Notices
Electric Pattern Aircraft Discuss epowered pattern aircraft in this forum
View Poll Results: Which airframe for FAI
Krill Spark Evo
5
8.20%
SebArt Mythos
20
32.79%
BJ Episode
17
27.87%
BJ Bi-Sode
19
31.15%
Voters: 61. You may not vote on this poll

Decisions Decisions

Old 11-11-2013, 04:51 AM
  #26  
Neilbo4
Thread Starter
 
Neilbo4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Perry Hall, MD
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Hey Ryan, thanks for your input. I have been looking at the Neu motor pretty closely. What ESC are you planning on running? Castle 80HV?

Neil
Old 11-11-2013, 04:55 AM
  #27  
AmericanSpectre505
 
AmericanSpectre505's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Posts: 1,238
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Neil,

I'm currently not sponsored by anyone at the moment by my choice, so I'll give you my opinion and advice, for what it's worth.

The NUE F3A is a fantastic power house, but it requires more maintenance and can be a bit un friendly to new EP pilots (Great motor I flew Archie's Miss Wind three rounds in 2010, while on leave and loved the motor). The AXi is a good motor but heavy and doesn't swing the big props. Ryan already gave you the scoop on the E-Flight 180. The A60-7S-V2 is a great affordable motor and its light and efficient. I ran one in my converted Black Magic VF3 in 2012 as a test motor (excellent motor). I am currently running a Q80-14XS in my BJ Craft Nuance. The Q80 is a very strong and efficient motor, but you are limited to the speed controller due to the stator/ winding design from what I am told (The Hacker A60-7S-V2 works great with the castle HV 80 and has all the power I needed for FAI). The Q80 will not run on the CC 80 HV, Mezon, Jetti spin 99 pro (what I'm using and I believe A.J. is still using it). I am very happy with the Q80 and will put one in my EPIC (Q80-13XS), whenever it gets here.

Other motors to consider; New MPI HI-MAXX 6330-210 another great motor( lighter). The Pletty Advance is another very efficient and super strong motor (difficult to get and the reason I went with the Hacker Q80. The Shulman FURY is a very strong motor and affordable and Dualsky has a new motor that is light and very strong.

Another thing to consider, most newer airframes are designed more for nose mounted out runners or in-runners like the NUE or Hacker in-runner and most new airframes do not come with a firewall for rear mounted motors.

I have run the Pletty 30-10 EVO, great power and fairly efficient.
I have run the Hacker A-60-7S-V2 (extreamely happy with the motor for $214.00 and $165.00 for a CC HV 80)
I am running the Q80-14XS, also very happy with the setup, but more costly dollar wise at $550.00 and $200.00+ for the appropriate ESC.

Ulitmately, I'd fly what is more prevalent in the district you fly, so you have some additional support.

Bill



Originally Posted by Ryan Smith
I flew the Power 180 in an Oxai Splendor this year and it had a ton of power. I flew Dave Lockhart's Bravo with Neu F3A and liked it a lot. Very strong power, but more importantly, incredible braking and a constant speed. The Power 180 was happy with a 20x13W (originally APC, then Dave let me borrow a Wistmodel carbon 21x13W at the Nats. I believe Falcon has a 21.5x13 that performs similarly to the 21x13W. Something I would be very interested to try on the outrunners is one of the new Mejzlik 3-blade F3A propellers. FWIW, the Neu is going to be my preferred setup this year, provided I can get my act together.

Last edited by AmericanSpectre505; 11-11-2013 at 05:04 AM.
Old 11-11-2013, 05:18 AM
  #28  
Neilbo4
Thread Starter
 
Neilbo4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Perry Hall, MD
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Hi Bill,

Thank you for the candid response. I am somewhat partial to Hacker motors only because of the electric motor experience I have, they have all been Hacker motors. I think my ideal setup would be the Hacker Q80-13 or 14XS but like you said that route is a but more costly. What is the advantage in running the Q80-13/14XS vs. the A60-7S?

Neil
Old 11-11-2013, 05:24 AM
  #29  
Neilbo4
Thread Starter
 
Neilbo4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Perry Hall, MD
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

double post
Old 11-11-2013, 06:07 AM
  #30  
AmericanSpectre505
 
AmericanSpectre505's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Posts: 1,238
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Hey Neil,

The advantage,..ummmm? Probably more Q80's out there than the A60-7S. The Q80 has a bit more power perhaps, but not by much in my opinion. I put my Spin 99 on the A60-7S to see, if there was a difference. I definately gained more power using a the same F3A Unlimited 35C-5100. For the money you can't beat the setup cost of the A60-7S. The draw back for me is installing a fire wall for the A60-7S and the ease of servicing it. The front mounted system is much quicker to install and you can swap motors very quickly, if need be. I can have my Q80 in and out in about 10 minutes or less. The A60-7S about 20 the way I had mine mounted (look at the build thread of the EPIC by JAS, perhaps a firewall idea like his would be the way to go?

