Gas Engines Questions or comments about gas engines can be posted here

Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

Reply

Old 10-30-2005, 11:24 PM
  #1  
jake_027
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Binbrook, ON, CANADA
Posts: 33
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

Hi,

I recently aquired a Midwest Super Stinker (27%, 60 inch Wing Span, Approx 14lbs). The recommended 2 stroke (glow) engine is 1.20 to 1.80. I would like to go with a gas engine and was wondering what would be good for this. Someone mentioned to me a Zenoah G38 but I thought it would be too heavy for this plane. Any suggestions??

Thanks,

Dave
jake_027 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2005, 11:32 PM
  #2  
flyinrazrback
Senior Member
My Feedback: (69)
 
flyinrazrback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Fort Smith, AR
Posts: 3,778
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

the G38 is heavy and not much power, a zdz 40 would probably be a better choice, or something in that range.
flyinrazrback is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2005, 11:46 PM
  #3  
JoeAirPort
My Feedback: (41)
 
JoeAirPort's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 10,259
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

My buddy has a Moki 1.80 in his, perfect power for that plane. A gasser will add a lot of weight to an already heavy bird. If you can afford it the Saito 220 would kick total butt.
JoeAirPort is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2005, 12:56 AM
  #4  
ben beyer
My Feedback: (23)
 
ben beyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bryan TX
Posts: 2,382
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

I was thinking about getting one of these. Power would be an MVVS/EVO 26.
ben beyer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2005, 06:19 AM
  #5  
Don M.
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
 
Don M.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Halifax, NS, CANADA
Posts: 1,848
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

I am building one and I am putting an OS 160 2 - stroke in it. I also had at my disposal a Brison 2.4, Saito 270 and a Q42, all these engines are much, too much heavy for this plane. I also own a MVVS 26cc and this engine does not have enough power to do this plane justice at all - about 800 rpm's less ( same prop ) than the OS on a muffler, so unless you can stuff the pipe in the fuse somewhere, forget it. A G38 - tooooooo heavy. Since I don't have it mounted yet I may replace the OS 160 with the new Saito 2.20 - now there's the engine for it.
Don M. is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2005, 10:41 PM
  #6  
Rcpilot
My Feedback: (78)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 7,734
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

Depends on what you want out of the plane.

Scale flying? G-38 It's NOT too heavy. Look at all them square inches on that plane. It'll carry a G-38 FINE and you'll have nice power. Convert it to electronic ignition if the weight bothers you. You can save a little weight--and then it will be comparable to some of the other 40cc engines.

Reliability? G-38

Crazy power? G-62, or for a little LESS power--any of the popular 50cc engines.
Rcpilot is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2005, 12:47 AM
  #7  
rcdude7
Senior Member
My Feedback: (264)
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Great Mills, MD
Posts: 2,223
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

A friend of mine flew his stinker with a brison 2.4 and it was a very good match for this plane.
rcdude7 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2005, 07:36 AM
  #8  
jake_027
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Binbrook, ON, CANADA
Posts: 33
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

I was actually thinking of a brison 2.4, primarily due to the fact that it weighs less than a G38. However, I did read in some advertisement for the G38 that one of the recommended planes it can be used on is the Midwest Super Stinker.

All I've decided on so far is that I want to go gas. I know that a 1.60 O.S. or 1.80 Moki would be good choices due to power to weight ratio, however, I have other glow planes and this would be my only gasser. Also, as much as I like to fly 3D, not every plane I fly has to be for 3D....I have a Funtana for that

Thanks for all the input so far guys!

Dave
jake_027 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2005, 08:54 AM
  #9  
Flip and Fly
Senior Member
 
Flip and Fly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Gatineau, QC, CANADA
Posts: 652
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

Brison 2.4 will give you plenty of power, even on a pitts muffler. Keep the weight at 14-15lbs and you will be fine. I have one in a 14lbs Extra, will pull out of a hover well. However we are at sea level, what altitude you at ?

I have lots of experience with Bipes, Had the Lanier Pitts, a little smaller with a Fuji BT 32, OK sport plane, not to heavy at 14lbs. Flew fine! Fuji was not strong enough!

Also had a Weeks Solution, Weeks Special, Bucker Jungmann, and now a Ultimate. All flew well, however bipes have a little more pitch roll coupling. But can they ever tumble nice, and they look cool too. Just my opinion.

Many motors would work fine, Brison 2.4,ZDZ40, Evolution/MVVS 45, Taurus, BME, and the list goes on. If I was doing it I would try the MVVS/Evolution 45. Light, strong, good design, and people seem happy The Bisson pitts for the ZDZ 60 will bolt right on from what I have seen, have fun.
Flip and Fly is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2005, 08:55 AM
  #10  
Tired Old Man
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Valley Springs, CA
Posts: 18,602
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

The 2.4 should be a pretty good match for the plane. So would a BME 44. The Super Stinker was designed well before the advent of 3D, and it would take quite a bit of modification to flying surfaces for conversion to 3D, where the need for higher power to weight ratios are usually needed.

