RE: What would good numbers be for Magnum 91 4s
I have run everything from a 13X8 to a 15X6 on my Magnum .91. I have only used 4S plugs on it and 15% nitro with at least 18% lubricant. I never like to see it turn anything near 10,000 on the ground, as someone else mentioned earlier. We are about 600 to 800 feet above sea level here in San Antonio and it does get quite warm in the summer. Mine is mounted on a Pheonix Decathalon and is just enough overpowered to do anything the plane is capable of. I am using an APC 14X6 on it due to clearance restrictions and the plane slows up nice on final and pulls off the ground in about 20 feet or so for takeoff. I also have a Magnum 1.20 that is equally awesome and reliable. The key to most 4s engines is getting the bottom end set up right and never run too lean on the top end. You should always see a bit of a smoke trail on a clear day, or you may be too lean. Good luck with your engine.
Posted on: 3/16/2010 6:06 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9587630

RE: futaba 9c conversion to 2.4
[quote]ORIGINAL: Bax The FAQ refers to non-Futaba 72 MHz modules that had to use the antenna built into the transmitter. That means that the transmitter and its antenna are part of the RF output circuitry, which needs to be certified as a totality, and only Futaba can apply for that certification. The after-market modules on 2.4 GHz will have all of the output circuitry needed, including the antenna. The rest of the transmitter, then, just provides the modulation. That means that the transmitter, itself, isn't a part of the RF-generating circuit. The law does allow those modules. The FAQ was written before there were any 2.4 GHz modules. [/quote] Thanks for the clarification Bax. For the record, I have purchased 4 of the seven channel Assan units and then 4 of their 9 channel units. Just like Bax said, the module has the antenna attached. the long antenna, 9 channel receivers are working great, seem to be on par with my Futaba PCM modules. I have used two on large glow planes so far, with no ill effects and will check one out on one of my less expensice gas powered planes. The seven channel receivers with the short antennas must only be for park flyers. I tried one in my glow powered UCD 46 and it worked fine with no glitches, mounted inside the fuselage. I then tried one in my Reactor, mounted in the fuselage. I did a 500 yard range check on the ground and everything seemed okay, but on takeoff, the plane started rolling uncontrollably, luckily I regained throttle control soon enough to reduce throttle to idle, but still had no aileron control. The plane was partially damage; bent wing tube, cracked firewall and bent landing gear and destroyed cowl and prop, but repairable. The plane had been flown many times on current set up with a FM receiver. Battery was good 4.8V NimH, fully charged. After the crash, all control surfaces seemed to be working fine. Later on, I tested one of these receivers on a 4.8V battery that wasn't freshly an fully charged with high torque servos, like my Reactor has, and the red light came on and went into lockout for about 7 seconds. I will now use 6V batteries or Lion with a regulator using these from now on. I have received my new 10C Futaba and absolutely love it!!! All of my 9C programs for nearly 30 airplanes transerred over from Campacs easily. The 256K after market Campac I installed gave me an additional 64 models. The 10C is a great replacement for the 9C, which uses nearly identical programming techniques and language. It seems to have allot more available for sport programming even than my 9Z (except for flight conditions) with 8 program mixes, it was a snap to set up crow on my sticks and Giant UCD. Just wish the receivers were more affordable, $160 for the 8 channel and $200 for the 14 channel definitely limits those of us on a budget to complete change over to FASST mode flying. But since it readily accepted my 9C PPM/PCM modules, I am ready to almost use it exclusively, if I wanted to. Also, the ASSAN module will not fit in the 10C, but plugs in easily to both of my 9C's and 9Z. I think the pins are larger/thicker on the 10C, than what come on the 9's. Hope this helps with some additional imformation.
Posted on: 10/18/2008 4:04 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8060979

RE: How many Futaba 10C?
[quote]ORIGINAL: Oilsands I have one and really like what you can do for the price you pay, I like it better than the 7C I had. I fly 33%, and getting a 36% and 37% soon. This radio should be able to do what I need (2 rudder servos, 2 elevator servos, 4 aileron servos, throttle servo, ign cutoff, and smoke. Lots of mixes (some preprogrammed, some not). [/quote] You will have to do at least one Y with the setup you just mentioned, unless you want to run two seperate receivers. Channels 9 and 10 are not proportional, or even adjustable on the endpoints like on the 9Z. With the single 14 channel receiver you still would not have a dedicated single, proportional channel for the nine channels you listed. I bought one a few weeks ago, it is an upgrade 9C with a backlight display and mucho more programming. I bought it so I could copy some of the 30 planes I own off of my 9C's campac modules. That part is terrific, especially when you have many hours in trimming and tweaking. I have a little remorse that I did not opt for the 12 FG for $400 more, since it now has the 12+2 software upgrades available, giving you many more proportional channels, since we are still talking $200 per 14 channel receiver for the 10/12/14 channel radios. I will start installing receivers in my large gas planes soon. I guess I will just put all those 8 & 9 channel PCM receivers on the shelf with the old reliable 9C radio. My 9Z got an 8 Channel module for 2.4 installed and is working great for my smaller, less expensive sport planes. If you never had a 9C or 9Z and are upgrading from a 7 or 8 channel radio, the 10C will rock your world. For the budget minded, it is the most versatile sport radio out there for the money. Futaba is supposed to have a new 128 KB Campac module out soon for this radio. I am using one of Hansen Hobbies 256 modules, which adds 64 more model memory over the in radio 15 models. The old Futba 64 K campac also plugs in, but you can't transfer anything from a 9Z WC2 radio. You will just have to reprogram the module for the new 10C, then go into setting up and saving your setups. A good friend at our small local field upgraded from the 7C to the 10C and was like a kid in a candy store with $50 to spend. I only had to look at the book for the new stuff, such as naming the radio and the newer upgraded functions the 9C didn't have. It is so easy to program, I would not hesitate to recommend it to beginners, as it should serve their needs for years to come. I particularly like the 2048 resolution in 2.4 8 channel and 14 channel receiver usage. They still have all the auxilary channels preassigned, like on the 9C, so you will need to remember to null the aux channel, that you are mixing with programs. Hope this clears some of the false rumors, and encourages many others to purchase. I wasn't disappointed, it has proven to exceed my expectations so far. Happy Landings!!!
Posted on: 10/7/2008 8:43 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8028349

