RE: NEW 42% PRODUCT -
Does it work on PCM radios like the Wike unit?. Andres
Posted on: 11/16/2009 5:03 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9258358

RE: OS have just announced a 55cc gas engine
[quote]Here we go again with another strange carb. Where's the regulator side of the carb?[/quote] OS carbs are the best in the glow world period, so let's hope it works as good as them. OS has produced some of the finest 2 stroke glow engines ever made (like the 1.08 FSR or the 1.40 RX) and I really like seeing them getting in to the gas world. Andres.
Posted on: 10/3/2009 1:41 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9143677

RE: DA 100 Tuning
[quote]That's the DA burble[/quote] Well this didn't take long. Let's wait for the BME ad that follows, so predictable,..............
Posted on: 9/27/2009 10:08 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9128608

RE: Premium PVC Tubing
I bought this and It has been in a container of gas for a week for testing purposes. I will let you know what I find: [link]http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXYE85&P=0[/link] Andres
Posted on: 8/27/2009 4:15 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9049948

RE: vess 27A Or MEZ 27X10TH ???????
A PT 27x8 or 28x8 could be another good option to try. I bought a PT 27x8 for my Comp-ARF Extra 330L 2.6 but I won't be testing it at least for a month (the plane is not finished yet). Andres
Posted on: 8/18/2009 11:33 AM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9025426

RE: 3D in brazil
[quote]hi gays[/quote] You might want to edit that [:D]
Posted on: 12/16/2008 11:45 AM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8251429

RE: OS .55AX problem???
[quote]After reading both pages I've found lots of sound Ideas. I have 3 AX 55 on 3 3D profiles I have run every combo prop. APC 12.25X3.75 12x4 13x4 13x4W zinger pro 12x4 13x4 Axor 12x4 13x4 MAS 12x4 13x4 balanced everything. I've found the high needle has a very large adjustment. The low needle also has a lot of adjustment. Castor has helped lots but I still get dead sticks. I pinch the line at an idle and at full throttle runs great and dies 3 minutes later. I'm not new to RC 2 stroke motors. Air bubbles don't show up on the ground. Glow plugs are OS #8s everything is tight I don't think I'm getting air leaks. I'm not alone one of my flying buddies has the same setup and dead sticks every flight! [/quote] Victor, Sorry to hear you are having the same problem I had, This engine was driving me crazy too. As I said in post 21, the big difference was after I added Castor oil to my fuel and changed the plug from an F to an 8. Now, the engine is running perfect, starts with one flip and has insane power with Jett muffler. I have adjusted the carb a little bit better and with some expo in the throttle, I have better midrange for 3D now. Maybe you don't have enough castor in your fuel ??, try adding al little bit more... Andres
Posted on: 10/7/2008 5:56 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Glow Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8027811

RE: OS .55AX problem???
Just an update for people facing the same problem. First the things that didn't work: -Putting more foam under the tank. -Changing the zip ties for velcro bands. -Replacing all the fuel lines. -Removing the fuel filter. -Trying any possible carb settings. The things that worked: -Adding Castor oil to the fuel (my fuel was supposed to have Castor oil on it, but I think it was not enough). After doing this, the engine quited too but it lasted longer into the flight. -Changing the OS F plug with an OS 8 coupled with more CAstor in the fuel finally made the difference and the engine rus fine now. Some final thoughts: -I was using an F plug, because I was having better transition with it, but It was also making the engine run too hot. -This engine really needs Castor oil in the fuel. -The Jett muffler really adds power (at least 1500 RPM`s with a 12.25 x 3.75 prop). However, transition is not as good as the OS muffler. You can actually feel the engine getting in to the tuned band and making some RPM`s jumps in the air but it still can be used for 3D.- -This engine starts as easy as a gas engine and also has a very good carb. In my opinion OS carbs are the best in the industry. -This engine is incredible powerful with the Jett muffler. My profile wights 5 pounds - 6 Oz and the engine pulled it out of a hover with authority. I can't imagine this engine in a 4 pound profile. - I am going to try different props to see if I came up with a better combination for 3D. Hope this hepls people with the same issue. Andres
Posted on: 9/7/2008 7:49 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Glow Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7929594

