary Ferrari!

That article only showed what it does on a test stand. I am sure everyone remembers how well the older MDS engines ran IN THE AIR!

I wish these testers would actually bolt the engines onto a test airframe such as a good Stick model and really test them.

Agreed.

I proposed that RCR should have a column entitled "From the Field," which would consist of stories from actual experience with various engines and airframes AFTER the initial break-in period and shakedown flights.

No go yet.

r.m.rc.air does a pretty good job of covering that territory, I guess.

Marty

S***ty English weather!

Problem is, most rmrcair is too full of opinion. I would be willing to give hard data for any testing you want to do.

Hey.. HE drew first blood! :-)

MJC

OK, I'll bite. What is the problem with the TH .61, as far as usability is concerned?

What .61 to .75 engine is best, considering power and usability?

The TT .bb .61 got good recommendations, but the test figures show it is a dog on HP. What gives?

Not just an exercise, I will be buying something in the next week or two.

I wasn't thinking of "hard data." More gossip and reputation earned by planes and engines. It's intangible stuff that kind of adds up.

My field report for today: My MVVS 35 cc starts and runs fine. I lost a small set screw from the carb, so I had to call it quits after just three flights. That's my first deadstick with the two MVVS gasoline engines I've flown on this plane (26 cc and 35 cc, 30+ flights). These are my first two gasoline engines. I'm pretty pleased with the results so far.

Marty