wildnloose

But I believe that is on a os 160/pipe combo; which, if memory serves me correct, will turn the apc 18x6w approx. 9500rpm's(at least my friends' does this good). I bet the numbers will be closer on the ys 140 sport.

Jonathan.Lam

how well does the os 160 fx perform on this plane?
and wat will it sound like with an pitts style muffler? - as i still want a scale type of noise

any updates on the build?

MikeEast

My Feedback: (3)

lol, I have not run an OS 1.60 before but I have been them on planes of this size. Should work ok.

I am installing the engine right now. Stay tuned.

Jonathan.Lam

wat about the engine noise?
rememba if i get this engine i'll put an pitts style muffler

wat would it sound like?

MikeEast

My Feedback: (3)

vroom vroom??? It would sound like your engine on a Pitts muffler..

Jonathan.Lam

watZz the noise of that?[sm=71_71.gif]

av yu got video of it?

MikeEast

My Feedback: (3)

nevermind. I was just pulling your chain. I have no idea how to describe what it will sound like with a Pitts Muffler. I dont have any video of the OS 1.60, perhaps someone else might.

OK here is the engine installation. Nothing to it really. Just a standard engine installation. Edit: You cannot actually use the supplied mount with a YS 1.40 or 1.60 due to the vibration. You have to use a vibration dampening mount like a Hyde mount.

panicman

sounds like a dirt bike, not scale at all. a little loud to, if you have noise restrictions at your field you may not pass.

Maudib

My Feedback: (51)

It's not to bad... not quite the annoying whine of smaller two strokes... but it does have that ringa-zing-zing of a small motorcycle...

I did the review for the GP CAP232... ti has the 1.60FX and Bisson Pitts muffler... see it's video here:

http://vidcache.rcuniverse.com/rcuvi...2/GPCAP232.wmv

It's got a music bed.. but you can clearly hear it through several parts...

MikeEast

My Feedback: (3)

Thanks David.

Jonathan.Lam

Thanks

mike is the engine mount good enough for a ys 160? wouldnt there be a load of vibration without a soft mount?

MikeEast

My Feedback: (3)

I am still thinking about this as I am un uncharted waters. That is considering using a YS engine without a Hyde Mount. I have mounted lots of YS 1.40s and this 1.60 but have never tried to run w/o a Hyde mount.

I have been reading up on it and I think that if current drain from vibration is the only issue that I need to concern myself with then the hard mount should be ok since i am using a Lithium Ion setup and 5955TG's which can handle the vibration of a large gas engine. This should be nothing compared to the vibration my BME 110 dishes out at low RPMs.. Also, I have 4800mah packs and I should be able to get several flights even if the drain is higher.

A Hyde "Type A" mount (no nose ring required) is $130 so unless I just absolutely have to have it I hate to spend the additional $$ unnecessarily.

All that being said, if I crank this thing up and the vibration is too bad then I will pickup a Hyde Mount.

I have a Hyde AR Mount but there is no way to mount a nose ring on this thing.

Any of you guys have experience with YS 1.40/1.60 engines on hard mounts?

Ian.W

no, but on the note of vibration v. current drain, with a Hacker C50 in the nose, running 5 digis flying full 3D and freestyle type flying, i use about 100mAh a flight. very good! IC will use way way more, so a hard mounted YS160 could be a problem. Everyone here in the UK will recoment the Hyde ARI (with the nose ring), its about the best mount and aparently worth every penny.

Maudib

My Feedback: (51)

WOW... a 1.60DZ at $640 and another $230 for a soft mount... you are at nearly $900 shipped.

Seems to me that a fella could go 50cc gas for the same money he'd have in this glow size outfitted with this setup. (DA50 with stock muffler $670 the extra $230 to go for the airframe and and extra battery/kill switch)

I'm glad I have the OS 1.60FX and Bisson Pitts... at $310 (with tower deal) it seems more "monetarily suited" to this airframe. And with proper spinner and prop balancing... the 1.60 isn't notorious for pounding the plane with vibration.

Still on the fence about trying a Brillelli 40 in it though... but the 1.60 and lipo/reg sure would be light...

MikeEast

My Feedback: (3)

Yeah, actually Merles make a Hyde mount that is only $125 that does not require a nose ring. I talked to Dave at YS last night and he concurs that there is no hard mount that will suffice so I am going to have to pickup a soft mount. I am working on that today. No big deal, the motor didnt take long to mount and it was a good learning for me. [8D]

A 50cc is not going to work I dont think, a DA is about a pound heavier, plus the weight of the muffler. Plus its just way too much engine.

I will get the mount coming and go from there. [8D]

Thanks guys.

MikeEast

My Feedback: (3)

GREAT news... After talking with Merle Hyde for about 30 minutes I think I know what mount we need to use..

He suggested that I go with the Hyde Mount Firm Idle MKII Type C (no nosering). Its a fairly new design from Hyde Mount. The vibration wear reduction is 35% vs 60% with the $220 ARI type mount but he said that you should still net a substantial increase in the life of your equipment and the number of flights between charges. Features include pre drilled holes that will put the engine thrust washer at 6 3/8" (perfect) from the firewall. The best part is the mount is only $65, a $160 savings and he said it will perform beautifully especially with all of the cowl clearance a Yak has in the nose. He said all you need is about 5 thousandths additonal clearance for movement.
The mount has 2 sets of bolt holes that will fit Enya, Webra, OS, YS, and even the new OS 200 among others.