I would run the A60-7S-V2 again and I may install one in my Nuance and just put the Q80-14XS in the EPIC.

The battery selection is also important. I purchased 4 sets of Zippy Compact 5000 to practice with and even fly local contest with, until I moved up to better packs. The Zippys are only 25 C packs and the F3AU packs are 35C and the New TP G8's are 25C, but feel more like 35C packs. The Zippy packs are not as strong as the TP or the F3A packs, but a great practice pack for the money. I know you have done you're homework and I'm just sharing some practical testing I've done to help me understand EP better.

Bill

Originally Posted by Neilbo4
Hi Bill,

Thank you for the candid response. I am somewhat partial to Hacker motors only because of the electric motor experience I have, they have all been Hacker motors. I think my ideal setup would be the Hacker Q80-13 or 14XS but like you said that route is a but more costly. What is the advantage in running the Q80-13/14XS vs. the A60-7S?

Neil
Old 11-11-2013, 06:18 AM
  #31  
AmericanSpectre505
 
AmericanSpectre505's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Posts: 1,238
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Ohh, and the Q80-13XS from what I was told has a 57KV difference to the 14XS. The 13XS is a slightly faster flying setup over the 14XS, but I have zero practical experience with the 13XS. You might want to send A.J a PM and ask him his opinion, as he has run both.

Bill

Last edited by AmericanSpectre505; 11-11-2013 at 06:20 AM.
Old 11-11-2013, 09:22 AM
  #32  
Neilbo4
Thread Starter
 
Neilbo4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Perry Hall, MD
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Hey Bill, thanks again for all your replies, I appreciate all the information you have provided.

I can see how the mounting of the A60-7S can be a bit of a downside when compared to the Q80. After looking through some of the threads on various 2M planes, it seems a handful of people have successfully installed a firewall and mounted motors similar to the A60-7S. With the price difference in mind I am leaning towards going with the A60-7S and retrofitting a firewall in the airframe.

I agree, battery selection is extremely important. I have heard good things about the Zippy compacts and your experiences confirm what others have said. Good bang for your buck, not quite as much power as TP but for half the cost that is what I would expect. I have also been toying with the idea of running an 8S setup for two reasons: I currently have 8S packs and 8S is a little bit lighter than a 10S setup. But I would have to change my motor choice if I were to decide on 8S. If I can get a 2M plane ready to fly to weigh in around 4550 grams with a motor setup producing between 2500-2600 watts, I think 8S would be good.

Neil

Last edited by Neilbo4; 11-11-2013 at 09:56 AM.
Old 11-11-2013, 10:04 AM
  #33  
AmericanSpectre505
 
AmericanSpectre505's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Posts: 1,238
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

My pleasure,... The firewall template for the Nuance is the same as the Episode and the Prolog, so that firewall template is available. I believe, I have it saved to my files, if you go the Episode route.

The 8s may end up lighter, but the efficiencey is not the same as a 10S setup from what I have read. You may find out that 4550 may just be to light of a set up. In my experience these planes fly best around 10.5 lbs for all conditions for the wing loading. I think 10lbs with batteries ready to fly would be difficult, not impossible. I think the new MPI Hi-MAXX 6330-210 is expected to be around 560 grams and it's around $279.00 maybe (still rear mounted). The Hacker A60-7S-V2 is about 590, mine was and the Q80 is the lightest of the bunch.




Unrelated question you can PM me if you want.

JTEC Radiowave 39% 330LX with a DA-150 stock or with cans, will it have enough power for unlimited at 39 lbs or will it need pipes? The first one I had in 2003, I lost weeks before the Don Lowe Masters and it was 43.5+ pounds stock with a DA-150 and challenged for sequences back then. I have never flown the second one, as I always migrate back to my Carden Cap. I also have a 38% GP Extra 330S and it's not impressing at the moment, its fun! I ran the Air Models 31x11 on the first Extra and it was great, 32x10 did not have the mojo and was scary pulling out of T-Rolls. Just looking for your opinion, since I've been away from it for so long. Trying not to buy a 170....


bill


Originally Posted by Neilbo4
Hey Bill, thanks again for all your replies, I appreciate all the information you have provided.

