THE NEW MT 57CC ENGINE

[soarrich]

	Quote: Originally Posted by robertp17
	How about lets just concentrate on getting one to run long enough to post some numbers and stop with the BS.

Mine runs fine, what are you talking about? Do you really think that everyone that buys one is going to report to you directly? Get a life. I reported the numbers that I got with lots of props, no BS.

Al
I missed the link you said would be happy to put up showing your DL making 33 pounds of thrust, maybe just BS?

[hughes500e]

I didn't realize that people were having a hard time keeping them running, I have not read that!

All I have read is a few guys trying to beat posted results with a brand new engine, I don't get it!
Oh well, I bought one! Looks nicer than the DL 50, crank case, rod, no mounting ears to break off etc......

[Al Lewis]

	Quote:
	Al I missed the link you said would be happy to put up showing your DL making 33 pounds of thrust, maybe just BS?

I'll make one this weekend showing the thrust I'm getting with my DL just for you. Like I said, I don't think Larry really wants to use this thread for that purpose but if you insist. BTW Rich, how about posting yours also as you only reported getting 30 pounds in the "Real World RPM" thread.

Real world RPM

hughes500e, Could you be so kind as to give us some numbers on your engine when you get it mounted and running? I don't think anyone has said it's not a nice looking engine or anything else really detrimental about it. Problem is that we can't seem to get any numbers on the engine from anyone but Rich and Closetguy and, seemingly, when someone posts about a problem their post and pictures disappear the next day. LOL So far the only things addressed on the engine are that the timing was factory set at 14° which Larry has corrected and it doesn't seem to have the top end power expected. That's still up in the air though as there really hasn't been enough input to evaluate it. I think however, based on what I've read here, that closetguy may have found the reason for that without knowing it.

	Quote:
	just had to say thanks, to Soarrich for the idea about useing the heavy Mylar for reeds.that stuff work great.the reeds must have been leaking worst than i thought.i got twice the amount of compression now with the new reeds. i hope that means a performance increase.the Mylar is about twice as thick as the factory reeds and much stiffer.

If reeds are not stiff enough an engine will have great performance in the low and mid range but the reed will flutter at high range and power will fall off. The reverse applies to reeds that are too stiff. Provided the reeds are large enough to supply the engine at peak rpm you may find that replacing the reeds with a stiffer set will significantly increase the top end power. Larry may want to have Ralph try different reeds when he gets his new test engine from Tomy. He may find that the engine will spin a much larger prop with good power.

[Al Lewis]

Larry, I just went back and read through this thread to refresh myself with the numbers reported on this engine. During that I noticed something a bit strange. Ralph got one of the first engines I believe, the one with a loose wrist pin bearing he said, but he also said that the timing on the engine was set at 28° BTDC. What changed to get them to 14°? You should also give some serious consideration to testing out a stiffer reed and see if it doesn't give you more top end power. That could be the key to making this engine a real powerhouse.

[robertp17]

	Quote: Originally Posted by soarrich
	Mine runs fine, what are you talking about? Do you really think that everyone that buys one is going to report to you directly? Get a life. I reported the numbers that I got with lots of props, no BS. Al I missed the link you said would be happy to put up showing your DL making 33 pounds of thrust, maybe just BS?

Your telling me to get a life? I am entitled to give my opinion as much as you are. Im just saying that every engine thread I have read has all kinds of rpm numbers and if as many were sold as larry said then why are there not more people chiming in to give there experiance. You said you were thinking rpm numbers were bs because you can get two 22x8 by two diff manufacters and get way diff. numbers. This is true but thats why we want to hear what everyone else is getting. Im sure everyone is out enjoying there engine so much that they dont have time to talk about it and what a great deal it was. Im not opposed to this engine, heck id even buy one if i heard more info about how it runs and if they are lasting. Please by all means shut me up....

[jrjohn]

As time goes on you will understand these sites are really for Sales "TEAM" members. In this case one chaninsaw sales "TEAM" member earns his brownie points so he can get another free motor by trolling the internet peddeling his wares, and trying to prevent competition. This engine is a real threat to him. If you can cut through the bias BS and understand you can't listen to somebody on a "SALES TEAM" then you will be OK, (I get a kick out of it) if you get caught up in the sales BS, then maybe this and other simular sites arn't for you. You really have to consider these sites entertainment, and if you happen to learn something from somebody that isn't bias, then thats a plus. The other guy causing all the stir is just having some fun, maybe lonely or something and just likes to read what he types. I would not let him bother you.