Generally he said although its not "as" efficient as the softer mounts, it is plenty adequate and should allow the gear to last aboust as long as gear in a standard mount with a different engine..


Here is a link to the website that carries them, mine should be here Saturday.
I asked Central how well they are holding up, and they said that they have had nothing but positive feedback from those who are using them with large YS engines.
http://www.centralhobbies.com/Engine...hydmnts.html#c

wildnloose

I was just going to comment on this...it works beautifully...

T. Bob

My Feedback: (9)

$279.95

Sounds like a pretty good racket to get into.

You guys have waaaaay too much money.

STG

My Feedback: (26)

Yes, my thrust pull tests show that the APC 18x6W did pull 1/2 to 1 pound harder than the Skorepa 18x6 @ ~20 pounds. Spool really is good with the APC, but it is instantaneous with the Skorepa. The way I like to power planes (for 3D and IMAC) I can give up a pound our two of static thrust(on an 11 pound plane) and not know the difference. When power is marginal, though, the best pulling prop can make a difference. I like saving 2.5oz off the plane & taking it off of centrifugal mass is all the better. The motor follows my throttle inputs closer and that is important to me as mine is continually on the move.

The sound of the (for instance O.S. 1.6 on pitts) motor has a lot to do with your flying style and prop you are using (and the beauty lies in the ears of the beholder). There are guys at the field flying the exact plane set up the same as mine and they fly very fast at high throttle settings. They allow the motor to spool up to high revs (mid 9’s) and it does have that “winding� noise. I like to fly slower (most of the time) at lower throttle settings—full throttle only happens when I want to accelerate fast.

On my 11 pound plane with OS160 and pitts (I removed the pipe to bring CG forward—extra power was not needed) I have found that I like the Skorepa 19x7. It only turns just over 8,000 and pulls 1.25 pounds less than the APC 18x6W static (only 17.25 pounds on a very hot humid day@1,250 feet), but the motor sounds very good to my ear (like a small gasser) at this lower rpm when I am 3Ding in close & down lines are noticeably slower. I would not recommend this prop on the OS160 with pitts to others that run the motor leaner and fly at high throttle settings. It works well on my light plane at lower throttle settings (my flying style).

STG

My Feedback: (26)

Don't forget running costs--if you fly a lot. 30% v.s. 5% -- Really, though, this is just a hobby and not everyone is into thrift.

This is why I sold my YS 4 stroke and went to OS 2 stoke (higher cost of fuel). I had 2 similar planes, one with a YS and the other with the OS--each time I went to go flying I thought to myself do I want this to cost me $5.00 in fuel or $13.00 in fuel. Long story short is that the OS got the nod almost all the time.

It is harder to get a OS 2 stroke running as well as a YS or SA 4 stroke (I like my motors very crisp--following throttle stick). The 2 stroke is much more sensitive to the optimal needle settings and a lot a people do not like spend time working on the initial tune (which may require a pump or pressurized fuel system).

MikeEast

My Feedback: (3)

OK,
Today I did some work installing the rudder and elevator servos and getting everything setup.

The design location is to mount the tank on the front tray in front of the CG.

However decided to mount the tank directly on the CG so I did a modification to get it under the wingtube and on the CG.
Here is what I did.
1. I cut out the section of the former that is in the way.
2. The cutout just so happens to fit nicely against what is left of the former below and makes a nice platform for the tank to sit on.
a. So I used the cutout as a template and cutout a second piece. 1 for in front of the former, 1 behind.
3. I epoxied the cutouts to the former below and let it dry. You can see I added a small spacer in the center to give it a little more strength.
4. I cutout 2 vertical supports to connect the lower part of the fomer back to the center of the former.
5. Last I cutout a horizontal piece the width of the former at the top of the new support former for the tank and epoxied it all together.
6. Last I trimmed out the rearward plate on the landing gear mount so that the tank would slide forward under the wingtube and land directly over the CG. (see this pic later in this thread)

The tank now sits just beneath the wingtube and almost right on the recommended cg of 6" behind the trailing edge.

I also mounted the cowl support plates but I will post that when I mount the cowl.

Maudib

My Feedback: (51)

Nice work and figurmatin'

Seems like a great on CG solution with no strength loss...

Keep it comin'

MikeEast

My Feedback: (3)

Thanks![8D] I just sortof got lucky that the piece fit so perfectly.

OK here is the cowl installation. It came out nice and clean.

aslan

Hello there,
I certainly am no expert here Mike, but should the tank be on the tray between the engine box and wing tube?

Maudib

My Feedback: (51)

Aslan,

Mike WANTS to move the tank below the tube and onto CG. With his YS, he is pumped... so distance from the engine is no issue. The feature of this is that as the 20 oz of fuel is used up it doesn't change CG and go less noseheavy.

For many it's not a real big thing... but when it's in the nose... that 20 oz makes you very noseheavy... and slowly chages over the flight. WIth an on CG install... ther is little to no change... so the plane flies the same from the first drop to the last... (Hope you don't drain the tank that much though)

Without a pump added to say a 1.60 or other non pumped engine... you may have issues with fuel draw causing the engine to go lean... An Iron Bay/Cline Regulator or Perry pump is usually added in those cases.