New Evolution 10cc gas engine
10-10-2015, 10:22 AM
#2101
Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Redmond,
OR
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The muffler does not look the same as the on the Horizon web site. It looks like the same configuration as the 15gx2. My brother had one and it fell apart after a few flights. I hope this does better.
Bruce
Bruce
10-11-2015, 11:08 AM
#2102
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sun City West, AZ
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just completed 4 12 min flights. Needle valves are far less critical than my older 10cc. Getting about the same rpm with break-in props. Fourth engine run with 12x6 APC max rpm a little over 10,000. Mufflers is holding together, had to re-torque mounting bolt twice. RPM holds steady throughout the flight.
10-11-2015, 01:09 PM
#2103
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central California,
CA
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you guys think the new case is a direct swap with the old one?I just ordered(back ordered)the new carb and case.I did the carb swap on my 15gx had to file the fins in front of the carb and drilled through mounting lug for the pulse line.I put it in my ultra stick 60 and it pulls it around really well,not as good as my os 75ax but I didn't really think it would.
Later Jim
Later Jim
10-11-2015, 03:08 PM
#2104
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sun City West, AZ
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you guys think the new case is a direct swap with the old one?I just ordered(back ordered)the new carb and case.I did the carb swap on my 15gx had to file the fins in front of the carb and drilled through mounting lug for the pulse line.I put it in my ultra stick 60 and it pulls it around really well,not as good as my os 75ax but I didn't really think it would.
Later Jim
Later Jim
10-15-2015, 03:07 PM
#2106
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: saluda,
SC
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How is everyone liking the new pump carb engines.I traded a while back my 15cc plane.Thought maybe of trying the newer engine out.General Hobby has a nice looking Sukhoi.They say its 40 size,but it has 60" width wings.15 might work well in it.Not many 50 size planes out there to choose from I like.
10-16-2015, 09:25 AM
#2108
My Feedback: (2)
I wouldn't hesitate for a minute regarding a single battery setup. That battery would not be my choice though. Whether or not the NiMh works out ok for you is going to depend on what kind of plane you're talking about, along with what type (digital or analog), number and size servos you plan on. A Cub or trainer on 4 servos might be OK. Anything beyond that, and I'd go with the newer batt. technology.
10-18-2015, 10:13 AM
#2109
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sun City West, AZ
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last edited by DCGayhart; 10-18-2015 at 12:41 PM.
10-23-2015, 11:52 AM
#2110
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sun City West, AZ
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have 10-10 min flights on the new pumped engine The engine now tacks 9600 on the ground with an APC 13x7 and the Radial Rocket is at 80 MPH straight and level.
10-23-2015, 04:27 PM
#2112
My Feedback: (11)
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Beverly Hills, FL
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: General Hobby Sukhoi 60"
Friend has this plane with a Evolution 10cc engine in it. A real rocket and needs to be toned down as the flight controls are very effective. Plane is well constructed and very attractive. 15cc might be a bit much.
Friend has this plane with a Evolution 10cc engine in it. A real rocket and needs to be toned down as the flight controls are very effective. Plane is well constructed and very attractive. 15cc might be a bit much.
10-26-2015, 08:35 AM
#2114
Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Champaign,
IL
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure this is TMI for many of you, but there is no witchcraft or magic going on with the ignition and battery circuits.The EVO engine, and the new DLE's, CDI's will work well with the 4.8 volt packs only if there is nothing else in the circuit that may reduce the voltage to the CDI.
One problem I found, that is common to most of the CDI's that say they will work with 4.8 volts to 8.4 volts, is that they are very sensitive to lower voltages compared to the old CDI's. BTW the 4.8 volt number is not really a "minimum" voltage, it is a "nominal" number, it actually represents about 4.1 to 5.8 volts for the operating voltage depending on the battery type. They won't work with lower voltages like the old CDI's that were designed for 6 volts MAX.
