NEWS engine " SHOCK"

[Krusty 181]

Hi all , i gotta have my say , sorry

I dont know who took/ stole what from who and when , and really i dont care ..

if that was the case surely there would be a patent/copywrite to sort out the story??

if a mould has CMB on it surely its CMB's mould????

if it was a MAC mould surely the owner can just get it back??? :huh:

what i wonder( and this is certainly no reflection on Andy or anyone for that matter) IS .. IF cmb made some magical motor(completely new)and made say 1HP more than ANY other motor on the market

do you think that CMDi or anyone else for that matter would get one , pull it down and see why its better?? and then try to improve there own engine possibly by using the "magical" engines new ideas??

i think every engine manufacturer would be insane if they did not check out others new ideas

isnt this the case already with hulls/pipes/props / cars/ fridges / aircraft and just about any other product on this earth????

having several manufacturers is great more would be better , for competition and for costs!!

AND for those that cant read

this is no reflection on Andy / cmb /CMDi or anyone else i forget

i am just over seeing this topic do laps every few weeks ....

when will it be time for people to let it go????

surley this will annoy lots

was not my intent

Andrew

 

[Don Ferrette]

I heard thur the grape vine that it's going to be some time before we see the new MAC's, problem in machining is what I heard. Any comments on this Andy.

My .002 cents

Well a little birdie tells me your mistaken, at least on the new A/A Pro's.

1- if that was the case surely there would be a patent/copywrite to sort out the story??

2- if a mould has CMB on it surely its CMB's mould????

3- if it was a MAC mould surely the owner can just get it back??? :huh:

I really don't want to dwell on this part anymore as the answers have already been put forth regardless of what some will dispute. However since you asked here it is real quick-

1- patent/copywrites/property don't mean sxxt anymore, especially across an ocean. Look to the Chinese for a shining example.

2- it doesn't take but a brief effort to add (and/or remove) a couple letters to an investment casting mold. Doesn't change who designed & owns the molds. What you suggest is like putting a Ford emblem on a Chevy, does that now make it a Ford?

3- see answer #1.

As far as a manufacturer tearing down a competitors piece of gear, whatever it is, of course that will happen & is to be expected. That has been going on since man started making things. Seeing what makes a competitors item "tick" then designing & manufacturing your own part that may benefit from that or those ideas is one thing, in a way that is how things steadily improve, someone takes an idea & expands on it. But to make parts using someone's else's molds & just slap your name on it, that is not right. That's like you taking let's say a Seaducer hull mold & adding the name Andrew across the stern then making a bunch of hulls. Does that now make them Andrew hulls?

This ramp that has suddenly shown up on the retooled MAC front end residing on this "new" CMB is a good example why Andy has not publicly released pictures or drawings of his new stuff. Perhaps he has someone out there in manufacturing who can't keep their mouth shut but that is Andy's issue to deal with. The single best thing that can happen right now is for the new motors from Andy & the gang at CMDi to hit the market so we have another motor option out there. Mine are ordered & they'll get here when they get here.

 

[Buckshot]

What is the drum set up like on the K motors?

Don't they have a screw in ramp slug? Maybe not.... I've never seen the insides of one but I thought I saw a "screw" on the front of their drum housings.



-Buck-

p.s. Who cares where the design came from......just built the best motors you can and let's all go to the pond and have FUN.

 

[Don Ferrette]

What is the drum set up like on the K motors?

Don't they have a screw in ramp slug? Maybe not.... I've never seen the insides of one but I thought I saw a "screw" on the front of their drum housings.

Hey buck that "screw" is a cover over the ball bearing that supports the drum on the K motors. The drum actually is supported by & spins on that bearing.

 

[Buckshot]

Hey buck that "screw" is a cover over the ball bearing that supports the drum on the K motors. The drum actually is supported by & spins on that bearing.

Thanks Don!

See you can learn something new every day.

