"Ed Cregger" <ecregger@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:fZ3bk.26365$s77.4095@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "3for3" <mor_rc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:aB2bk.3284$vn7.1167@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Hi Ted,
>> My experience with the 5 ST engines that I have owned/own has been
>> varied.
>> I have never experienced that moving the spray bar has made a
difference
>> in the performance of the Super Tigre engines. I have also tried
placing
>> a brass ferral in the carb throat to decrease the intake diameter with
no
>> positive effect.
>> Today I have two G-51 that are three years old and they both misbehave
on
>> a regular basis. One is on a Seamaster and I have the low needle at 8
>> plus turns out to keep the low end and mid transition from going lean.
>> The other G-51 is on a trainer and is always full of surprises. I don't
>> know if these engines are sensitive to barometric pressure or the
>> alignment of the planets. Some days they run very acceptable and other
>> days they are threatening to stall during transitions.
>> I have a G-45 and a 40 (Italian made) that run like clocks with no
issues
>> what so ever.
>> I did own ( and now returned to Tower Hobbies with full refund) a 61
size
>> engine that ate three planes.
>>
>> I see others peoples responses indicate that they need a lot of
break-in.
>> If more that three gallons of fuel does not qualify for break-in, then
I
>> need to sell these G51's to some unsuspecting person on Ebay and go buy
>> some magnum XLS-46's.
>> I have not replaced my temperamental ST G-51's because I am frugal and
I
>> like a dead stick challenge at least twice a week. If I were to
purchase
>> new engines I would not purchase a ST again. I own OS, GMS, Magnum,
Jett
>> and Weston engines and do not have the trouble that I have with the two
>> G-51's.
>>
>> On a side thought, maybe the issue with the G-51's are a quality issue
>> with machined surface tolerances and are on the margin of acceptable
>> dimensions.
>> Does anybody know what happens when the crank intake area under the
carb
>> opening and the inside wall of the crank case get leaky?
>>
>> Thanks for reading
>> RCS
>>
>> "Ted" <tkennedy63@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>
news:b975c373-fd62-4388-8d65-3ad1457d1364@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>I am having a bit of a problem getting my ST 51 to run smoothly. I
>>> have had STs before so I know you have a delicate balance between the
>>> low end and high end before you get it just right. I recall reading
>>> somewhere that the position of the spray bar is very critical as well.
>>> Has anyone also heard of this? And what position would be ideal? Most
>>> engines like it pointed straight down but I seem to think the STs
>>> prefer a little upward thrust of the spray so if you are looking from
>>> the needle valve side it would be pointed around 4 o'clock. Any
>>> thoughts or experience on this? Many thanks.
>>>
>>> Ted
>
> ------------
>
> I'm going to treat this subject as though there are folks reading my
> response is brand new to the hobby - not you.
>
> The first thing I would do is to compare the ST.51 engines' features to
> those of the engines you own that run well. Are they ringed? The ST.51
is
> a ringed engine. Are you using the same glow plugs in all of your good
> running engines and is this the same type of glow plug that you are
using
> in your G.51 engines? Fuel? Prop sizes for equal and near displacements?
> Inverted engine installation?
>
> Can you see where I'm going with this? I realize that you have probably
> already been through this routine, so forgive me for being simplistic,
but
> many times the things that are causing us grief are simplistic.
>
> If your other ST engines are running great and are nearly the same size,
> might not their carbs switch with your problematic .51 engines? Might be
> worth a try.
>
> A ringed engine can have quirks in running that are caused by a
defective
> ring, or a defective ring slot in the piston. Changing a ring and
> inspecting the ring slot/groove is an easy process and is one that might
> yield an answer to your problem. I can think of nothing about the ST.51
> design that is problematic on a regular basis.
>
> I am not telling you that I don't believe you or that you are
> hallucinating. I believe you. Let's get to the bottom of this. Now it is
> time for you to answer some of the above questions, if you please.
>
> Ed Cregger
>
Mr Ed,
Hopeflully this information will satisfy your curiosity. I have replaced
the
stock carb with a perry carb with no improvements. I did replace the ring
in
one of the two engines with no improvement. I buy plugs a dozen at a time
and all of my 2 cycles have the same plug. All of my 2 cycles that I own
use
the same 15%N 20% synth/castor mix fuel.
I have an 10.5 x 6 on one engine and a 9.5 X6 on the second. These engines
were purchased within 6 mos. of each other 3 to 3.5 years ago.
I'm done with the one. If you would like, I'll ****p it to you. If you fix
it, let everyone know what I did not do to get the engine to run
satisfactorly.
thanks,
rcs
|
