"1/2 A" & "1/8 A" airplanes These are the small ones...more popular now than ever.

More Power

Reply
Old 05-18-2013, 04:30 PM
  #1
ZoomZoom-RCU
Thread Starter
 
ZoomZoom-RCU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Louisa, VA
Posts: 790
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default More Power

For the 1/2-A experts. I'm looking for an engine with the same footprint as a regular Surestart, but with more power. Any suggestions? I've seen .049 variants, but can't tell how they really stack up against a stock SureStart power increase wise. Any advice is much appreciated. I've also seen .050's mentioned, but where to find one....hmmmm. Tougher still. TIA.

ZZ.
ZoomZoom-RCU is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2013, 04:45 PM
  #2
combatpigg
 
combatpigg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: arlington, WA
Posts: 19,891
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

One idea would be to put an aftermarket backplate mount on a TD or a Norvel.
.051s have virtually the same power as .049s...but moving up to a 1cc Norvel is a big upgrade if you want to swing a 6x3 prop on your WWII fighter.
combatpigg is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2013, 05:11 PM
  #3
ZoomZoom-RCU
Thread Starter
 
ZoomZoom-RCU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Louisa, VA
Posts: 790
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

Well, I don't necessarily need the same mount, I guess I could make a stock TD or Norvel fit. What size of each of these are you recommending? .061 Norvel or TD? Really I'm just looking to fit it into the same space without an engine head sticking up any higher.

Thx,

ZZ.
ZoomZoom-RCU is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2013, 09:54 PM
  #4
combatpigg
 
combatpigg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: arlington, WA
Posts: 19,891
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power


If you really need some extra punch the Norvel .074 will get er done. I've used these engines to rescue 1/2A projects that turned out too heavy quite a few times. They will swing a 7x3 better than most .049s can swing a 6x3..so this is a big boost in thrust with very little weight difference.
The difficulty is finding one that is new for a good price..or else gamble on a used one [not knowing what you'll get]. Coming up with the right deal could involve some patience and dilligent snooping around.
combatpigg is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2013, 04:52 AM
  #5
049flyer
 
049flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Tyler, TX
Posts: 1,021
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

Bernie at Cox Intl sells a high performance head and plug for the surestart. I have used it and can confirm that the power increase IS noticeable. Although I did not tach the engine, all my 1/2a flying friends agree that the power appears to be close to the TD with this head installed. Really makes a difference on a plane that comes out a bit heavy. The plug looks like the Norvel type and the head has an extra cooling fin.
049flyer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2013, 04:31 PM
  #6
ZoomZoom-RCU
Thread Starter
 
ZoomZoom-RCU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Louisa, VA
Posts: 790
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

Ooooh. Those are both great suggestions. I'm currently watching an auction for a Norvel .061, but if that falls through, the head you mentioned 09Flyer is definately of interest. It's not like it needs a heap more power, it flies, straight forward in a gracefull slowly descending glide. I can tell she will be a great flyer....she just won't climb. My first leaning was towards Combatpigs mind frame, that being...if alittle more power is good, even more is better....lol. But then I am still trying to get the transplant under the same hood as the surestart, so clearance is tight. The .061 seemed like it might be a good compromise of size to power boost offered.

ZZ.
ZoomZoom-RCU is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2013, 01:27 PM
  #7
hllywdb
 
hllywdb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Vero Beach, FL
Posts: 1,052
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

Go with CP's suggestion. If at full power it just makes a slow decent, you need more than just a tad more power. An 061 at the very least and the 074 to fly really well.
hllywdb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2013, 03:13 PM
  #8
Steve Westphal
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Fremont, NE
Posts: 506
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

I have a Cox .051 R/C with a muffler. It is the most powerful .049/.051 I have ever seen. The carburetor on it works great also. I fly it without the muffler and it pulls a couple of warbirds designated for an .09. With the muffler it makes good power also. They are sorta pricey but worth it. We fly it without the tank using an internal tank. Maybe I happened to get an exceptional one but a friend has one that he says the same about. They are worth looking around for as they do not make them anymore but very much worth it. Like I said, the carb actually works quite well and it pulls more than it should. I compare it side by side with my Enya .09 r/c at half the size. Try one!!!
Steve Westphal is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2013, 03:16 PM
  #9
Steve Westphal
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Fremont, NE
Posts: 506
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

PS......I haven't tried the competition head and plug. I can't imagine an improvement but it may scream even harder.
Steve Westphal is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2013, 04:08 PM
  #10
aspeed
 
aspeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ruthven, ON, CANADA
Posts: 2,866
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

The .051 has the twin port cylinder and the high compression TD head on it already.  They are pretty good as are all the Norvels.  The Thunder Tiger .07 is kind of a bolt on.  The quality varies, I would get the Norvel in the size you prefer.  My Norvel .06 doesn't idle very well but has good power.
aspeed is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2013, 04:32 PM
  #11
AMB
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: winter park, FL
Posts: 6,748
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

A 06PAW diesel may be a thought turns a 7x4 and 8x4 , it should hum on a 7x4 and scream on a 6x3 martin
AMB is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2013, 05:38 PM
  #12
049flyer
 
049flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Tyler, TX
Posts: 1,021
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

I agree that if your plane will not climb with a Surestart then you need a substantial power increase, not an incremental power bump.
A bit more power provided by a different head or a TD is unlikely to be enough.