RE: Assan X8 2.4 Ghz problems
I just purchased the new 9 Channel, long antenna version from Hobby King, installed in my Giant UCD with a Moki 2.10 on it, with the 8 channel transmitter module in my 9Z. Could not tell the difference between the $200 PCM receiver and the $40 Assan 2.4 receiver. No glitches, qwerks, or problems at all. Range checked out to 500 yards, couldn't loose the signal, got tired of walking. Flew out well over 1,000 yards, no problems. The long antennas are mounted 90 degrees apart, inside the fuselage. They are about the same size and weight as my old 6 channel JR Spread Spectrum receivers, only with longer antennas and less expensive white plastic covering. I just ordered 4 more tonight, after the great success with my first one yesterday. I have a Giant Scale Decathalon, with a 45cc gas engine, I will test out on next. They require initial linking with a jumper on the signal pins of channels 1 and 3. Once linked, they are linked for good, unless you need to relink then to a new different module. Hope this answers the question about large scale. I also purchased 4 7 channel receivers, but I think they really belong in park flyers or other smaller planes. Haven't played with them yet, beyond linking and installing in little electrics. Hope others post their results soon. Thanks
Posted on: 10/7/2008 8:15 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8028259

RE: Futaba 608FS reciever locout/failure due to heat
Thanks Craig, you may want to post the info. It was actually more than JR did for a friend of mine with he lost a 40% $10,000+ Comp Yak due to lock out on a 10X PCM. Appreciate the quick reply in extra info, Happy Landings, Mike Boyd
Posted on: 9/26/2008 9:43 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7994533

RE: New SV Gassers
[quote]ORIGINAL: mikeboyd [quote]ORIGINAL: HeliTB chutt...Break in 20:1 to 25:1 for 2 to 3 hours, then you can run 40:1. Not sure I agree with your friend regarding breaking in on a stand or plane. Not sure of the vibration either. I would think the vibration would be more abusive to the plane. [/quote] Agree on your recs. I have one of HC's XYZ 28cc's Spec A, which was about $235
Posted on: 9/26/2008 9:13 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7994434

RE: New SV Gassers
[quote]ORIGINAL: HeliTB chutt...Break in 20:1 to 25:1 for 2 to 3 hours, then you can run 40:1. Not sure I agree with your friend regarding breaking in on a stand or plane. Not sure of the vibration either. I would think the vibration would be more abusive to the plane. [/quote] Agree on your recs. I have one of HC's XYZ 28cc's Spec A, which was about $235 with shipping (as platinum member, forbidden to disclose our few dollars saved) Bought it nearly a year ago on a lark. Now running Amsoil Sabre at 65:1 with an APC 18X6W prop. Starts easily and flies my GB Wildstick great. I also bought another Wild Stick on close out from Tower and put the SL 52cc on it. Still running it on breakin fuel, but improving with every flight. I have bought over six various engine from HC, with no issues at all on any of them. The use of the Walbro carbs from Japan, really takes allot of the mistery out of these sweel little engines. I also have two DL-50's that are real powerhouses and very reliable so far. I'm still laughing all the way to the bank, to put money in savings for more planes!!!
Posted on: 9/26/2008 8:58 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7994388

RE: How Many Airplanes Do You Have In Your Hangar?
[quote]ORIGINAL: brennan l TOO MANY TO LIST! I have around 30 ill see if it can find a pic [/quote] OMG, are we both addicted that bad. I just did a count, since I posted a partial list on this thread a while back. CYBI, I am actually considering buying #31!!, just don't tell momma, until the brown truck pulls up in the drive again!!!! I got a couple of extra 50CC gas engines in the hangar looking for a home and considering the WH 540 V2 or PAU next. I keep telling myself I need to sell some, I don't fly, to make room, but then rearrange and fit in more, somewhere!! Gotta go, here comes momma, don't want her reading this!!!
Posted on: 9/26/2008 8:24 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7994253