-Buck-

 

[Piston1]

Don consider the internal frictional loses caused by the lubrication trapped between the stationary slug and the drum. Now you are looking at internal and external frictional loses. The higher the RPM the greater the frictional loses are going to be.

 

[Don Ferrette]

Don consider the internal frictional loses caused by the lubrication trapped between the stationary slug and the drum. Now you are looking at internal and external frictional loses. The higher the RPM the greater the frictional loses are going to be.

I considered that but I would think the trade off of a balanced drum without that heavy ramp being part of it will result in a gain since you've reduced the weight of the rotating mass. I think this is what Dave was getting at in his reference to the "metal slugged drum". Also consider that may very well be affected by tolerances as far as clearance goes which is what I was getting at earlier. One would have to think the tighter the clearance the less trapped lubrication within that tolerance so to me a machined fit would be preferred.

 

[Piston1]

It's all function of your fuel/lubrication package viscosity.

 

[Don Ferrette]

It's all function of your fuel/lubrication package viscosity.

Perhaps, but you still want that clearance as tight as possible, less clearance means less trapped fluids means less drag.

 

[Speedway]

Honda's 250cc in-line six cylinder ran happily at 32,000 rpm with les that a 10 micron lubricating film. They de-tuned it to run a 27,000 for durability. Honda needs to start making Nitro motors.

 

[lhutch45]

Why are you surprised? Once a thief, always a thief. We knew this was coming .... <_<

HELLO DON I WAS REAL SUPRIZED WHEN I SAW A CMB PISTON AND SLEEVE ON E-BAY.IF THIS IS THE SUPPOSED NEW STOLEN TECHNOLOGY IVE GOT NEWS FOR EVERYBODY.IVE GOT ROSSI 45'S THAT WERE MODIFIED BY STAN SIMPSON BACK IN 1993,THIRTEEN YEARS AGO.THEY LOOK IDENTICAL WITH THE SLEEVE CUT AND THE PISTON CUTS IN THE SIDE.AS SOON AS I CAN DOWNLOAD PHOTOS ILL SHOW THEM ON THE SITE.STAN LIVED AROUND JACKSONVILLE,FLA.AND WAS DOING THIS TYPE WORK WAY BACK THEN.I WONDER IF SOMEONE MAY HAVE STOLEN HIS IDEAS. LARRY

 

[AndyBrown]

Why are you surprised? Once a thief, always a thief. We knew this was coming .... <_<

HELLO DON I WAS REAL SUPRIZED WHEN I SAW A CMB PISTON AND SLEEVE ON E-BAY.IF THIS IS THE SUPPOSED NEW STOLEN TECHNOLOGY IVE GOT NEWS FOR EVERYBODY.IVE GOT ROSSI 45'S THAT WERE MODIFIED BY STAN SIMPSON BACK IN 1993,THIRTEEN YEARS AGO.THEY LOOK IDENTICAL WITH THE SLEEVE CUT AND THE PISTON CUTS IN THE SIDE.AS SOON AS I CAN DOWNLOAD PHOTOS ILL SHOW THEM ON THE SITE.STAN LIVED AROUND JACKSONVILLE,FLA.AND WAS DOING THIS TYPE WORK WAY BACK THEN.I WONDER IF SOMEONE MAY HAVE STOLEN HIS IDEAS. LARRY

:lol: :lol: Larry, Me and Stan spend more time on the cell phone with each other every week than with anyone else. Only talked with him twice yesterday. And yes, we've spent hundreds of hours at the pond (just me and him) testing different ideas. And yes we both come up with some great ideas and we both have come up with some really dumb ones.

We're still trying to figure out who came up with what first. We were both doing some of the same things in the early 80's before we had seen some of each others work.

 

[Piston1]

Perhaps, but you still want that clearance as tight as possible, less clearance means less trapped fluids means less drag.

DON,

With respect you are just speculating on the above statement. What's your technical basis?

We are not PHd's.

JOSE

 

[Don Ferrette]

Perhaps, but you still want that clearance as tight as possible, less clearance means less trapped fluids means less drag.

