Cox 0,49 vs PAW 80

[Jens Eirik Skogstad 2]

Hi folks, I am planning to build the UC stunt plane who are powered by Cox 0,49 then I am thiking to repace with PAW 80.

Is the PAW 80 strong enough to run the UC stunt plane and make maneuvers?

What is your comments about to use PAW 80 instead Cox 0,49?

[Shaun Walsh]

The PAW 049 appears to have a very similar power output to a standard Cox 049 0.13 hp approx 100 watts so probably comparable in performance.

[J D 8]

I have both these engines. If you want small and fast [ and noisy ] the Cox. For something a bit larger and aerobatic then the PAW with it's ability to swing a large propeller [ for a small engine ] would be best.

[Phil Green]

Its impossible to compare the two without knowing which Cox model:

The Babe Bee for instance is only 0.057 bhp (42 watts)
Black Widow 049 0.08 bhp (60 watts)
Tee-Dee 049 .105 bhp (78 watts)
Norvel AME 049 .14 bhp (100 watts)

I would expect a good PAW 049 to outperform all but the Norvel.

Cheers
Phil

[Shaun Walsh]

Posted by Phil Green on 05/04/2020 20:49:41:

Its impossible to compare the two without knowing which Cox model:

The Babe Bee for instance is only 0.057 bhp (42 watts)
Black Widow 049 0.08 bhp (60 watts)
Tee-Dee 049 .105 bhp (78 watts)
Norvel AME 049 .14 bhp (100 watts)

I would expect a good PAW 049 to outperform all but the Norvel.

Cheers
Phil

I didn't realise that there was such a wide range of power outputs across the different models, you live and learn!

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Jens Eirik Skogstad 2]

Thanks for all answer, I has Cox Babe Bee and Cox Black Widow.

I want to use PAW 80 to run longer time due low fuel consumption.

Wich propeller size is recommended for good climping ability in the PAW 80 since it's a stunt plane?

[Simon Chaddock]

There are even 2 versions of the PAW 80. For FF and CL. The CL one is the most powerful.

[Steven Webb (Steve Webb Models)]

PAW 80 for me. Why? It’s a diesel, smells nice , sounds good, needs no starting equipment other than a prime and a good diesel flick. It should best most 049 cox engines except for ‘competition’ types. The Tee Dee range are powerful . The PAW 80 I’d also the same size physically as the 100 so there’s always that should the 80 not be enough.

All that put to one side , the smell of the PAW wins!!

Steve

[Peter Christy]

I've got loads of Coxs and a PAW 80. My observations: The PAW is heavier and doesn't have an integral tank, as many Coxs do. It doesn't lose as much power when silenced, and is much quieter either silenced or not. Special piston and liners are available for Coxs with an extra transfer port (like the TeeDee) and no sub-piston induction, which brings the power back to (almost) un-silenced levels.

Although the PAW 80 will swing a bigger prop (7x4), it is much happier on a 6x4 - same as the Cox.

But the real killer is starting! The Cox is MUCH easier to start! My PAW 80 is a little brute to get going! I can be there flipping it for ages, without a pop or a bang from it, and priming it is just asking for a painful back-fire! The tiny size of the prop makes it difficult to use any kind of finger protection, and I have received more (and deeper!) cuts from the PAW than I have ever got from a Cox!

It also flatly refuses to start on D-1000 (so-called "easy start" fuel!). It is much better on D-2000, and even better on D-3000, though that isn't recommended for plain bearing engines. (Any comments on this Jon-Laser?)

The easiest way to start it is with some kind of electric starter, but you need to be VERY careful doing this! Most electric starters are way too powerful, and will bend the conrod (at least) if you flood it!

Its a shame no-one makes an electric starter for small engines (based on a 540 or smaller motor, perhaps?), as this would solve many of the problems.

Don't think I'm anti-diesel - I'm not - at least not in model aeroplanes! (Cars are another matter!) I've got quite a few diesels, AM15s, a KingCat, and several PAW 149s. In contrast to the 80, the PAW 149s are little jewels of engines! Easy to start (as long as you don't use D-1000!), quiet and they throttle extremely well.

--

Pete

[paul d]

I think PAW 80's are single ballrace? My 149 hates D1000 as well, but runs well on 2000, it is a bugger to start though, possibly a bit worn.

I think 3000 would be ok in a 80 but it would have to be run in on something milder first.

[Ben B]

Posted by Peter Christy on 06/04/2020 09:26:03:

Its a shame no-one makes an electric starter for small engines (based on a 540 or smaller motor, perhaps?), as this would solve many of the problems.

Don't think I'm anti-diesel - I'm not - at least not in model aeroplanes! (Cars are another matter!) I've got quite a few diesels, AM15s, a KingCat, and several PAW 149s. In contrast to the 80, the PAW 149s are little jewels of engines! Easy to start (as long as you don't use D-1000!), quiet and they throttle extremely well.

--

Pete

This is exactly what I made 25-odd years ago to start my Black Widow after starting it sent me to A+E for some stitches. We had a lathe at school so I just turned up an adapter from ali to attach to a can motor and used some silicon hose as the cup. Worked well. It was the first thing I made on a lathe so took absolutely ages.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Piers Bowlan]

I have a spring on my Cox BB engine, just slip it over the prop and wind backwards a turn or so, then let go. No more cut fingers and so simple I am surprised they were not made for these small diesels too. Any thoughts?,

[J D 8]

My Frog 100 mk3 has a starter spring.

[Engine Doctor]

The Black Widow is great little engine and with correct fuel will go like the clappers. The PAW 80 is also a great engine but totally different characteristics as already said . It really depends on whether you want out and out speed or pulling power/grunt. Cox for speed (and Noise) PAW for grunt ,

Good luck and have fun .