If an ignition battery eliminator circuit (IBEC) is used with a 4.8 volt pack, the ignition will be getting about 1.2 volts LESS than the battery voltage. The new CDI's will quit at about 3.2 volts, at the input to the ignition, which means 4.4 volts at the battery. The old 4.8 to 6 volt range CDI's would work with a battery voltage down to 4 volts, or about 2.8 volts at the CDI, so they did not have the problem unless the battery voltage dipped lower than 4 volts during aggressive flying.
I found this out when I used an IBEC in order to get an electronic switch to cut off the ignition. With the 4 cell NIMH battery pack, the setup would only work with fresh batteries, after a few minutes, or under a heavy load, like knife edge flight, the battery voltage would drop too low for the CDI to work properly and the engine would run rough and much slower.
The bottom line is that the new CDI's need about 400 more millivolts, on the low end, to operate than the old CDI's. I'm sure that was the design trade-off to get the expanded voltage range of 4.8 to 8.4 volts (actually 3.2 volts on the low end) from the old range of 4.8 to 6 volts (actually 2.8 volts on the low end) without doing a major design change. The manufacturers have never said that the "actual" minimum voltage for their ignitions have gone up by 0.4 volts. The NIMH five cell pack, or 2S pack will prevent the low voltage problems with the new ignitions.
One problem I found, that is common to most of the CDI's that say they will work with 4.8 volts to 8.4 volts, is that they are very sensitive to lower voltages compared to the old CDI's. BTW the 4.8 volt number is not really a "minimum" voltage, it is a "nominal" number, it actually represents about 4.1 to 5.8 volts for the operating voltage depending on the battery type. They won't work with lower voltages like the old CDI's that were designed for 6 volts MAX.
If an ignition battery eliminator circuit (IBEC) is used with a 4.8 volt pack, the ignition will be getting about 1.2 volts LESS than the battery voltage. The new CDI's will quit at about 3.2 volts, at the input to the ignition, which means 4.4 volts at the battery. The old 4.8 to 6 volt range CDI's would work with a battery voltage down to 4 volts, or about 2.8 volts at the CDI, so they did not have the problem unless the battery voltage dipped lower than 4 volts during aggressive flying.
I found this out when I used an IBEC in order to get an electronic switch to cut off the ignition. With the 4 cell NIMH battery pack, the setup would only work with fresh batteries, after a few minutes, or under a heavy load, like knife edge flight, the battery voltage would drop too low for the CDI to work properly and the engine would run rough and much slower.
The bottom line is that the new CDI's need about 400 more millivolts, on the low end, to operate than the old CDI's. I'm sure that was the design trade-off to get the expanded voltage range of 4.8 to 8.4 volts (actually 3.2 volts on the low end) from the old range of 4.8 to 6 volts (actually 2.8 volts on the low end) without doing a major design change. The manufacturers have never said that the "actual" minimum voltage for their ignitions have gone up by 0.4 volts. The NIMH five cell pack, or 2S pack will prevent the low voltage problems with the new ignitions.
As others have suggested, you can purchase the crankcase that has the pressure port already installed if you wish to not make that modification. You will then need to transfer all other components to the new crankcase. This will also void your warranty.
I hope this helps answer some questions.
Thanks,
Jimmy
11-02-2015, 05:11 AM
#2117
A deal? For what exactly?
The original design runs fine ,there is no flaw and this is just an improvement . For those who can't or have trouble tuning engines then this carb should help them and for $36.00 it's inexpensive . Try pricing a replacement carb for a weedwacker or chainsaw.
The original design runs fine ,there is no flaw and this is just an improvement . For those who can't or have trouble tuning engines then this carb should help them and for $36.00 it's inexpensive . Try pricing a replacement carb for a weedwacker or chainsaw.
11-02-2015, 07:45 AM
#2118
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sun City West, AZ
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A deal? For what exactly?
The original design runs fine ,there is no flaw and this is just an improvement . For those who can't or have trouble tuning engines then this carb should help them and for $36.00 it's inexpensive . Try pricing a replacement carb for a weedwacker or chainsaw.