DON,

With respect you are just speculating on the above statement. What's your technical basis?

We are not PHd's.

JOSE

Jose' that's been a basic in full size racing motors for years. Run the tightest bearing clearances possible without breaking the film barrier. We went through alot of Plastigage setting clearances back in the day. B)

 

[Piston1]

To many variables here Don, (viscosity, temperature, pressures, RPMs, etc. etc) that we have no control over them. You are still speculating on your basic statement in my mind.

DON, DON, DON we are just not going to get anywhere on this one. Maybe we can discuss matters like this in Atlanta, over a few "brews".

JOSE

 

[ALLAN YUEN]

h34r: I believe that CMB 45 will be fail fricton slug(drum) :blink: If it become increase heat then cramp or viberate because cause cheap fuel? or too lean? will take Recall Never know happen <_<

 

[Piston1]

ALLAN,

That's a possible possibility, we are just "gonna" have to wait and see what happens.

JOSE

 

[Don Ferrette]

To many variables here Don, (viscosity, temperature, pressures, RPMs, etc. etc) that we have no control over them. You are still speculating in my mind.

Well duh! Those variables existed in the race engines we built as well. I don't know what your getting at especially when I opened up this line of thinking with "Also consider that may..." and "One would have to think..." as I was suggesting this as a line of thought, not stone cold definitive answer. All I can tell you is I know what I saw building race engines back in the day, can't see that not being a viable theory here. Think about it, would you want the drum trying to rotate through a thin film of oil or a thick one? B)

 

[lhutch45]

Why are you surprised? Once a thief, always a thief. We knew this was coming .... <_<

HELLO DON I WAS REAL SUPRIZED WHEN I SAW A CMB PISTON AND SLEEVE ON E-BAY.IF THIS IS THE SUPPOSED NEW STOLEN TECHNOLOGY IVE GOT NEWS FOR EVERYBODY.IVE GOT ROSSI 45'S THAT WERE MODIFIED BY STAN SIMPSON BACK IN 1993,THIRTEEN YEARS AGO.THEY LOOK IDENTICAL WITH THE SLEEVE CUT AND THE PISTON CUTS IN THE SIDE.AS SOON AS I CAN DOWNLOAD PHOTOS ILL SHOW THEM ON THE SITE.STAN LIVED AROUND JACKSONVILLE,FLA.AND WAS DOING THIS TYPE WORK WAY BACK THEN.I WONDER IF SOMEONE MAY HAVE STOLEN HIS IDEAS. LARRY

:lol: :lol: Larry, Me and Stan spend more time on the cell phone with each other every week than with anyone else. Only talked with him twice yesterday. And yes, we've spent hundreds of hours at the pond (just me and him) testing different ideas. And yes we both come up with some great ideas and we both have come up with some really dumb ones.

HEY ANDY GLAD YOU CLEARED THAT UP .YOU CAN IMAGINE HOW I FELT WHEN I FOUND I HAD THE TRICK TECHNOLOGY AND DIDNT REALIZE IT FOR 13 YEARS.THE ONLY PROBLEM WAS I STOPPED RUNING BOATS UNTIL NOW. HAD ALL THAT FAMILY STUFF KIDS TO RAISE ETC.I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO GET BACK ON THE WATER WITH THAT EAGLE 45 TWIN I BOUGHT FROM YOU BACK IN 1993.ALSO HAVE A SCALE I WANT TO PUT A MAC 67 IN.HOPE TO PURCHASE ONE IN ATLANTA IF YOU HAVE THEM THERE.THANKS AGAIN AND GOOD LUCK ON THE NEW ENGINES . LARRY

We're still trying to figure out who came up with what first. We were both doing some of the same things in the early 80's before we had seen some of each others work.

 

[Piston1]

Don, define "Thin vs Thick" and quit making analogies.

JOSE

PS

I am "OUT" Don, I got to get in bed, tomorrow I got a busy day at the "OLE NUKE PLANT".

I hope I did not offend you.