text: MT70CC TWIN - Page 48 - RCU Forums
  like one poster pointed out in the mld thread,,that if you were to visit most threads pertaining to china made engines,,whether it be in this or another forum the melody isthe same ,,maybe thats was a fitting name,same old song,you know it was a problematic chinese made engine that drew me to theese forums awhile back,,and i think way back then ,,t.o.m ,and antique and a few others that have heard this same story maybe stated differently but ,,the bottom line here,is even at their low prices most arent worth the headaches,,because even if you figure out their defects,,and tell them,,,they are trying to sell you their next batch of defects,,and offering a discount,,or only an excuse.
  you know for me it's not about a cheap twin it's about a 70 twin or there abouts that weighs in at 3.5lbs or so.i would buy a Mintor if it weighed less,but for the size of plane that it would go in a 4lb.+ engine is pushing it a little for say a 30%.but as the quality goes up so does the weight,as in most things.
  in any event being like you into 30% aerobatic planes,,i wouldnt want the pucker factor to increase because i have a 1000,00 engine and a thats without the exhaust system,and i could not back the weight quality statement,,we all know if os or da nade a 70 twin it would be high quality lightweight,,but pricey ,,the mintor looks better suited for a reno racer ,and would work well with a 1/3 scale aerobatic plane,,but im under the inpression that the mt 70 cc s main market was the 50cc sized aerobatic planes,,when closet guy and i were in the mt57 forum ,,this is where we were intorduced to the 70 and it was touted ad the answer to any shaky 50 cc engine on the market,,we all know the rest of the story.
  The Mintor engines are awesome! the 75 twin though is just not suited to any 30% aerobatic plane - its way too heavy. In any case it is out of production while it is being redesigned and will re appear as a slightly differnt size better suited weight wise to 30% planes
  as we all know Pity The MT70 QC has not come right, could have been a great engine, I fly mine every w/end almostandit is strong as anything else. I get guys asking for a 70 twin every time they see mine .......................
  that mintor needs to be slashed in half ,price wise,also when they do the redesign,,then it would be very interesting,,otherwise its just something that most would pass over ,,,and while they are at it ,loose considerable weight,but back to the mt 70 ,,mine runs great too,starts easily runs smooth powerful great power band looks good ,,i wonder if the major players in the engine manufacturing arena paid tommy to drop the ball,,because he had a real winner ,,and the answers to its refinements were laid out for him,(tommy) to implement,and so far it hasnt happened,,what ashame,,most of us here encouraged ,gave well wishes ,,gave sound input,,and has me wondering whats really going on ,with mtengines.all we wanted was a reasonably priced decent engine,and got it ,,but that only pertained to the ones that were accidently assembled with defect free parts or got re done by people like jody,,if one bad apple ruins the whole barrel ,,imagine what several will do.....
  No it doesn't. The Chinese have yet to make any of our engines with half the quality and engineering that goes into the Mintors. Yes, you CAN find stuff in the junkyard pretty cheap but you get what you pay for.
  Just because someone designs and manufactures truly great products and sells them for more than the entry level competition does not mean they should reduce prices so the financially challenged can afford them. If that was the case more people would be driving BMW's and Mercedes.
  hey t.om ..i do live in the real world,,and should have stated it as a wish,,i certainly dont expect it to occur,,and wouldnt mind seeing more people enjoying our hobby.what i wouldnt want to see,is anyone getting hurt just because they could now afford something they arent fully aware of.i remember a few years back at my field ,and ,this well to do fellow and his 11 year oldson, showing up with a aeroworks yak,with a da 50,they bought on craigslist,,and neither had even flown a c/l plane before,,several of us convinced them to get a trainer first,,,but all that aside ,i do understand your piont very well.
  There have alwys been, and always will be, those that purchase products they are short on qualifications to use. As far back as I can remember there has always been the newbie that showed up with a new warbird, heavy, built to scale, and underpowered. That is was going to be their first flight with anything didn't phase them at all. Today that has shifted to "Q.B." kits and such but the tendency hasn't changed. Some listened and changed direction but most did not.
