Twin Cox .049 cylinders equals one .098 Nitro Engine. 

Me too! Thanks.

Right on. Those were great for sure. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control recent flight. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-BU0z7ddwslYU.htmlkie

Right on. I was 10 doing it too, but began flying in UKIE Pattern contests with Johnson 35 combat special engines in my Veco Thunderbird and Nobler. I was a voodoo fan too. You had some good stuff too, it sounds like. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see a later video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control recent flight. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-BU0z7ddwslYU.htmlkie Thanks much.

Always a favorite Christmas gift right up there with Erector Sets and Heath Kits.

All I can say is W😮W!

I remember those .049 mufflers. It was the only way Mom would let us run those things in the garage.

Thanks much. Bet you will like this. Flying shop rags part 2 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Q7MwFVHCRpY.html

Thanks very kindly Dylan. We appreciate that!

I was flying Cox .049's in the 60's free flight later in the 70's 2-3-4 channel.....60 % nitro and 4.5" x 5.5" prop. Those little planes scream. Still fly them but electrics are easy...................nitro is the way to go.

Right on. You’re right. It took some finesse to get a good flight. Thanks much.

Right on. Make a video of it and post the link here. Would love to see it.

Dave R had it on a sail plane, and it flew great. We'll see if I can make something. Thank.

Yes, I know Hanno Frettner. He was the one to beat. Thanks much.

Hanno PRETNER, flying a DALOTEL

That is great. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control flight from this week. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-BU0z7ddwslY.html

NightFlyyer checked it out and commented, thanks!

Well 45 years ago, when he made this, there was no internet, no Google, and no way to hear others suggestions, like yours, so used what he had on hand. Single carb adjustment would have been nice for sure. Thanks.

That is great. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control recent flight. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-BU0z7ddwslY.html

@@NightFlyyer I got the PT-19 for Christmas in '61 and a P-40 "Warhawk" for my birthday a few months later. I got seriously bit by the bug. During the winter of '62-63 I built a "Flite-Streak" and my uncle gave me a Testors/McCoy .35 to power it. First flight in the spring was on 55 foot .012 steel lines I got from a friend.....I figured it out quickly that I'd need 70 or 75 foot lines to fly this beast! Flew combat and stunted with it for 2 years, had a lot of fun! Then at the age of 14.....I discovered girls.......

@@ajwilson605 What a great story. I discovered girls too, but made sure they liked model airplanes. LOL Thanks and happy flying.

Yep, well My wife used to work at Cox in Santa Ana before it burned down, and Dave Duncan the Head Engineer was a member of our RC flying club back in the 80's. I have many videos on Cox engines and airplanes on my channel, you may enjoy. According my friend who designed this, firing opposite was extremely difficult to start and it was very hard to adjust the carbs because each piston and cylinder were on engines that weren't identical in age and wear. H said it would run just right on one engine, but rich on the other and vice versa, so he went back to 2 carbs. Maybe with 2 brand new pistons cylinders and glow plugs, would be a way for 1 carb, but he said in no way could he adjust it so it would run right. Plus he also said it had horrendous vibration. So I never tried. Thanks.

Thanks so kindly. Balance is set to fire both at TDC at the same time, so it balances out pretty good. Thanks so kindly.

We did too. LOL Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control recent flight. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-BU0z7ddwslYU.htmlkie

Well, they were designed to run either way. If I had an engine run backwards, I simply flipped the prop backwards and it usually ran the right way. In this situation, both engines had to run together and one could not run backwards. And of course if it was running backwards, you would know right away as which way the wind was going. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control flight from this week. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-BU0z7ddwslY.html

That's a great story and effort. I'm sure Dave, my friend, will appreciate that. Thanks kindly. Check this out, if you like Cox engines. Flying shop rags. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Q7MwFVHCRpY.html

It's not.

Thanks kindly Jean!

They both fire at the same time. There was too much vibration firing alternately and it was impossible to start. It would not stay running on just 1 cylinder. That prop was the only one I had, so it probably was out of balance. My friend designed and built it many years ago.

Maybe a pipe collector system could be added to the muffler outlet pipes, but I don't know if it would help, as it screams pretty good as is. I'm just happy to run it for Dave as he designed it. Thanks Robert.

Thanks kindly.

I really don't have any more info as this is what I got from my friend long ago. Good luck.

They probably have. Thanks kindly.

That's great. I may put mine on a plane if I find a suitable one.

Because this was the only one I had that was the right size and since this engine does not put out as much power as the Brushless motor did, so no problem. It works.

Thanks. Well, I would have to make a non foam plane for it, as the fuel will eat foam. You may be waiting a long time, Scott. LOL.

Thanks kindly!

Not yet, but it has flown on a plane...a glider in the past. Thanks.

Put that on a nice p51 or p47. That would turn one of those airplanes into lightning with wings.

Thanks kindly!

Thanks kindly.

