Originality, or how to avoid a mongrel...

I assume you know of Martin Hepperle aerotools web site and you should also refer to the wikkipedia page also for clues

As far as I know, there is no one place to see exactly each engine configuration and dates of MFG

http://www.mh-aerotools.de/airfoils/cox_frameset.htm

As mentioned above, there is nothing that exists that is definitve. There is however, a load of info on here and on the web that will help. You can learn a lot just by looking around.

If you have specific question(s) just post them here and you will get the answer you are seeking. Lot's of experts in CEF.

Ron

While pick-and-assemble was how it was done, the parts of certain styles were used, then once switched AFAIK the old style part was not used again.

There were also different product lines that were maintained. While many of the differences were cosmetic there were functional differences between certain parts. (stunt tank, etc)
Phil

Not the correct place for this but since I was on the Cox Wikki page I re-read through a few of the descriptions and saw this

1961 Tee Dee 051 (Cat#200 - Manufactured Oct 1961-Jan 1996)
The 051 was simply a Class A version of the engine, physically the same on the outside only the bore was different and the piston had a small groove in the skirt to bleed off just enough power to exactly equal an 049 so no trim changes would be required to free flight models (this groove also visually differentiates the 051 from the 049 but this was of secondary importance). The 051 also had a RED carb body.

I had never before heard that the grove was anything other than a way to externally Identify a .051 from a .049

I am not sure that the grove and where it is would bleed off any power

Fred,

refer to the other thread titled "051 groove ring lowers power?" running in parallel. I tried to explain there my opinion that concurs with yours i.e. the groove there is just for the visual differentiation between 049 and 051 calibers.

Many thanks to you all for the replies--and it's pretty much as I expected. I have been thinking lately about putting pen-to-paper and coming up with some engine-by-engine descriptions based on all the info available here and elsewhere, and post it for your verification or correction. With many contributors it would eventually become as complete and accurate as it's possible to be after all these decades. Since all of the info is public domain stuff I can't see any lawyers beating a path to my door for infringing any copywright laws...any legal boffins in the ranks, please correct me now if I'm wrong about that!!!
Of course, the people to talk to would be any ex-COX employees, the higher up the chain-of-command the better, but I don't imagine there are too many left now from the early days.
I'll buy a big notebook tomorrow.....

I too have assembled many engines from acquired Cox parts. This  forum has educated me to the point to where I can select the period correct crankcase, tank and back plate and even the drive washer to assemble a 50's, 60's 70's or 80's Babe Bee.
I used to buy Cox engine lots on ebay, disassemble and clean all the parts with no regard to keeping the parts together on an engine. Mostly because many of the engines had mismatched period parts any way.  I wired the crank to crankcase and the piston to the cylinder during soaking and cleaning because these parts were mated to each other. Now the big question, was the 3 piece (piston, retainer and circlip) ever used by the factory in early Babe Bees?  Would it be correct with the crankcase without the retaining groove for the spring starter?  I know Cox kept using parts till they ran out before switching to new product/part.