Are you starting to understand why nobody wants to post anything? And that exactly what Chainsaw Jake wants.

[AJT]

As I see it this motor is a win win situation! 1st is price 2nd is service (Ralph) 3rd is quality. Even if it turns out to be only as strong as the top of the line 50-53 motors it will fill all the needs of 30% air-crafts. My Taurus, DA, berillelli, Flies the crap out of any aircraft I've owned to date (30%ers)... And I've had quite a few.. I have a feeling this motor will be one of the better choices. At least I have a fair compairson to go by. I will know Monday, as my Dietrich Extra260 is ready to go. and I don't have to work. You just can't beat the price!!! and I am not loyal to any MFG. So flame if you must but I will tell it like it is.
The other AL.

[jrjohn]

	Quote: Originally Posted by AJT
	As I see it this motor is a win win situation! 1st is price 2nd is service (Ralph) 3rd is quality. Even if it turns out to be only as strong as the top of the line 50-53 motors it will fill all the needs of 30% air-crafts. My Taurus, DA, berillelli, Flies the crap out of any aircraft I've owned to date (30%ers)... And I've had quite a few.. I have a feeling this motor will be one of the better choices. At least I have a fair compairson to go by. I will know Monday, as my Dietrich Extra260 is ready to go. and I don't have to work. You just can't beat the price!!! and I am not loyal to any MFG. So flame if you must but I will tell it like it is. The other AL.

Al, your exactly the kind of guy I like to get my information from. Your not loyal to anybody, your not getting free engines so you will slant information or advertize, your not on a SALES TEAM, you don't owE anybody. That makes you a credible witness. What you just posted is exaclty how i feel

[wildhare]

I hit a button and submitted this incomplete, completed report below.

Sorry.

TF

[Al Lewis]

	Quote:
	Here are my CORRECTED results. Prop

Did I miss something important here Tom??? LOL

[wildhare]

I got to thinking about this discussion of rpm and thrust numbers and I decided to run some tests. I used a typical 50cc class engine, name is irrelevant. I wanted to relate thrust to rpm, so it doesn't matter what is turning the prop. I own every brand of engine that exists pretty much, so it could have been any of them including the MT-57.

Here are the results from my first cut at this.

Prop Type RPM Corrected thrust
22-10C Bunny 6450 26.25 lbs (new design)
22-8 Bunny/Xoar 7000 26.9 lbs.
22-B Vess 7150 26.25 lbs
23-10 Mejzlik 6420 23.45 lbs

Let me explain corrected thrust. I was measuring with a digital fish scale. My measured numbers seemed very low, so I compared the fish scale to my digital shipping scale that is calibrated and known to be as accurate as the UPS shipping scales. At 14.9 lbs on the fish scale the shipping scale showed 18 lbs exactly. I calculated a 1.22 multiplier to use as a correction factor. I now believe these numbers to be accurate within an ounce or two.

There are 2 very important lessons here.

First, one cannot trust a scale, even a digital one. Before I believe anyone's numbers, even my own, I'll have to see some effort to calibrate the scale before I believe the numbers.

Second, it's going to take a major power increase to get to 33 pounds. These are pretty typical numbers and are only about 80% of what is actually required.

The Vess 22-B makes the most RPM of these, 7150 rpm, and doesn't produce significantly more thrust than the other props at other rpm's. If thrust is linear then the Vess' rpm would have to increase to over 9000 rpm to get to 33 lbs of thrust. But the blades would be cavitating at that RPM so it appears that this 33 lb. number is not possible with a 22-anything prop.

I'm not seeing how you can get there even with a 23-8. By my swag figuring you'd need to be turning a 24-10 at 6500+ rpm to get to 33 pounds of actual thrust.

So as you read the numbers in this or any thread, consider the testing method and look out for smoke that may be going up your skirt.

TF

[jrjohn]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Al Lewis
	Did I miss something important here Tom??? LOL

Al, I can see the results, I think they are blocking you, Looks like another conspiracy!