Here is a view of what I am talking about.

Originally Posted by IGOR_EXTRA

The engine is a better place to work! Why is this not correct?

If it is better or not I couldn't say, But the external line is how the factory intends them to work.
Milton maybe could describe why or not? I just know that this one is getting fuel and flying great.

In carburetors Valbro this tube is "a helper", the main apertures has not been canceled.
Or am I mistaken?

There is absolutely no difference in the way engines work with either configuration...It's easier on some engines to use the pulse line...A loose carb will leak pressure either way...If the pulse line falls off the engine stops...If the carb loosens the engine stops...If the hole in the engine base version is too close to the edge of the main hole in the gasket the pulse will leak...
A carb with a pulse line can be rotated any way you want to rotate it, the base carb location makes it harder to do, the carb insulator must be grooved to match the carb pulse hole...
Some people worry too much about non issues...
The factory could make it work with no pulse line by using a carb without the fitting and drilling a hole in the insulator in the right place....Walbro makes carbs both ways...
If the engine manufacurer has not plugged the hole in the carb base and they use an external line there's a possibility the pulse could leak at the base...I alway plug the carb base hole and put a fitting in the back cover when rotating the carb....

Originally Posted by IGOR_EXTRA

You can tell more simple words? I don't understand.
Thanks
P.S.
Now I have the same hole.
And on the factory assembly holes do not match.

Igor, the machined holes don't need to match because the carburettor pump is actuated by an external pulse line (the hose between the case and carburettor)

I bought one of those engines to replace a YDA112 in my Pilot Sbach and have run enough fuel through it to properly tune it and get a good feel for it. So far I have had very positive results.
It is obviously too early to say how long the engine will last but the old engine was predominantly made of JC parts so there is no reason to expect lifespan will be any shorter

Tell me please! I did the right thing?
Or there is no difference in the engine?

Originally Posted by IGOR_EXTRA

Tell me please! I did the right thing?
Or there is no difference in the engine?

Antique has covered this very well in his post just before my post

Why I see more good work of the engine ?

Originally Posted by IGOR_EXTRA

Tell me please! I did the right thing?
Or there is no difference in the engine?

Macht Nichts

Good propellers!
we liked

Real video.
This video of the second flight.
Take-off for 40 % of engine power.
In the first flight the wind was 3 m/s therefore landing was fine.
In the second flight there was a wind of 0 m/s, the 342nd without a wind doesn't land!!!
The second flight was 8 minutes.
On words of the operator (PINOKIO, Serege's thanks for video) we do not pay attention, I didn't hear them... and though as that should be made a landing.
On the 4th sharp turn the engine was blanked off and the landing was without the engine!
CG ahead, a landing on a hariyer isn't possible.
On the KNIFE of the 342nd flies as on rails.
Failure at a sharp turn, at a list of 70-80 degrees, on NO small gas.
On video MAX gas was 30-40 %.
Thus the plane keeps in a sryvny sharp turn - as in plasticine.

KRASNODAR 4 apr 2012.wmv (4 min 0 sec)

I couldn't show today good flight.
Because engine t max in flight (at simple flight) was 360 F.
I will improve the system cooling.

Originally Posted by Full Spool

The new proto props that will be available through www.vital-rc.com if all goes to plan perform exceptional well. The jc120 loved the 28 x10 however I didn't get any footage of it, maybe next go around. If you don't like ripping props you might consider throttle management or maybe try a 29". I did however get a couple quick flights in on the jc60 using the 24 x8 . The motor to my surprise took it quit well and still manage to rip the larger prop rather easily, the motor suffer little to no spool up lag compared to the 23 x10 and had plenty of punch out power. I was going to test the 23 x 8 but the 24 was doing so good I didn't want to waste time changing props lol.

Enjoy the video, when I get back in town I will try to get more videos for you guys. As always thanks Chad for helping get a quick video, it's hard to fly and video at the same time LoL.
Happy Flying


JC60 24X8.wmv - YouTube

so what kind of rpm's are you getting on the 60 with the 24-8 or the 23-8?

Avg around 6150-6200 on canister, fixing to dump that setup and go to stock muffler. Weather is changing so I need to lean it up a bit as the top end wasn't peaking consistently.

Just gave my MSXR liposuction and installed the side dump, readings avg 6500 on the 24x8. It is now 15 ounces lighter.

thats not bad numbers at all,rite up there with a DA60,maybe better.