RE: Futaba 608FS reciever locout/failure due to heat
[quote]ORIGINAL: craigteffe Guys, I started this thread to warn people of problems with the futaba receivers. If you still want to use them you do so at the risk of loosing you aircraft. My thoughts are this if you throughly test your receivers under high temp settings and all goes good I think you would be ok. But I will not take the unnecessary risk. This thread was not intended to bash but to get the information out there and discuss it, ask Summerwind what he thinks about all this mess. If you want to post here fine do so but please do not question my motives, [b]if you have nothing constructive or helpful to say then don't post!!!!! Don't waste my time or those that have subscribed here.[/b] [/quote] What was the prognosis from Futaba, when you returned your defective receiver back to the manufacturer?? We are all really curious how Futaba responded to you. I had a major radio problem on my old 9C from them a year ago, after they had made some repairs, they made good on the follow up repairs at no charge and a nice apology. I wonder if they will still be so kind in this situation. Thanks for all the info so far, could we get a list of your components and maybe some good pictures of the installation, like Summerwind did on his post of the 308 failure on his Skybolt. Look forward to you positive, accurate information, soon, since I may have wasted money buying some of these units already. (before seeing this thread) Mike Boyd AMA 7197
Posted on: 9/26/2008 7:39 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7994131

RE: Futaba 608FS reciever locout/failure due to heat
So as a precaution, I will mount my new 6014 where it is shaded by heat reflective material and make little ducts to ensure good air-flow around it, so it is air cooled like the engine (LOL)[;)]. Just a side note. I have had some manufactures regulators fail, causing similar problems as described, so quit using their regulators and went back to batteries without so much complex electrical hardware, that could fail. I just purchased a new 10C and two 6014 receivers and am tempted to temperature test these in the model with thermometer and heat lamp or heat gun to make sure, my receivers don't have the same heat sensitive components. It would really have been nice to see a picture of the installation, with all the components listed, so we could all appreciate things to avoid in our endeavor to upgrade from good old reliable 72 PCM (with all it's ignition possible failures) to something that is advertised as nearly bullet proof and reliable!!!
Posted on: 9/26/2008 6:57 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7994029

RE: Futaba 10C Official Thread: Press release inside!
I just got my 10C from Futaba, with the 2.4 module and 14 channel receiver, which is 2048 resolution. The 72 module from both my 9C and 9Z's plug in and work just fine at 1024 resolution. There is way more programming than the 9C and 9Z either have. The display is much larger, brighter and easier to read. I have already upgraded to a 64K campac, which automatically will be identified and be reset after installation. It is the futaba campac from my 9Z. It will not read 9Z programming, but will read 9C programming which can be copied into the radio. Aftermarket 2.4 module from Assan will not fit, since the pins are larger on the 10C, than the module will allow. The module that came with the radio is very easy to remove and reinstall, for changing between 72mhz and 2.4. I just ordered a 256 campac from Hansen hobbies, since I have one in my 9Z and love all the features it offers. The futaba instruction manual says you can use a 16/64/128 campac, but futaba and tower neither one list anything but the 16 for sale. Since the hansen 64K and Futaba 64K both seem to work just fine in the 10C, I am hoping to have no issues with their 64X4 selectable (256K total) unit. I have already ordered another receiver, so I will slowly transition over to all Futaba, from my 9Z on the 2.4 8 channel set up. Since the receivers are $199 each, the budget gets in the way of changing over everything I have (nearly 30 planes) to all futaba 10C. The radio feels like the same weight at the 9C and is almost identical in size, much lighter than the 9Z. Now just need to get over the crud and the wind to stop blowing to start trimming planes on my new radio. Safe Flying, Mike Boyd AMA 7197
Posted on: 9/20/2008 7:18 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7973695

RE: First Gas Engine
IMHO, all that has already been said is good, free advice. I own at least one of all the mentioned engines, and to date, have not had a problem with any of them, (just lucky, I guess) The new generation DL50 is awesome, for the money. I just ordered #2 from DL USA, here in Texas. I have an old one in a Lanier 87" Extra that weighs almost 16.5#s. I am using a mejlik 22X8, still on break in fuel and the engine spins almost 8grand with unlimited vertical. We are only 800 feet above sea level at our flying field in San Antonio. When I first took this plane to the field, I let everyone just think it was a DA 50, since they look alike. Several that owned DA's made the comment, that they couldn't believe the power and response from this engine, and it wasn't broken in yet. They were really surprised to find out, it was a DL and cost half of the DA's price. Don't get me wrong, I love my DA and 3W engines, you get what you pay for most of the time, but the DL is truly amazing for the cost. The XYZ 50 is really just 47cc's and doesn't even come close to the power of the DL and is much heavier than the DL as well. I have a STL 45 from HC that puts out better power than the XYZ, so I bought a 52, but it doesn't seem to be as tight and strong as the 45. Of course, each engine is different, and some require allot of break-in before developing their full potential. Bob at DLUSA said he should be getting a new shipment in Irving next Tuesday, so you may want to get yours ordered, before he runs out again. They do go fast, even at $390 each, with standoffs, muffler and ignition, what are you waiting for? Good luck and welcome to gas.
Posted on: 9/14/2008 5:20 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7953819