A Norvel .061 or .074 is your best option. Forget about the Thunder Tiger or AP .061 engines as they don't have near the power of the
Norvels. A diesel would work but they are a different breed of cat. You might need a bit of help to get you going with a diesel.

Our assistance might be more useful if we knew more about your plane. What is it? What does it weigh and what is the wing area? Maybe a pic or two? Then we could REALLY help you get going with this project.

The flip side to adding more power is reducing weight. Any way to reduce the weight of your plane; lighter servos, receiver or battery for starters.
049flyer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 07:07 PM
  #13
MJD
 
MJD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Orangeville, ON, CANADA
Posts: 8,605
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

Then there's this for the diesel-fiendly: [link=http://www.icare-rc.com/diesel.htm#MP_JET_.061_BB_(RC)_Diesel]MP Jet .061 RC diesel[/link]

[link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlOWZzbZmU8]Bench run on YT[/link]

Pretty light too. I looked up the NovaRossi .12's, they weigh 7oz+... [:-]

MJD is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 07:06 AM
  #14
AMB
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: winter park, FL
Posts: 6,748
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

OK group the PAW 06 a nice classic engine but fully agree with MJD on the MP jet modern engine, easy starter I run mine on Davis 1/2 A fuel, just as easy to run and adjust as a glow no hassels martin

easy hand flip starts, running muffler on mine
AMB is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 11:22 AM
  #15
ZoomZoom-RCU
Thread Starter
 
ZoomZoom-RCU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Louisa, VA
Posts: 790
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

Thanks again for all the awesome recommendations. I actually won the Norvel Big-Mig .061 off ebay for around 30 bucks. Looks nice and seems a perfect fit in the little ME-109. I'll keep you guys posted as I will try some engine runs as soon as it is installed hopefully this weekend. The little motor looks mint, and it seems to have nice compression, so we shall see. I will use a 6x4 prop although the Norvel manual claims a 6x3 is the max. I always use 6x4's at this size so I figure what the hey.

ZZ.

PS.>>>

Oh, and I will post some pics as well shortly. I determined my error in this build (at least in targeting it for use with a Surestart) was the wing thickness. Everything else here was spot on and I could find no reason why this machine (I have others this size/span that fly on an .049) would not work with the .049 powerplant. I have a taube that has lots of scale flying wires, dummy motor etc etc. that is the same span....and which should be much more draggy than this clean little 109. Yet the taube flies and climbs well, but the 109....not so much. After reviewing the 109 build and its differences two things stood out as main contributors....slightly higher weight, and the wing thickness that on review, I could've designed 1/4-1/3 thinner in cross section. I have a sneaking suspicion that if I rebuilt this exactly the same, only with the sleeker wing form, that she would work witht he .049. Oh, well. such is the black art of aircraft design....sometimes the little things can add up!!
ZoomZoom-RCU is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 11:28 AM
  #16
hllywdb
 
hllywdb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Vero Beach, FL
Posts: 1,052
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

Use an APC 5.7X3, the 6X4 won't let it get into it's power range and you will be in the same boat. It's not a Cox motor.
hllywdb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 01:33 PM
  #17
Andrew
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Murray, KY
Posts: 3,187
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power


Quote:
ORIGINAL: hllywdb

Use an APC 5.7X3, the 6X4 won't let it get into it's power range and you will be in the same boat. It's not a Cox motor.
Agreed - the NORVELs are timed to turn up; the 6x4 is too much.
Andrew is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 03:03 PM
  #18
combatpigg
 
combatpigg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: arlington, WA
Posts: 19,891
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

All of the .049 engines I ever tested showed a reduction in power with a 6x4....it's just a slight overload for .049s. The 6x4 is a very good size for .074s and up to .12 powered planes if those planes are designed for speed.
combatpigg is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 03:08 PM
  #19
airraptor
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: fairfield, CA
Posts: 4,111
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

get a norvel or the newer NV .074 abd run a APC 6.3x4 prop. this is a classified as a combat prop but is the best prop for this engine and most all sport planes. break it in on the APC 6x4 gas prop the put the 6.3 on it.
airraptor is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2013, 10:14 AM
  #20
gcb
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Port Ewen, NY
Posts: 3,440
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

ZZ,

Since you mentioned the thick draggy wing I would suggest an APC 6x2 prop. As everyone mentioned, the NORVEL engines need to rev to get up on their power curve and to maintain good venturi (carb) velocity.