  As for pricing and product, there really is some class distinction in this hobby. People have the ability to choose how much time, effort, and expense they want to expend. That's a good thing. Do they want or need the best or will they be satisfied with average or a little less? Not every thing is for everbody so the decisions have to be made in advance. Those satisfied with average or less in some areas could be having just as much fun as the person spending the big bucks for the best of things. We've a;; seen peoplebuying the best when their abilities dictated the need for only average, but advertising has convinced a lot of people that if they use such and such they will be able to fly as good as so and so. One has to make their own call in this.
  As for the MT70, it still has potential but who knows if the maker sold enough of the "almost good enough" engines to finance the follow on improvements. There's really nothing new with two stroke RC engines except some cylinder designs, so there's no reason someone couldn't hit a homerun in the first inning if they really wanted to. You have to be trying to miss if you can't copy the basic Sachs design and have it function well. Select a decent head and piston design, work out the desired top to bottom end geometry, construct a light and tight case, use good bearings, think about the induction tract before placing carbs, then select the right sized carb. It really is that easy.
  Mr Chen has been passing in and out of the RC engine market for a decade or more and has so far only come close to where the product needed to be.
  pimodel
  URL=http://img508.imageshack.us/i/mld70cc.jpg/] [/URL]
  Send a private message to pimodel
  Find More Posts by pimodel
  Did they put the mufflers on backwards?
  What's up with the six bolt hub? Keep it to the DA 50 standard. I wouldn't turn all my 50-70cc props into swiss cheese or buy another 5-10 props
  Next question, what's it supposed to weight?
  You guys need to start a new thread.
  This thread is on the MT70 Twin
  My 70s is running well after having the crank realigned, the tall piston shaved and bearings replaced. Doesn't turn over as smoothly as other engines but it's reliable now.
  Tomy should go back to this design and have someone who understands quality control build them. Wish I could find a 4 bolt hub, then I could use my lightened spinner.
  happy independence day everyone,,hey mr p.k. my junk is still running well too,,i m of the opinion that this thread is dead ,just like the mt engine line,i may have a 4 bolt hub for you ,,from that junk tommy sent me this past winter,,,remember that feeble attempt that was made to find more suckers?well ,i still have the case and its just sitting in my garage.,being useless.like many of the other mt engines ,,oops ,,was i being defamatory or was i just being honest?
  I flew with Jody last weekend and he had one of the MT 70's in one of his planes. Unfortunately it was not a stock MT 70 since he re-worked it to make it functional. Waaay too much power for the plane it was in.
  If Tomy was to pay attention to QA and do it the way Jody did he would have a winner.
  thats why mine runs so well because he massaged mine into shape too as you know,,we both fly the same setup gw yak reworked engine unless he has another setup now,,,,lets go have fun!!!!! ps have a wonderful weekend t,o.m .,,i think if your last statement makes the perfect bottom line analysis for this now ,what i believe to be discontinued engine,its what we all have been saying all along ,,from the first batch ,and with previous engines of the same origin,notice i didnt say manufacturer,,i have learned alot on how theese parts come together,,sometimes poorly,, from different ,barely passable parts,,from the lowest bidding, suppliers ,,and passed on to the unsuspecting buyer,wide eyed ,,hoping for the latest and greatest newest hopeful.,at a deep discount.,,,dle and maybe one or two others have proven it can be done,mt missed the boat.
  The one TOM is refering to is a different one, it's in a GW MX-2, it uses the case you have sitting on the shelf, it's the most powerful version of the MT70 to date. I've been trying to kill it for three or four months now, finally pulled the firewall out of the MX-2 last weekend. It'll be beefed up and ready for Tuesday night.
  Jody, did you get mine yet?
  Don't know, who are you, I'm not at work either until Tuesday.
  Sorry, should have sent a pm. I emailed you yesterday anyway so you'll see that tomorrow.
  Tomorrow is Monday, 4th of July, Independence Day, Holiday, I'll see it on Tuesday.
  Right, it's still Sunday there, I,m 3 hrs. ahead of you. Have a good July 04 th!!
  im very aware this is the thread for the ill fated mt70cc engine ,,and since many guys are interested in stuffing the most in their 30 % aerobatic planes ,and other aircraft ,,i decided to see if the mld 70 twin was now available ,,its under 400,00 and i found this one at sds /cyclone hobby,,,,tried to upload a pic,,but couldnt ,,,just letting my fellow modellers its available .
  some twin ignition have programe problem and has been replace by RCEXL. and now quite numbers of MT70 and MT70S sold to Europe and have happy fly .