RE: futaba 9c conversion to 2.4
Does anyone have any experience with the Assan units from Hobby City? http://www.hobbycity.com/hobbycity/store/uh_viewItem.asp?idProduct=5538&Product_Name=X8F_2.4ghz_Futaba_Module Futaba's web site for FAQs states that any and all after market modules violate the AMA and FCC rules and their warranty. I had just ordered a new 10C from Tower, but am already getting buyer's remorse, from reading all of everyone's success stories on this thread. I have a 9Z, 9C, and 9C super, so am now questioning if I even needed to "waste money" on a 10C. I guess I'll order some of the ASSAN units and try them out on a 9C and some smaller glow and gas planes before I purchase a bunch of 160 to $200 receivers for the FAAST system. If anyone has any experience with these units, we would love to hear more about the inexpensive ASSAN 2.4 modules and receivers http://www.hobbycity.com/hobbycity/store/uh_viewItem.asp?idProduct=7229&Product_Name=X8_R9_9Ch_2.4GHz_Receiver_(Long_Antenna) is the page for the 9 channel 2.4 receiver. Thanks, Hope everyone escaped Ike okay!! Mike Boyd
Posted on: 9/14/2008 4:38 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7953688

RE: Quick U-CAN-DO 46 Servo question
[quote]ORIGINAL: Axel40 "Fun to fly??" bet your ass it is [:D] Mike, I maidened today, weather was pretty much perfect. Took her up, few clicks here and there for trim and there she was. I'm balanced about 5 1/4" from the LE at the fuse btw. AUW is 6 pound 4 ounces if I can trust my kitchen scales [:D] Plane tracked wonderfully and I even had a few hovers 2-3 mistakes high but when it falls out the hover it just gently floats away on the prop, awesome fun. I stuck to low rates for today (had about 4 flights) but I will be setting them high for the next go. I made the mistake of going with a 14x4W (Magnum .70) but I will switch it out for a 13x4W (picked one up on the way home actually) as I was only making 8200 rpm. I think I'll see an improvement. These things can hold a massive amount of AoA, it's almost freaky[:)] So much fun for beginners in 3D. Anyway I can't fly again for 4-5 days or more as the weather is taking a turn for the worse from tomorrow but you can bet I'll be back out soon as it clears up. Seriously, a great fun aeroplane, I can't get enough!! [/quote] My first UCD .46 was one of the promotional/introductory models, that I was fortunate enough to be in the LHS when the two kits arrived. I also installed an OS .70. I used an APC 14x4W with great success, but we are only between 600-800' above sea level. The engine performed great on Byron's 15% fuel. I got several other pilots addicted with this plane, and they immediately oredered theirs. My friend Jason (who now works for Hobbico) finally got his and started experimenting with helo engines and higher nitro fuels. Most of us ended up with Hyp .50's running between 15-20% nitro and either an APC 12X4 or 12.25X3.75W props. The later is a hardier prop if flying off grass. I usually fly mine on high/3D rates all the time. I put enough expo in the make it soft in the center stick, since I am an old, shaky man of 60. Some of the top 3D pilots in our area have flown mine, and advised not to change a thing. I am pretty close to the factory recommend rates, but my CG has been moved back to the rear limits, which requires a slight forward elevator stick pressure on landings and almost no stick pressure to fly inverted and half throttle. Don't go too far back all at once on your CG, ease into it. Most of us just move the battery pack rearward to do this. I started with my 5 cell AAA pack up by the tank, but now have it firmly velcro'd in the furthest accessible area behind the servo tray area. I don't fly with a cowl anymore, which also takes off nose weight on the heavy Hyp .50 and I use a light GP, aluminum back-plated, nylon cone spinner. Glad to hear it has worked out so well. I would suggest leaving the wheel pants off, if you are flying off grass, and haven't reinforced the landing gear mounting system, since it will be only a matter of time on grass runways until it breaks loose. The wheel pants will go through the wing which is a PITA to repair and make it look decent. Have a happy fourth of July, Mike Boyd AMA 7197
Posted on: 7/4/2008 1:16 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7693742

RE: Fun World 3D
[quote]ORIGINAL: rideon67 I was afraid of the lack of vertical with a 120. The published numbers tend to be fiction in most cases, but these area to weight ratio numbers appear to have quite a bit of leeway for a great wing loading. Did you try running your 120 on 30% fuel? Also, how did you get "crow"? Separate flaps and ailerons? Thanks for the tip on landing gear. I'll replace the wires to start with. Any other weak spots? [/quote] Let's see 30% helo fuel will soon be over $30/gallon, so it won't take too many gallons the pay for a gas engine or a cheap glow engine that will run on either FAI or 5%nitro, at less than half the price of 30%. Don't know what's going on with Nitro here, but price is skyrocketing to make the higher nitro fuel way too expensive for those who like to fly allot. I think if you beef up the firewall, one of the less expensice gas 26cc engines would fly the airplane pretty well. The ST2300 is being sold by Tower for $139.99 right now, so it is cheap and reliable and runs great on 5% nitro. That engine with an APC 17X6 or 18X6W prop will give nearly unlimited vertical. Since you won't be flying at full throttle much, since throttle management will be paramount, it doesn't burn too much more than the 120 4S. As far as the crow set up, if you are using a 9C, go to the Futaba website, questions and answers http://www.futaba-rc.com/faq/faq-9c.html and look up the crow set up, with separate elevator servos. If you follow that, it is pretty simple, if you really understand the radio. I have the same setups on my GB Wildstik 120's and will also use it on my new GUCD, when it arrives from Tower this week. Well, gotta get back to my class, don't want students waiting on me. Good luck, Mike Boyd
Posted on: 7/1/2008 2:20 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7682230