RE: A better alternate to Tygon fuel line?
Has anybody tried this one? [link]http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXYE85&P=0[/link]
Posted on: 7/23/2008 10:04 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7765212

RE: A123 Field charger
I was hoping for a different answer too. I guess I have to look for a different charger [;)]
Posted on: 7/22/2008 9:39 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Batteries & Chargers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7761342

RE: A123 Field charger
Guys, Can you charge A123 packs with the FMA cellpro charger whithout balancing the cells? If the answer is yes, do you need an special adapter or you just cut the extra wires in the balance connector? Andres
Posted on: 7/22/2008 9:08 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Batteries & Chargers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7761209

RE: OS-120 quits
This is crazy, I have the exact same problem with a .55AX: I take off, two circles to the field and it quits. I have tried everything but no fix for it yet. I have read also some posts of people with similar problems in the AX line of engines. I will be paying attention to this thread, and if I find a solution I will post it here too. I have like 30 flights and 30 deadsticks, this engine is driving me crazy and I don`t buy the "it will be better after is broken in" theory. Andres
Posted on: 7/13/2008 11:30 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Glow Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7727903

RE: OS .55AX problem???
Keep in mind that the engine flew fine with the OS muffler. The jett muffler produces a lot more power which could make the fuel foaming worst as bob27s said. However, I would think that the jett muffler produces less backpressure being a less restrictive muffler but I might be wrong though. I will try different props for sure.
Posted on: 7/9/2008 10:05 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Glow Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7713318

RE: OS .55AX problem???
[quote]This might sound stupid but have you tried to tach it down to 13700-13800 on the ground and then try it. I've had engines that run great on the ground, put'er in the air and start climbing and bang, deadstick, richened it up a few clicks and the problem was solved. On the ground if you run it full throttle and hold it straight up and to either side does the engine quit ? [/quote] Yes, top RPM's are around 14100 I fly at 13800. [quote]I'm having the same problem with my 55AX,runs perfect on the ground,but quits every flight. I'm using one of the new Slimline mufflers.It runs without any problems with the stock muffler. I also tried a Bison pitts muffler,same thing. Don't waste your money on the new Slimline Pitts muffler it doesn't work on the 55AX. [/quote] As others have said, this engine needs a lot of backpressure to run right.[:o] I think I am going to need a perry pump if I want to keep the Jett muffler. The fuel foaming is not helping either, so I will try to fix that first before trying the pump. Andres
Posted on: 7/9/2008 6:32 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Glow Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7711804

RE: OS .55AX problem???
Thanks guys for the help, I think I am going to replace the zip ties holding the tank with velcro bands and try to put more foam under the tank. The prop was balanced but I will do it again too. I really don't see this engine being reliable for 3D, even with the OS muffler it has had some odd behavior. There is something with the fuel supply that doesn't work right. I agree with others saying that it needs a lot of back pressure. I might try a perry pump if I cannot get it to work well as it is. Has anybody tried a perry pump with this engine?.
Posted on: 7/7/2008 9:12 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Glow Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7704901

RE: OS .55AX problem???
[quote]When I talked to Dubb Jett about using his muffler with an OS.55AX, he strongly recommended that I not use a prop larger than an 11x6, preferably smaller. I'm talking about Jett's muffler that resembles an Ultrathrust muffler, not the round muffler. He said that the muffler is inflexible in its rpm range/tuning and that the engine will not run correctly with that muffler if loaded down with too much prop. I can't see running a 12x4 something or another making the engine quit, but I would try a smaller prop just to see if it is the problem, as long as nothing else becomes apparent. Dubb said that the 11x6 was right on the edge of being too large with this engine and his muffler. [/quote] Ed, The jett muffler I have is the one similar to the ultrathrust. This problem is very strange as the engine runs perfect on the ground for a full tank of fuel if I wanted it to. I might try an smaller prop but I doubt this is the problem, the engine screams on the current prop. Andres
Posted on: 7/7/2008 9:02 AM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Glow Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7700380