The original design runs fine ,there is no flaw and this is just an improvement . For those who can't or have trouble tuning engines then this carb should help them and for $36.00 it's inexpensive . Try pricing a replacement carb for a weedwacker or chainsaw.
11-02-2015, 04:22 PM
#2119
My Feedback: (2)
Without going into a lot of detail regarding my experience with 2 of these engine over the last few seasons, I'm just going to say my fingers are crossed regarding it's potential with the new carb.
I can't hep but think though, that if this carb were not a necessary mod from some perspective, it would not have happened.....
If you think about it, there's likely a pretty good reason other 10cc engines from other manf's, ALL include pumps.
I can't hep but think though, that if this carb were not a necessary mod from some perspective, it would not have happened.....
If you think about it, there's likely a pretty good reason other 10cc engines from other manf's, ALL include pumps.
Last edited by ahicks; 11-02-2015 at 04:25 PM.
11-02-2015, 08:35 PM
#2120
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sun City West, AZ
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Without a dough the new pumped engine is better. When I bought mine last summer I assumed it had some kind of internal pump. I got it home in the late summer and found it had muffler pressure. It works ok but not the best way to pressurize a tank.
11-18-2015, 05:32 AM
#2121
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sun City West, AZ
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just finished the first gallon of fuel though my pumped engine. I couldn't be happier. I sold the un-pumped version last weekend. Now I'm looking for another project for this engine. Any ideas, I'd like a scale warbird without retracts.
11-18-2015, 08:51 PM
#2123
Senior Member
I think the ignition systems could possibly be made lighter by using a remote coil. That might also make packaging/installing in the airplane easier too. The small circuit board could be easily placed somewhere in the smaller models, and the coil perhaps in another location in the model, or out on the firewall, etc. No heavy complete ignition system in a metal box, potted in epoxy.
I have some circuit boards without coil from CH that I use like this, but I use the fairly heavy Zenoah external coil. A smaller, lighter coil, used remotely would be cool....
AV8TOR
I have some circuit boards without coil from CH that I use like this, but I use the fairly heavy Zenoah external coil. A smaller, lighter coil, used remotely would be cool....
AV8TOR
BCCHI
11-24-2015, 11:48 AM
#2124
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Dunwoody, GA
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[HR][/HR]I had the maiden flight today in winds under 4 mph. After warnings about squirrely behaviour on the ground, I decreased low rate on the rudder and increased the expo on it to 50%. I tried to toe in the landing gear with wheels and wheel pants installed but was probably only marginally successful. Anyway, I took off from the smooth grass runway, without any trouble and no tendency to pull to any side, and was airborne in maybe 40 feet. The plane was basically stable and didn't seem to need any aileron trim but it did need probably more than 10 clicks up elevator, which I did not have on the black button. Will add subtrim and rebind.
I balanced the plane with fuel tank empty at the recommended 3 1/4" from LE and wonder if more weight in the tail is needed - but perhaps that would make the plane tail heavy when the tank is near empty.
Flew 14 minutes high at half throttle and probably had at least 5 minutes more fuel left over. I could not fill the tank to the top anyway as the black plastic vent tube provided will not bend sharply enough or remain bent. No aerobatics yet, with elevator trim required, while still getting familiar with the plane.
The Evolution 10gx was "hunting" at half throttle (the RPM going up and down a bit), though it did not die. When I cut the throttle to idle on landing approach the engine died - which means I have to reset the slow idle speed. Perfect landing with dead stick, though.
In summary, this plane seems a keeper and has potential for lots of fun.
11-26-2015, 11:06 AM
#2125
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sun City West, AZ
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've got my third engine, second pumped and just did a test run with the 10x6 APC. I'm tacking over 13,300! I also just ordered a Sig Clip T 70, Tower is offering $30 off and free shipping.
Last edited by DCGayhart; 11-26-2015 at 03:24 PM.