RE: 26cc gas prop size
[quote]ORIGINAL: Penuts Thanks guys, As of right now im turning 8000 with a 16/6 but i will try a 17 as soon as i can get one,It flys great for me but it really needs more power. I really dont care for the spe engine just does not put out the power like they claim it does. Here's a pic of the plane anyways. [/quote] Most gas engines take awhile before they break in and start making real power. Don't loose heart, just burn a bunch of gas with the correct oils in it, and you will be rewarded. DA recommends that the first couple of gallons you use petrol based lubes such as Lawnboy ashless mixed around 32:1. This will throw allot of black soot on your plane, but helps seat the rings to the liner and loosen things up a bit. Once you notice that the engine is coming around and putting out more power after the first two to three gallons, then you can switch to Amsoil Sabre 100:1. In the hot summer heat, here in Texas, I usually mix the Sabre oil to about 65:1 to get the extra lubrication in cowled engines. Once you switch, you will notice a pronounced difference in performance, but don't rush the process. If you start with Amsoil, you may never seat the rings, since it is such a superior lubricant, so don't try to break the engine in with it. I had to run nearly four gallons of Lawnboy "syrup" through my Fuji 64 before it started to break in enough to switch to Amsoil, but once I mad the switch, everyone remarked at how much power the engine gained. Hang in there, gas engine do need allot of correct break-in, but they don't cost an arm and leg to fly eithers. Happy Landings, Mike Boyd
Posted on: 7/1/2008 2:04 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7682186

RE: Fun World 3D
[quote]ORIGINAL: rideon67 Has anybody flown this 120 size World Models plane? I've got one on order strictly based on published wing area and weight. Planning on pulling it with a Saito 120 that will barely hover 11 lbs (no pull out) so if it comes in at less then 10 lb I'm hoping it will fly. [/quote] I had one of these with a 1.20 4S, which flew it, without much vertical. I replaced the 1.20 with a ST2300 with stock muffler, mounted inverted and it ROCKED!!!! I used a Futaba 9C with crow set-up and you could nearly park it in the air and harrier almost straight down. With the huge, thick wing, the airplane is so neutral, gentle, and predictable, you can explore your own personal envelople, like with a UCD, only bigger. I replaced the landing gear with a Four Star 120 aluminum gear from the LHS, since the Chinese steel in the supplied Wire format, bent too easily on the rough grass field I fly on. Hope you enjoy the plane as much as I did mine. I ended up selling mine to a very good friend, to get him into big birds. He was a former student, and really enjoyed learning new things this plane gave him the confidence to try with it. Happy Landings, Mike Boyd
Posted on: 6/30/2008 6:11 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7679140

RE: Quick U-CAN-DO 46 Servo question
[quote]ORIGINAL: mikeboyd [quote]ORIGINAL: Axel40 Thanks guys, always helpful here, as usual [8D] Mikeboyd, so you preferred your pair of 3010's on the Ailerons as opposed to say the Elevator? Interesting....care to elucidate? [:)] [/quote] The Ailerons surface area is huge on this plane, so I chose the 3010's for them and the Rudder, because the rudder, in knife edge has allot of blow
Posted on: 6/30/2008 5:59 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7679102

RE: Quick U-CAN-DO 46 Servo question
[quote]ORIGINAL: Axel40 Thanks guys, always helpful here, as usual [8D] Mikeboyd, so you preferred your pair of 3010's on the Ailerons as opposed to say the Elevator? Interesting....care to elucidate? [:)] [/quote] The Ailerons surface area is huge on this plane, so I chose the 3010's for them and the Rudder, because the rudder, in knife edge has allot of blow-back loading from the prop
Posted on: 6/30/2008 2:18 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7678388

RE: Quick U-CAN-DO 46 Servo question
I have one of the oldest UCD .46s in San Antonio. I have worn out standard servos on it, two engines and it has more packing tape than covering. I ended up with Futaba 3010's on ailerons and Rudder and 3004's on the elevators, running a 6 volt battery. They seem to handle the Hyp .50 OS engine just fine. If you are flying off grass, you may need to replace the landing gear platform soon, as it is notoriously weak. I redid mine with 1/4 AC ply, doubled and pinned, with glass cloth over the top. That setup has lasted nearly four years, through many fun fly's and rough harrier landings. I just ordered a Giant UCD from Tower this week and am mulling over what engine to put on it. I have four Glow and three gas engines to consider, they are a Moki 2.10, MDS 2.18, ST3250, or STL 50cc Twin (possibly way to heavy) XY .50, STL .50, or DL50. Anyone with any experience would be greatly appreciated to you to share it. Thanks, Mike Boyd
Posted on: 6/29/2008 4:24 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7674861

RE: 26cc gas prop size
I think 8200 is a little fast for a gas engine, I have run both an Evolution Wood 18X6 and APC 18 X 6W on My XY 26, and both seem to turn between 6800 to 7200. I am flying it on a GB Wild Stick and it is a hoot to fly. Seems to be about the same as a 120 4S, as far as vertical. I tried both a 16X8 and 16X10, but seemed to get better performance from the 18 inch props. Hope this helps.
Posted on: 6/29/2008 4:11 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7674838