RE: OS .55AX problem???
[quote]check your in-tank fuel pick-up line, most probably it's come off or there is a crack on it. [/quote] I have already checked all the fuel lines and found everything OK. I might add that the problem happens not matter what the level of the fuel in the tank is. Andres
Posted on: 7/6/2008 7:47 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Glow Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7700222

OS .55AX problem???
Hello, I have an OS .55AX in a bad boy 3D profile with the following set up: APC 12.25 x 3.75 10% nitro fuel OS 8 and F plugs (Both work well) 14,000 RPM`s on the ground Jett stream tuned muffler The problem is that I take off, one circle to the field and the engine quits in the air exactly at the same time every flight. I have tried everything and cannot find the cause. I know how to tune an engine so it has to be something else. Transitions, idle, top end power are superb as with any OS carbs. I suspect it is related to fuel foaming. This is my first profile and with the tank so close to the engine I can see a lot of bubbles in the tank. The problems also began with the Jett muffler. So far I have like 30 flights and most of them have ended in deadsticks. I have not been able to replicate the problem in the ground, but the amount of vibration should be different in flight and that could increase the fuel foaming problem. I think I read about a similar problem in an old thread but have not been able to find it. Any suggestions?? Andres
Posted on: 7/6/2008 7:06 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Glow Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7700097

RE: Composite-arf NEW 2.1 Extra !!
[quote]Hi Andres, I don't have the weight as my gear is mounted with pants and wheels attached but here are some rough dimensions (pardon the use of both inches and mm): The gear is in two pieces but with it mounted here are the measurements I got: At the fuselage where it attaches, the distance across flat part of the gear before it bends down is about 5 1/2", width of the material here is about 39mm. Thickness of the material varies a little but is about 6 1/2 mm thick. distance across at the axles is about 15 3/4". The gear tapers down, of course, from the fuse and is about 16mm wide at the axles. Height from where the gear attaches (at the fuse) to the axles is about 7." Tom [/quote] Tom, Thanks a lot man, I really appreciate it. Regarding the weight I just checked it and the 2.6 m Comp-ARF Extra landing gear is lighter than the Graphtech so this one from the 2.1 Extra will be even better. It will also fit my plane perfect according to your dimensions. [;)] Andres
Posted on: 2/12/2008 2:04 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7064347

RE: Composite-arf NEW 2.1 Extra !!
Guys, I would like to try one of the 2.1 Comp-ARF extra landing gear in my Colombo 27% Extra. I made a mistake of buying a Graphtech landing gear that delaminated in a few flights. I have the 2.6 m comp Extra and tried its gear in the Colombo, and It barely fits but it`s a little bigger , so I think the 2.1 one will be perfect. I checked the price in the Comp-ARF website and it sounds right at $49,95. I would like to ask any of you guys with the plane to get the general dimensions and weight of the gear before I place the order. The Graphtech gear besides being junk, is heavy at 10+ Oz. Thanks, Andres
Posted on: 2/11/2008 8:38 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7060845