Of course but part of the fun is seeing if you can build something that is not "off the shelf" Thanks.

Thanks jj!

Maybe. I will think on it! Thanks.

Since it is not counter rotating, it does give torque and it is also fun. It flew many years on a glider. Thanks.

I might try to build something that I could fly it on, but throttling would be more difficult. I don't want to change Dave's original design in his honor. Thanks.

Totally understandable sir!

My friend is an engineer and figured the extra stress on the bushed bearing could use the extra oil when he built it, so that is the reason. It can't hurt but probably not necessary . Thanks.

Thanks bud. You saw it fly on daves glider. I may do that too if I find something.ti put it in. Thanks.

Thanks so much, Philip. I appreciate you.

Those were the days for sure. Thanks much.

Thanks very much!

Actually that is a 7x6 ic prop, but some will work on small IC engines like this, but not good for anything big. Thanks.

Thanks kindly.

Thanks kindly!

Thanks a lot Tom.

Thanks Dick. I hope he likes seeing it run for sure.

Thanks much.

I could not get it to run firing at the same time as I tried and tried. The push on the gears weren't right. It actually is quite smooth as is, though. Thanks.

NightFlyyer oh well it's still good engine and cylinder cutting out does not seem to be so bad you can still land it

Thanks very kindly!

Yes, thank you. Well Dave is in no position to do that anymore. He did make a 6 cylinder radial before he got confined to a wheel chair, but that engine can't seem to be found. Thanks.

Was the six cylinder made from Cox parts, did it use one needle valve, it sounds like a very cool idea.

Muchas Gracias!

Thanks very much!

Thanks for that. It may end up there for sure!

That would be a challenge for sure.

That could work too, but I am not changing Dave's design. Thanks.

That is true, we all ran them wide open. LOL.

@@NightFlyyer All I can figure those mufflers were for starting your engines in the House, when your parents weren't home. (I never did that!!).

@@KrustyKlown Me neither and for sure, Id not be around today as my mom would have.........

There's many ways to cut a pizza, and my friend did it this way.

Others have done that for sure.

Yes. I ran it like he designed it. There's always room for improvement.

Great. There are 13 on each of the crankshaft gears and 18 on the main spur gear. Good luck and happy flying.

I used a 7x6 prop and have no idea about the RPMs. I did not design it, so have no detailed drawings. Sorry. I'll bet you could improvise though! Thanks kindly.

They have no bearing, just bushings, so not sure if anyone makes and mods anymore.

NightFlyyer ok, thanks.

Thanks Doug!

Yep you can see them surrounding the cylinders with black spring metal clips that can be rotated to prime the engine. There is a small exhaust port visible too. Thanks.

Hehe, I was exclaiming because of the noise really. But yes, I knew these little engines normally vented direct through the barrel, though I've never owned one. Is one ?pipe? pointing towards the prop? Or is that a handle?

Yep, one pipe is pointing forward. Many of the early baby bees never had mufflers. They came later. It makes it easy to open the spring metal clips to expose the port and put in a few drops of fuel to prime. It would be nicer if they both aimed back, but...you know...Keep it simple, sir. :-)

Thanks much!

Good luck with it. Thanks kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control flight from last week. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-BU0z7ddwslY.html

A Cox Twin cylinder?

Thanks

I seem to remember seeing a 5 cylinder radial engine advertised for sale in the magazines that was just 5 OS .10 on a gear drive back in the old days. Wish I could find the ad for it, but my old issues got lost in a move...

Dave also made a 6 cylinder radial and it was hard to set all the needle valves since these are reed engines. No carbs. Thanks.

That would be a lot of work since these engines are reed controlled through the rear of the engine. There are no carbs. Tee dee engines would be easier because they had Venturi needle carbs and no reeds. Thanks

Well, if you think about it, the backplate/reed-valve assembly is the carb. That's the induction side of the engine. Just not the typical RC or UC carb we're used to in front-rotor induction engines, like the Tee Dee series, and most modern RC engines. The function is the same. It should be possible to run a remote needle valve common to both cylinders and thus get an even mix to both. You'd have to keep the plumbing between the remote needle and the fuel inlets as short as possible but it should work. I used to do a lot of 1/2A flying and remote needles are real finger-savers on these small engines.

Its too much work for me to mess with and besides, I wanted to just show what Dave R was capable of before he got MS and now can barely move his hands. Thanks anyway, as anything can always be improved on.

Thanks a lot, Tab. We appreciate that.

Me too. Thanks so kindly. I would bet if you liked this, you will like to see my latest video of my 63 year old Cox PT 19 U Control flight from this week. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-BU0z7ddwslY.html

He is not that well. I think since each engine has to be synced, he made them this way to be easier as they feed fuel right into the crankcase of each engine. 1 needle might work better for sure, but these Cox engines always were very sensitive to needle valve adjustments. Thanks much.