RE: XY(Z) 26cc A-Spec Gas engine
[quote]ORIGINAL: rfmullig I just ordered the XY(Z) 50cc A spec. It should arrive within the next 2 weeks. I will be mounting this on a 27% CAP 232. I am planning to break in this engine in with a 20x8 apc and transition to a 21x8 Vess or Xoar. I will provide video. Rob [/quote] I just ordered my second 50 about 5 days ago (2/14/08), still hasn't shipped, don't know what is taking so long, since I paid with PayPal. My first one is on an Obsession, with a 18X8 Xoar prop, it pulls over 8 grand. I started with a 18X12, but was only pulling in the high sixes and low sevens. I felt this was lugging the engine too much during break-in. Any way, I don't have the prop clearance for a 20 or 21" prop at the rough, grass field we fly at. I liked this engines' easy starting and solid transition so much I ordered the second engine from HC for my new GP Giant Aeromaster. It looks like it will fit the airplane almost perfect, since the plane was designed for a Fuji 43 and these engine have very similar dimensions. My XY 26 continues to break in and get stronger with each flight on my GB Wild Stick. It is set up with a 9 channel radio and is a favorite for almost everyone to fly at our Lake field at River City RC, here in San Antonio. I am still using the Evolution 18X6 prop, which seems to work very well with this airplane/engine combination. Hope you enjoy you engine, when you get it. Happy Landings, Mike Boyd AMA 7197
Posted on: 2/20/2008 12:40 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7107127

RE: FRL45 Gas engine Whats the verdict?
I mounted mine on a Dynaflite Super Decathlon. It started easily pulling a TF 18X10 prop over eight grand. I put a fish scale on the top of the fueslage and pulled it back at full throttle free of the fuselage holder. It took a little over 20 pounds of force to hold the fuse free of the tail rest. So with a paint stirrer prop, all seems well. I ran it for a few minutes at a time, allowing it to cool between runs, until I no longer needed to adjust the carb. The plane weighs a little over 14.5 pounds, so that is nearly 6 pounds excess thrust, which will only get better with time/break-in. It starts easily by hand, transitions okay and seems to be nearly as smooth as my DL50. I have subsequently picked up a Mejslik 18X12 and mounted it, but haven't run it yet. I have limited ground clearance, so am shopping for a three blade prop for it, but intend to finish breaking it in, in the air with the 18X12. Now all I need is a good, calm day to test fly it, in it's new home. I also bought an XYZ50 A spec and mounted it on my GB Obsession. It ran similar to the FTL45 with an 18X12 Menz wooden prop. No doubt, both these engine will really prefer a 22X8 when broken in a little or maybe even a 23X8. I can't believe the price on these! Isn't it great?!! Happy Landings, Mike Boyd
Posted on: 1/6/2008 1:55 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6862417

RE: XY(Z) 26cc A-Spec Gas engine
Update. I purchased an Evolution 18X6 wood prop for gas engines at the LHS for my 26. They did not have a Vess, Xoar or Mens in that particular size. I opted for the wooden prop over the APC due to weight. Swithcing from the 16X10 to the 18X6 made the Wild Stick 120 come alive. We had to lean out the top end quite a bit, but the engine is pulling this prop well over 7 grand and idle is smooth with excellent transition and idle around 1650. The plane will now hover and pull out gradually from a hover, which is pretty good with an engine with only a few tanks of fuel through it. I am running lawnboy ashless for breakin at 30:1 for the first gallon of gas. The engine is so easy to start from cold, warms up quickly and runs very smootly. For less than $200.00 I feel like I stole this engine. The plane weighs 10.5 pounds, so I would consider about 12 pounds to be the upper limit for sport flying and about 9 to 10 pound max for 3D. I highly recommend a good, made for gas wooden prop also. The Evolution looks almost exacly like the others (Vess, Xoar, & Mens) that seem to pull the strongest with gas engines. My engine is a C spec engine, not an A spec, so those of you lucky enough to get an A spec, should see much better results than I am seeing. Hope all have a great holiday period and maybe Santa will leave one of these gems under your tree!
Posted on: 12/19/2007 10:46 AM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6777786

RE: XY(Z) 26cc A-Spec Gas engine
[quote]ORIGINAL: KCJarman Any updates on this posting..... I am concidering this engine for a 67" Yak 54.... Not sure about the obscure brand and only around 8000 rpm on a 16x8..... Thanks.... Hope you all had a good Thanks giving. [/quote] The RPM's I reported was close to 8 grand on an APC 16X10. This is on a brand new, green, tight engine running 32:1 lawnboy "syrup" through the engine. I have found nearly all gas engines to be very sluggish for the first few tank fulls of gas. They seem to gain more and more power with every flight. The reason I chose the Wild Stick over a Yak was due to the larger wing area to carry the extra weight over a 1.20 to 1.50 four stroke glow engine. Obviously, at less than $200, this particular gas engine is much less expensive for both initial purchase and fuel usage, in the long run. Large 4 stroke, glow engines also require a bit of break-in as well. When you consider the extra valve maintenance and cost of 15-20% glow fuel, the heavier gas engine seems to be a better choice. The key thing you should consider, if you are putting this in a 67" Yak, is how much tail weight you would need to add, even if you mount the battery and all the tail servos in the tail section of the fuselage. I had to put 3-2 ounce sticks in the tail of Wild Stick, which ended up with an overall weight of about 10.5 pounds. This is nearly a pound more than what a large glow engine, such as a ST2300 or Saito 1.50 would result in. Even so at 1315 Sq. In. the wing loading still ends up to be about 19 oz/SF, which is about right where you want to be for this sized fun fly airplanes. If you use what I just gave you and do the math on your Yak, you may want to try to ensure you stay below about 29 lbs/sf, so you don't end up with a "lead sled" that is not any fun to fly at all. Hope this helps in your decision. All of these new, cheap Chinese engines are somewhat of a gamble. I took the gamble over a year ago on a DL50 and have no regrets at all with that engine. It ended up costing me less than half of the DA50. Everytime I fly it, it gets stronger and stronger. I don't even have a gallon of fuel through it yet, with the work scheduel and weather, but it is empressive. Good luck with your decision, Mike Boyd AMA 7197
Posted on: 12/14/2007 9:42 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6681043