RE: Losing The Experts and Their Knowledge
[quote]Absolutely not! Whoever reviews a product has the option of saying that it doen't meet acceptable standards, does not fit well, has poor construction, Deficient instructions, etc. When that happens the person doing the review did not make the providing company happy. If you're doing a review for a magazine or internet forum, the review may not get published because it cast a poor light on an advertising company that spends dollars for ad space. In my case, with engines specifically, the ones I review are the ones I buy outright for the most part. The ones I was provided to test did not meet minimum standards that I set for an eninge of a particular displacment. Be that in weight, power, or reliability. So the engines went back after testing and the information developed from the tests was given to the distributor to further improve the product. Those improvements are still being made. When I bought my Taurus 52 it was in the hope that it ran at least as well as my previous Brisons. It did, and did it better. It also performed better than any other 50 I've ever had my hands on with standard exhaust types. It blew some uav people away as well. Everywhere that engine has gone and been flown people could not believe the power, smoothness, and reliability. No other engine in it's class has been able to match it's performance. So I told people about it and to date have not asked for or received any compensation for spreading the word. Back to Brison. At the time it was an under rated company that was taking a back seat to a popular 50 that weighed a few grams less. What a mistake since they performed better and more reliably that the popular 50. I bought two of them full pop, and later bought a 105 twin due to the quality of the product. The 105 weighs less than the most popular 100cc engine and performs comparably if not better. I paid full pop for that one as well and had to wait for the ignition to show up from CH. So where's the added benefit to me. I paid full for my 115 as well. It still has a greater power output that any other 100cc class engine currently on the market. The machine work is an art form. If you take the time to use the search forums and read more than the first page of every thread you would note there was a point I found that some people could not obtain a good tune in certain areas with the engine. That was something that I had not seen or experienced myself except after changing a baffle design in someone else's plane. The problem was easily corrected. Now I "trusted" those that were having problms to have been reasonably knowledgable in engine tuning, since I hoped that no rank beginner was going to run out and jump into 100cc planes. Well I was wrong on that count but still felt that the engine could be easier to tune for the average dummy and revoked my endorsement from the product. In doing so it likely caused BME much pain, undeservedly since he was spending tremendous time and dollars in attempting to correct the issue. I still feel that many that had or have problems simply don't know what they are doing, but that's where it is. As for promoting CH, well, in the work I do I get to see the performance of various rc related products and know what works and for how long because the same stuff is used in my work. I learned about some ignitions the hard way when I experienced the problems when turning $100,000 plus dollar planes into lawn darts a few hours into the first flights. DA was the next ignition tested and performed extremely well and you people were told about it. Same goes with servos and engines. I get to experience the quality levels of each and know who makes the best. Contrary to popular belief, it's not one of the two most commonly sold. I'm not going to provide the test specifics or hours of use testing, loads, cycles, or anything else for you. You did not pay for the results so you may choose to use the information or not. Whether you elect to listen is up to you. Fromeco; another company that has made a superb quality product line that I've promoted free of charge and paid full pop for. JR; a company that used to provide the best servos on the market that I promoted and always paid full price for. Hitec; a company that made a high quality, low price product I promoted from the first day they hit the American shoreline that ran into some problems at one time, causing me to switch to JR, then later back to Hitec. Paid full price for them too. Now they are back up to standards that are well above what you deserve for the money spent. Futaba; the best servo product currently available to the average consumer. I pay full for them too. With Wild Hare aircraft I found that they performed consistently good to great and cost well less that the other products on the market. Each succeeding version of their kits has been improved over the last, making them a better value still. With the improvements came better flight qualities, to the point I found they fly at least as good, if not better, than the more expensive "name" kits available. The performance is built into the design, and Wild Hare performs their own aerodynamic design changes instead of waiting for a manufacturer to do something different. He's the leader in the design market, personally developed the 50cc plane market, and not a follow on company as most others are in the 50cc and up class of aircraft. All the other companies came after Wild Hare in 50cc plane development, and did so because of his success. I have not flown a bad one yet, and generally if I get a free plane it's a prototype design that will never make it to maket in it's current form. You, the general public, gain the benefit of flight and assembly testing with a better product than I or other had with the tested kits and products. Now if I get a free kit, or a hundred or two hundred dollars off one and put over 100 hours into the assembly, testing, documentation, photographs, and posting, I don't see it as quid pro quo at all unless I worked for about $2.00 an hour. I don't. My hourly rate for most everything I do is $70.00 so you can do the math and let me know how much I benefitted. You are the people that benefit the most for the activities of me and others that do the same things, not us. I've never, ever, been given or discounted an engine or radio product. If you're so blind or obtuse that you can't understand that then you truly need to go back to school and take some math and business classes, starting with the absolute basics. Hopefully you will obtain a passing grade. I'm beginning to think Al Lewis and some others are correct in their thinking. You guys don't deserve to get anything for free. All you want is something cheap. You should have to pay for it all and suffer your lumps instead of achieving success. If you have to pay for it more than once, all the better since it substantiates the position taken in this post. You can choose to believe all the "name" competitors that promote products. Those guys ARE actually paid to promote them, and paid rather well, whether they work well or not. [/quote] If I considered myself an ''expert'', as you obviously consider yourself, and I honestly came to these forums to help people I will come here everyday to give my opinion whithout never mentioning anything about any manufacturer or brand for that matter. This will be the ethical thing to do from an unbiased ''expert''. The day I see you do that I will believe all your crap. Until I see that, sorry man, I don't buy it. [;)] Andres
Posted on: 1/10/2008 5:35 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Forum questions or problems"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6886640