If you like warbirds in that size range check with Eric Clutton (the diesel guy). He created several for the PAW .06 diesel.

George
gcb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 07:52 AM
  #21
MJD
 
MJD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Orangeville, ON, CANADA
Posts: 8,605
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

Ditto on the 6x4, never found a 1/2A or 1cc engine (other than diesel) that is happy on that prop. The .074 is a different matter, it has 50% more displacement than an .049 and 25% more than an .061. Like others here I always peg 6x3 as the largest load I'll put on a glow 1/2A. Naturally this does not apply to Texaco engines or other unique application, but this is not one of those. This is a situation where you need all the power the engine has to offer and you want it singing in the happy place in it's powerband.

With the thick wing, running higher pitch than recommended is the opposite of the direction you really want to go. I think you'll be fine swinging a 6x3 at decent rpm. You can always try others.

MJD is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 12:26 PM
  #22
combatpigg
 
combatpigg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: arlington, WA
Posts: 19,891
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

My first RC plane was an Airtronics Olympic 650 glider with a 6 foot span. The plane had a hollowed pine nose block full of lead to get it to balance. I have no idea what it weighed but I used to fly it with one of my TD .049 "combat" engines with a 5x3 prop, hogged out venturi and latex bladder for the fuel supply. The engine was mounted above the wing. It was a strange combination of extreme noise and lack of airspeed but a 2 or 3 minute engine run would eventually turn that slow moving plane into a tiny speck.
Years later I tried powering a HOB P51 with the same set up and the plane would barely clear the ground on a hand launch and it was a real pig to fly. Same goes for a SST kit that I got from Hobby Shack for $19.99. A friend took the SST and installed a Medallion .09 in it and the plane was a great flyer after that. I put a OS .15 in the HOB P51 and that plane became a pleasure to fly with a 7x5 prop.
The lesson learned was by building the so-called "1/2 A" commercial kits and seeing first hand why they failed as good flyers with 1/2A power. They were just way over built and built with heavy wood in areas where heavy wood isn't wanted or needed.
It is almost impossible to build a Cox .049 powered RC plane too lightly..I've tried.
Someday I'd like to revisit the SST design and build one that comes in under 12 ounces for TD .049 / Cyclon power. This is where the hobby becomes the most fun for me.
combatpigg is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 04:38 PM
  #23
MJD
 
MJD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Orangeville, ON, CANADA
Posts: 8,605
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

Late '80's I scratch built a generic shoulder wing model for a Black Widow, pretty much ugly stick layout but more normal surfaces. The fuse was 1/16" with light built up formers, the wing used 1/32" D-box and cap strips, nice 6lb C-grain tail surfaces etc., all covered in one of those light synthetic fabrics and a clear coat over the oil-prone areas. The arifoil came from a Top Flite combat kitten, a generic symmetrical section. Wing was maybe 6x32". And quite nontraditional (this is for you CP) was the firewall, just big enough for the BW backplate. All up weight 12-13oz. On a Black Widow and 5x3 prop it hauled butt. Of course top speed is capped by prop pitch and that wing, but it was brisk, accelerated hard off the hand launch, had huge vertical, rolled like crazy, and glided like a feather. I even managed to thermal it a couple of times.

The point of this being that it was such a huge leap in performance compared to the Mini Falcon / Mini Fledgling / typical half-A of the day, it kind of took me by surprise. And it was all about weight. Above that it had good proportions and sealed hinge gaps. A guy from Toronto who built a lot of small models, .020 - .049 RC sport stuff, took it for one flight and said "that's the best flying 1/2A airplane I have ever seen".

I have an old Mini Falcon fuselage downstairs built by a buddy - without engine, gear, or wing it weighs more than most of my current 1/2A models.

These days with every day radio gear so small and light there is far less excuse for any 1/2A model to have to fly like a brick. Well, except maybe for the status quo of the readily accessible decent performance 1/2A engine market which is kinda the OP's problem, ain't it. Pretty much the opposite of 20 years back. Mind you if you're willing to lay down $160.00 - $225.00 for a high end engine, you can go like a buggered ape any time you want. If you are happy without throttle, don't mind pressure fuel systems, or propping your engine for 25k+ that is.

MJD is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 04:51 PM
  #24
MJD
 
MJD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Orangeville, ON, CANADA
Posts: 8,605
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power

There's a Norvel .074 on the large auction site, plus a few TD's right now.
MJD is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 05:37 PM
  #25
Andrew
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Murray, KY
Posts: 3,187
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: More Power


Quote:
ORIGINAL: MJD

............The point of this being that it was such a huge leap in performance compared to the Mini Falcon / Mini Fledgling / typical half-A of the day, it kind of took me by surprise. And it was all about weight. Above that it had good proportions and sealed hinge gaps.
The designs of that time frame were built like tanks and heavy. It would have seemed that with the heavier radios that every effort would have been made to keep the planes very light, but I suppose they were building to crash and not to fly.
Andrew is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:06 AM.