RE: AVOID THESE ARF's AT ALL COST!!!!!!!!!!!!
Update on my Lanier Yak 54. I checked at Tower today and they are discontinued, no wonder they were priced so far down! I removed the 3 Blade prop and TT spiner and went to a Mens 22X10 wood prop and GP 3 1/4 inch aluminum backed plastic spinner. I also removed the larger Lipo battery and installed a two cell lighter Lipo. I installed the original wheels and removed the GP, larger, stonger units and am looking for lighter wheels. Hated to remove the wheel pants, but just more weight with no functional advantage. This much got the overall weight down to a little less than 20 pounds. I found a 1 3/4 X 36" CF wing tube from TBM for less than $60 which will take out another 6 ounces. I am looking for a CF Landing gear that will fit the Lanier. It has a swept forward landing gear, that sweeps forward nearly 4", so I can't use a similar dimensional unit with the top width at 8.5", wheel span of 19.5", a height of 10.5" and mounting width of 2 1.4". This gear is one of those split units that slides through slots in the bottom, rather than just to good ole reliable bolt on the bottom, like everyone elses. If I can't find a CF gear, then I guess I will start removing covering and start removing excessive planking. The darned fuselage weighs nearly 14 pounds with the engine, gear, hatch and cowl. This is nearly 3 pound more than my old KMP Yak with the same stuff in it. I thought about moving the engine back a little, since I am at the recommend distance from the firewall to the prop flange and have about 1.5" of clearance, then I could start removing excess wood planking on the turtle decks, underside of the fuselange and other places that don't really offer structural rigidity. If anyone has any suggestions, let me hear them. My goal is to get below 19 pounds, which is very optimistic, considering I started with a flying weight of 21.5 pounds. Appreciate everyones inputs, thanks!!
Posted on: 12/11/2007 3:37 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6743673

RE: Tower digital servos
[quote]ORIGINAL: mitoor/c Hi Fellows.. Could anyone tell me who makes the tower and hobbico servos and receivers. They have a good price compared to futaba and hitec. There servos are about $10 cheaper. Thanks Robert.. [/quote] Robert, I am using the 150's, which use the Futaba arms, so I assume they are made by Futaba for Tower/Hobbico. I am very happy with them and have several on mid-sized gas planes. The 170 just has to be made by Hitech, with the titanium gears and speed. I have several HT5955's and these appear to be nearly identical, except they won't take programming from my HT servo programmer. If I am using double rudder servos, I usually opt to spend more for the 5955's, as I can match these servos up with the programmer so they don't fight each other. This saves using a match box and it's added weight. Whenever I am using a single rudder servo, I like the 170, because it saves about $15 and works just a well as it Branded counterpart. I have both the Hobbico and the Tower 150's and there doesn't appear to be any difference at all, again, ass-u-m-ing they come off the Futaba production line. Cheers, Mike Boyd
Posted on: 12/9/2007 10:49 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6736883

RE: Ultimate biplane, mid-sized arf.?
[quote]ORIGINAL: JDV500 good morning, i'm shopping for an ultimate series arf biplane, seen the nitro 120 size plane but have heard that the build up and instructions are lacking in quality. i'm looking for a decent arf that will take a .91 4-stroke to pull it, something around a 45" to 54" span. i really like the looks and size of the nitro plane, if anyone has faired well with it, pls let me know. or if there is a better arf out there that i should see, i'd greatly appreciate it.. lastly, been eyeing the "seagull" and the "goldberg" versions of the ultimate, both are at 54" spans and are in my price range and will take my .91 engine. looking for feedback on these two models, if possible. thanks in adv. [/quote] I had one of the GB .90-1.20 sized arfs and it flew great. I started with a 1.20 4S, but the wing loading was not to my liking. I mounted two mini high torque servos in the tail to couner the heavy 4S engine. It would climb out of sight and flew okay. They did not have the OS 1.20AX out then, so I opted for a .91 FX and it flew more on the wing, like the kind of flying you are looking for. Around this time, Tower dropped the price of their 30% Ultimate to the basement and I bought one, since I already had an unemployed 3W75 collecting dust in the hangar. Once I completed the 30%, the little Ultimate became a hangar king, so I traded it, ready to fly for a 9Z transmitter. It is still around somewhere. A very good friend has one with a Saito 1.50 on it and it goes crazy. The 1.50 weighs about the same as a 1.20, but still, the landing gear in the arf isn't the strongest. If you go this big, you may want to beef the gear up. Also, put some servos in the rear, rather than adding weight, performance advantage of servos mounted close to the control surface, reduces the chances of flutter and blowing the surfaces during high speed aerobatics. I really think the 1.20 AX would now be the engine of choice for this plane, expecially if you are thinking of any 3D at all. Ultimates can be addicting. Whenever I take my 30% to the field, everyone wants a shot at it, and they all giggle when they start the snaps and flat spins these planes accel at. Good Luck and happy holidays, Mike Boyd
Posted on: 12/9/2007 10:36 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6736814