RE: Losing The Experts and Their Knowledge
[quote]Bear in mind as you chase the old timers away that much of the reason others come to a forum is to obtain knowledge from the old timers. Those with the experience pass on to those who don't. Those who don't have the expreience are the lions share of product buyers. They are the ones getting into the hobby and buying shopping carts full of stuff from all the advertisers based largely on what the old timers tell them to buy. Think not? Ask a couple of manufacturers how many containers of product have been sold based on my recommendations. That's $$$ to any advertiser and the only reason they are in business. Other old timers have the same ability simply because they have the knowledge, tell the truth, and convey it effectively. Most all of them have already been named somewhere in this thread. The guy you just helped out the door designs and makes engines. A tremendous knowledge bank wasted, and for what? [/quote] What about the other side of the coin. People like the one who wrote this who come everyday to these forums and make advertising for some companies products whithout openly adimtting what the relationship with that company is? If bashing a company should be banned, this should be banned too. Nobody does this for free, there has to be some $$$$ involved. Andres
Posted on: 1/9/2008 4:39 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Forum questions or problems"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6880936

RE: Lets see your hanger
wow, You guys have too many planes, How do you decide which one to take to the field every weekend?. [:D] I only have 3 and a foamy now and I am planning to get rid of one. Where do you get the time to keep an hangar like that in flying condition??[X(] I have to show these pictures to my wife [:D] Andres
Posted on: 11/12/2007 11:27 AM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6614060

RE: Max RPM for DA 50
[quote]Several gallons of Lawnboy ashless will put all that carbon on the piston. So will DA's excessively rich needle settings. Air temperature will not drop the R's that much. Something's wrong with that engine. I had 2 different carb's, same brand and model, one would run 300 more RPM's on the same DA. So some DA50's will turn more R's than others with just a carb difference. Yours has dropped too much. Must be something major. Yes those DA50 high needles are virtually useless. Just crank them to two turns out and forget about them. All tuning is done with the low needle. Trust me on this one. [/quote] True, My DA 50 high end needle is useless. The engine runs fine though. [quote]Late DA-50s have carbs that have high speed needles that adjust in a normal fashion .... not at all like the ones that were so common for most years. I called DA and asked them about this and they denied that they had changed anything but new DAs now adjust normally! Maybe Walbro just changed something .... I don't know. A trip back to the DA hospital might get an engine back with this carb mod ... mine did! A different carb and I didn't have a carb problem when I sent the engine back! [/quote] I wonder what modifications has DA made to their lates 50's.(there has to be an improvement with time) The numbers posted in the forums for newer DA's seem to be higher compared to the early models. My DA 50 is around 14xx and it seems weak compare to others here. I am getting 6800 RPM's with a NX 22x8 and I have seen several posts with numbers of 7300 for the same prop [X(]. I know you can't believe everything that is posted in the forums but there seems to be several DA 50's getting better numbers than mine??? Andres
Posted on: 11/5/2007 12:13 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6583453

RE: 2 rudder servos on 35% planes?????
Flyjets, I found the picture (2 of them actually) of the single servo set up in the Yak. You might give it a try in yours. [image][/image] Andres
Posted on: 11/1/2007 11:22 AM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6567028