I can see how the mounting of the A60-7S can be a bit of a downside when compared to the Q80. After looking through some of the threads on various 2M planes, it seems a handful of people have successfully installed a firewall and mounted motors similar to the A60-7S. With the price difference in mind I am leaning towards going with the A60-7S and retrofitting a firewall in the airframe.

I agree, battery selection is extremely important. I have heard good things about the Zippy compacts and your experiences confirm what others have said. Good bang for your buck, not quite as much power as TP but for half the cost that is what I would expect. I have also been toying with the idea of running an 8S setup for two reasons: I currently have 8S packs and 8S is a little bit lighter than a 10S setup. But I would have to change my motor choice if I were to decide on 8S. If I can get a 2M plane ready to fly to weigh in around 4550 grams with a motor setup producing around 2600 watts, I think 8S would be good.

Neil
Old 11-11-2013, 01:19 PM
  #34  
Neilbo4
Thread Starter
 
Neilbo4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Perry Hall, MD
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I understand Bill, there in my opinion there is definitely such a thing as a airplane that is "too" light for sequence work so I appreciate you pointing me in the direction of 10.5 pounds. I will look into the Himaxx motor you are referring too as it sounds promising.

Sent you a PM.

Neil
Old 11-18-2013, 09:28 AM
  #35  
Chris Moon
My Feedback: (8)
 
Chris Moon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Leesburg, VA
Posts: 1,366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

The BiSide and Episode are both available (and in stock) in ARC versions if you want to do a personalized scheme. The Plettenberg Advance is limited in the amount they can make and typically sell out within 1 day after they arrive. The factory is sending us more today so we should have them in a week or so. The Q80 is a great motor as well but you need a controller that works well with a 28 pole motor (Jeti or YGE typically). The firewall mounted motors, Himax, Hacker 7S, Eflite are all good options as well the only downside is fabricating a firewall which is not very difficult and the reduction in airflow to the ESC and batteries due to the firewall blocking some airflow (even with plenty of cutouts in the firewall). If you are flying FAI then really any of the listed planes will fill the bill and all except the Spark are readily in stock in the US today. And I would not try the 8S power idea, been tried many times before and nobody stuck with it. You need much higher amps and subsequent heat and inefficiency in an 8S vs a 10S setup.
Old 11-18-2013, 09:36 PM
  #36  
Doug Cronkhite
My Feedback: (34)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 3,821
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 8 Posts
Default

The OS controller works well with 28 pole motors too.
Old 11-19-2013, 05:22 AM
  #37  
AmericanSpectre505
 
AmericanSpectre505's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Posts: 1,238
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Hey Doug,

I know it works fine with the A60-7S-V2, so it will work with the Q80's? I was told it would not, if it does that's great and certainly a cheaper option.

Bill

Originally Posted by Doug Cronkhite
The OS controller works well with 28 pole motors too.
Old 11-19-2013, 05:56 AM
  #38  
rcpattern
My Feedback: (45)
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Great Mills, MD
Posts: 2,861
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

The OS wont work with the Q80 as you can't adjust the timing. It will handle the poles, but wont let you adjust the timing of the controller to match the Q80. I've never tried it on the A60, but I know several who tried it on the Q80 and it wont work. I know the A60 works fine with the Castle controllers, but the Q80 doesn't. I don't think its a pole issue, I think it is something else, and I know Castle is working on it.

Arch
Old 11-19-2013, 06:07 AM
  #39  
AmericanSpectre505
 
AmericanSpectre505's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Posts: 1,238
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

That's what I was told in reference to the OS ESC and the Futaba MC 9100 when I went asking questions about using it with the Q80. I was just wondering what combination of motor/ESC Doug tried it on or had advance knowledge of. Thinking, perhaps a "new development" in the OS ESC might accomediate the Q80?

bill

Originally Posted by rcpattern
The OS wont work with the Q80 as you can't adjust the timing. It will handle the poles, but wont let you adjust the timing of the controller to match the Q80. I've never tried it on the A60, but I know several who tried it on the Q80 and it wont work. I know the A60 works fine with the Castle controllers, but the Q80 doesn't. I don't think its a pole issue, I think it is something else, and I know Castle is working on it.