RE: AVOID THESE ARF's AT ALL COST!!!!!!!!!!!!
Okay, I have to vent my frustration with Lanier. I purchased one of their 87" Extra's and put a DL50 in it. It came out right at the prescribed 16.5 pounds and flies great. I liked it so much, I sold my very light KMP Yak airframe, taking all the gear out of it and purchased a Lanier Yak, advertized to weigh 16.5 to 17.5 pounds. That would be around 25 to 28 ounces per square foot, like my Extra. Well I just finished the plane with a Fuji 64, Mejzlik 22X10 3 blade prop, True turn spinned and the recommended servos and it came out to a whopping 21.5 pounds!!!! &$(%@!$$$!!!! So that comes out to around 34 ounces per square foot. I am almost afraid to fly this heavy beast, as heavy planes tend to snap out and fly like crap. I am not sure about how well the Fuji 64 will pull a plane this heavy. The engine is taching about 5850 with this prop on the ground. As much as I hate to, I may have to remove that pretty 3 Blade prop and spinner and put a light wood prop and plastic spinner on it. Not much else I can do, as I am running single receiver, Fromeco battery and switch. The ignition battery is a AAA and only weighs 3.5 ounces with the switch, so not much else can be done. I really need to find a way to loose almost 3 pounds to make this lead sled a keeper. I moved the battery pack towards the tail to balance the plane and no extra weight has been added for balancing!!! It is a very pretty airplane, but just made so darned heavy, compared to the extra. If anyone else is considering one of these, try to buy from a LHS, rather than Tower, so you can weigh the boxed airframe, to see what you are really getting. I guess I should have kept the old KMP, fixed the cowl and recovered it, it weighed an honest 16.5 pounds with the same equipment, 8611 and 5955 servos all weighing about 2.25 ounces each. Also purchased six engine kill units from a gent here on RCU and two of them would not work correctly on the 4.8 volt system the Fuji requires. I am using one successfully on a 6V system on a XY 26cc engine on a Goldberg Wild Stick with no ill effects. I will test the two, aparent faulty units on other 6 volt systems, to see if voltage is the issue. The problem was that the engine ran very rough and the led light flickered all the time, indicating intermittent power to the ignition. As soon as I removed the electronic kill system, every thing was great. My other ARF complaints were with a Goldberg Ultimate, that had some design flaws and poor quality wood. I posted those on the Ultimate thread, if you want more info. The plane flies awesome with the 3W75US on it. I am using a choke servo on this one and don't intend on testing the new electronic kill units on it, even though it is a 6 volt ignition. All of my great planes ARFs are keepers, well built, light and reliable. I also really like the quality and strength of my Goldberg Wild Stick 120. I am still in the trim flying and tweeking stages, using crow, a new gas engine and playing with props to find the optimum. Once I get that one all figured out, I will post more on it, but it is definitely fun, light and a real keeper. Thanks for a great thread, it gave me a good venting on my latest waste of money!!! Happy Holidays to all, Mike Boyd AMA 7197
Posted on: 12/9/2007 10:17 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6736679

RE: XY(Z) 26cc A-Spec Gas engine
[quote]ORIGINAL: KCJarman The Yak that I will be putting this engine on is a Carl Goldberg Yak 54. Finished weight with the gas engine should put me around 12.5 to 13 lbs this is taking into account the extra pound that running gas will set me back. Overall wing area is 883 sq. in. When I put the thrust calculator to work I came up with a wing loading of 180 ounces per sq. ft. or 11.25 lbs per sq. ft. That seems pretty reasonable to me..... But I would really like to get an equal 1.5 thrust to weight ratio.... and that will require nearly 19lbs of thrust...... which means I need to turn an 18x6 prop at least 8000 rpm..... If this $200.00 investment will get me there... then I see no reason to spend the extra on a Saito 150/180. I am just hesitant to pull the trigger on this motor without knowing if it will swing an 18x6 at my perscribed rpm..... My other option is to purchase a saito 150.... or a Brillelli 26....... at one and a half times the cost..... I don't see the need if China brand x will foot the bill.....[:D] [/quote] Okay, you're a little off. 883 Sqin / 144 (in./sf) = 6.3 sf and 12.5 pounds X16 ounces = 200 ounces/6.3 = 31.7 ounces/SF. This is very high loading for a plane of this size and may not perform as well as you may want. You may want to explore an option that would get you less than 29. Hope this helps, good luck.
Posted on: 11/27/2007 10:02 PM by Author "mikeboyd" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6683474