RE: 2 rudder servos on 35% planes?????
[quote]I have a 35% Aeroworks Extra 260 powered with a DA 100. Installed one Futaba 9156 on the rudder. The servo is mounted in the rear of the fuse with a push/pull linkage. I can not get the rudder to blowback. Even with the DA WOT on KE you can slam the rudder in and it always goes full deflection. Inverted flat turns at WOT will not blow it back either. This setup is simple and it works awesome. This setup has been working all summer with no signs of wear or any stripped gears. Pull-Pull with one servo isn't enough. The cables just kill to much power. Set them up Push/Pull and you will need less servo power to get the job done. [/quote] Jason, I guess you are right, Push/Pull will be a better set up than pull/pull by far and will require less torque from the servo to get the same performance. [quote]Andres I am also building the small 2.6m but mine is the Yak. A single servo will work but if u are going to do 3D + hard snaps and fast knife Edge U better use 2 Rudder Servos. With that said a single 8711 will work on the Ailerons. That is exactly how I set mine up. Ian [/quote] Flyjets, There is a guy here in RCU that put a single servo in the tail of a COMP-ARF 2.6 Yak (Push/pull) and said that he could do KE loops no problem. I guess his username here is Pizza (???). I will try to put a single JR 8711 or a Futaba 9156 (If I can get enough feedback here about this servo) in the tail of my COMP-ARF extra in a push/pull configuration. With everything that I have been reading here It should be enough for everything. Andres
Posted on: 11/1/2007 11:14 AM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6567005

RE: 2 rudder servos on 35% planes?????
[quote]According to Troybuilt's tests, two Hitec 5955's would have @500 in oz of torque, one JR 8711 would have @350 in oz of torque. I still don't think 350 in oz of torque is enough for a 33% rudder. I'll bet if you guys running one 8711 would add another servo, you'd see a difference in your rudder authority. Jim [/quote] Where did you get this from? I read the TBM article and It said that when both servos heat up (And this happens very fast) the JR 8711 showed 280 Oz. of torque and the Hitec 5955, 152 Oz. This will prove that 2 Hitecs servos produce just barely more torque than a single JR and prove what other people have said here. If this is true a single JR 8711 will be plenty in the rudder for a 35% plane and this is what I will install in my COMP-ARF 2.6 Extra. I would like to know how close is the Futaba 9156 to the JR 8711? Has anybody tested both servos in the same plane? Andres
Posted on: 10/31/2007 7:00 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6564387

RE: BME Extreme 115...Good....Bad...Need Opinions
[quote]I'm not sure that he is looking for an engine that you have to modify the carb to get to run not just good, but the way it is supposed to. I can't believe that anyone would try to gloss over the issues with this engine when the isssues are well documented in the other thread. I still don't see a large portion of 115 owners saying that this problem has been fixed and adressed by BME or themselves. You are probably one of three that say thiers runs good. All reports should state that this engine runs great and that you get what you paid for. Instead there is a whole thread saying that there are issues. [/quote] So true!!! I hate the nerve of some people still trying to convince others in these forums that this engine is an option to consider at this moment when it is not!.
Posted on: 10/26/2007 5:06 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6542652

RE: No More Flatouts!
[quote]I have that bird... And it is a great flyer... (You can see a pic in my Gallery.) I'm using a Chinesse knock off A20 20L with a CC 25 ESC and TP1320. Total weight 15oz... A real winner! Your electrionics should work but may have a limited vertical... Your not out something for trying. Hibrass [/quote] Sorry Hibrass, I made a mistake, I was considering this plane that is a little bit smaller?: [link]http://3dfoamy.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23&products_id=80[/link] The profiles from Fancy foam at 13 Oz look very good too: [link]http://www.fancyfoam.com/Su29HPK.htm[/link] What do you think, Which one is better for the Rimfire, Andres
Posted on: 9/25/2007 10:42 AM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Foamies! - RC Electric Foam Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6411653

RE: No More Flatouts!
I really don't like flatouts at all. Yesterday I crashed my Reflection and even though it is reparaible I would rather dump it in the trash can than try to fix it. It is absolutly impossible to design something more complex for a foamy than the flatouts, bad engineering from the beggining if you ask me. I am looking for a new plane and was wondering what is the maximum weight that the Rimfire motor (22-1000) can handle with good 3D performance. I bought the 12 Amp ESC instead of the recommended 8 Amp thinking about getting something bigger in the future. I however have the 640 Mah 3 cell batteries [&o]. I was thinking about this plane: [link]http://3dfoamy.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=22&products_id=33[/link] Too small? What do you guys think? Andres
Posted on: 9/24/2007 7:32 PM by Author "AndresAM" in the forum "Foamies! - RC Electric Foam Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6409271