Arch
Old 11-19-2013, 06:46 AM
  #40  
rcpattern
My Feedback: (45)
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Great Mills, MD
Posts: 2,861
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Last I heard they were working on it, but not released yet. I could be wrong, but that was the last info I had,

Arch
Old 11-19-2013, 07:11 AM
  #41  
SAB
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: West of Scotland, UK
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 7 Posts
Default

First with apologies to the OP for continuing off topic - I have the OS controller, with a Hacker A60-5S (28 pole) on 8S (Mythos 125) I had slight loss of Sync at the Hacker recommended timing of 25 degrees which was cured by adjusting the timing to 22 degrees. Recently replaced the 5S motor with the A60-7XS (also 28 pole) - saving a whopping 140g & therefore allowing me to put the CG further back, anyway the loss of sync issue could not be fixed by timing - tried down to 10 degrees but was still terrible - solution has been a CC ICE 100 that I already had - and even that required some tinkering. Tried the latest firmware (4.19) that was supposed to be for high pole motors - didn't work, power cuts significantly at 60% throttle so went back to V3.27 with low timing, 12KHz PWM rate and all good

Steve
Old 01-07-2014, 07:37 AM
  #42  
jim woodward
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: boca raton, FL
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Neil,

Welcome to the group! I've been catching up on pattern again myself. One thing not mentioned yet, so I'll go ahead and do so now, is that if you read up on the planes mentioned on the RCU threads, you will need to accurately measure the plane (any of them) to ensure you know what the incidence setup is prior to flying. These are higher end ARF's, but still have some issues here and there. Getting to the best straight baseline airframe should be a first goal, before flying. After a few flights you'll have questions or observations, and in order for anyone to help they will begin asking questions about the incidents, thrust, CG. Pattern planes are very capable airframes and small angular differences between the engine, wing, stab, canalizer, on these planes make a big difference on the end result. Note that I didn't say "mix-free".

Set the airspeed you want to fly at (prop & throttle curve), get the CG you want (spin entries, inverted 45 uplines (upwind and downwind), landing, and general ease of rolling maneuvers), check for heavy wing in flight (long dive, sharp pull outs). Start getting a sense of knife-edge mixes.

Jumping into FAI - here is one universal truth - if you want to fly and have a presentation like the top guys (which seems to be a slower controlled speed flight), you'll need to match their setup closely. For instance, its almost impossible (or at least a hell of a lot more work), to fly super slow with a nose heavy plane. So set the speed you want to fly first, then go after the other trim elements.

I fly a lot of Unlimited in the SE. The iMac planes simply don't respond the same way F3A planes do to small airframe adjustments. The iMac sequences and application of the judging criteria do not carry the harsh penalty that pattern does for wind correction, heading control, and flying and sizing maneuvers "in the box." They are both GREAT fun, and I think you will be in for a great and enjoyable challenge!
Thanks,
Jim W.

Last edited by jim woodward; 01-07-2014 at 07:56 AM.
Old 01-07-2014, 08:46 AM
  #43  
Silent-AV8R
 
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jim woodward
The iMac sequences and application of the judging criteria do not carry the harsh penalty that pattern does for wind correction, heading control, and flying and sizing maneuvers "in the box." .
One small comment. In pattern it takes a 15 degree deviation to earn a 1 point deduction. In IMAC you get a 1 point deduction for a 10 degree deviation. So, in that sense, IMAC uses a more stringent standard for awarding deductions.

Pattern and IMAC both judge track and not heading, so I'm not sure what you meant by the heading reference. Same goes for wind correction. And again, for all of these things IMAC uses a 1 point per 10 degrees versus 1 point for 15 degrees.

Pattern does use a box and since IMAC does not, the pattern scoring is certainly more stringent in that regard.
Old 01-07-2014, 09:01 AM
  #44  
jim woodward
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: boca raton, FL
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Silent-AV8R -

Let me clarify - "heading-control" is a pilot skill that yields the track (track being judged). In Pattern, one bad maneuver can lead to the next maneuver being "out of the box", and perhaps even the next maneuver being severely penalized for being too far in/out, etc. So one heading-control mistake can accumulate to severe penalties. The iMac scoring is more forgiving in that the "one bad" maneuver doesn't typically lead to further severe reductions because typically the deadline isn't being crossed.

My perception is that 1 pt / 15 deg, 150-175 meters, and the 60 deg box, equate to harsher application of point deductions than 1 pt / 10 deg, deadline, and ACS. Again, both disciplines are really great fun. (Also, no 1/2 points in F3A). Just describing some differences. Everyone is human, heading control (and speed) management will cost your pattern score dearly against the box.
Thx,
Jim W.

Last edited by jim woodward; 01-07-2014 at 09:03 AM.

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


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.