That leaves you with a plane that will fly very, very nice aerobatics with a gas engine large enough to balance out the tail. Bigger than that and all you would be doing is adding extra weight for a bit more speed. Most (if not all) of the 50cc engines and up would be much too heavy and actually reduce the performance of the plane due to excessive weight. Don't forget that along with the engine you will be adding ignition and battery weights. There's nothing quite like flying a plane that has so much weight in the nose that when you reduce power to idle it drops like a rock. Keeping the engine size relative to the plane helps prevent that.

Square inches on a performance bipe have a bit different lift relationship from that of a monoplane.
Tired Old Man is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2005, 10:24 PM
  #11  
Rcpilot
My Feedback: (78)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 7,734
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker


ORIGINAL: jake_027

Also, as much as I like to fly 3D, not every plane I fly has to be for 3D


Dave
You will now be flogged and beaten.

Doesn't have to be 3D? Good gawd!! Whats wrong with you?

Quick!!--have your wife take your temperature, as this is surely one of the first indications that your coming down with the dreaded "old geezers minimal power requirement" syndrome. As far as I know--the only cure for this "old Geezers" syndrome is a direct intraveinous injection of nitromethane--metered out over the course of 3 days at 30% concentration. You may survive this--but only if you seek medical attention immediately. Stop by the LHS on the way to the Emergency room and get the nitro--as some hospitals don't stock it in full 30% concentrations.[&:]

Having enough power to hover is a MINIMUM requirement.[:-]

Just kidding. It's okay to have a nice sport bipe with a light engine that will do the job without raising the wing loading.

Definetly go with a gasser. Glow engines in the size required for a plane this big are thirsty and yucky.[:'(]
Rcpilot is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2005, 07:23 PM
  #12  
dhammond
My Feedback: (2)
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Constance Bay, ON, CANADA
Posts: 60
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

I had an early version of the Super Stinker and I set mine up with a G45 and it was Awesome! flew at 1/4 throttle for cruising but when you wanted vertical .... it was there .
it weighed in at 17lbs and handled fine for landings ... like most bipes a little throttle on landing until 2' off the deck .
Of course that was almost 10 years ago and Affordable light weight gassers were few and far between !
I have a ZDZ 40 on a GP Super Chipmunk and it is simply amazing! .... and only 14 lbs wet ready for takeoff !
If your budget allows it you should consider a 35 -40 cc Ignition gasser
dhammond is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2006, 10:04 AM
  #13  
Texan
My Feedback: (10)
 
Texan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Georgetown, TX
Posts: 568
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

The Taurus TS42 is a good fit in the Super Stinker airframe. Here are a couple of pics of my SS under construction. I modified my tail surfaces based on a full scale S1-11b Pitts. The fin, rudder and elevators are enlarged and reshaped.
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Ql34864.jpg
Views:	128
Size:	43.4 KB
ID:	386758   Click image for larger version

Name:	Ca80573.jpg
Views:	114
Size:	61.3 KB
ID:	386759   Click image for larger version

Name:	Ge96130.jpg
Views:	113
Size:	47.2 KB
ID:	386760   Click image for larger version

Name:	Lg16681.jpg
Views:	85
Size:	53.9 KB
ID:	386761  
Texan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2006, 10:45 PM
  #14  
bobzilla
My Feedback: (63)
 
bobzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Henderson, NV
Posts: 945
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

I too dealt with what engine to put in my super stinker..I opted for the SuperTiger 2300, (1) cause it was cheap and (2) it puts out gobs of horsepower.
Sorry too say, the engine never performed well, and I yanked..I now am deciding on a much more reliable engine and am thinking of putting in
my trusty Moki 2.10. Here are some pics.
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Xv65740.jpg
Views:	95
Size:	118.8 KB
ID:	403417   Click image for larger version

Name:	Lg16265.jpg
Views:	85
Size:	63.2 KB
ID:	403418  
bobzilla is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2006, 09:40 PM
  #15  
bobzilla
My Feedback: (63)
 
bobzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Henderson, NV
Posts: 945
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

OK, I shoed in the MOKI 2.10 freshly broke in..and fit cowling.
Have not checked CG yet, cut I'm sure the RX/Batteries will be heading to the rear.

Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Ig11641.jpg
Views:	76
Size:	60.4 KB
ID:	410286   Click image for larger version

Name:	Ez82355.jpg
Views:	66
Size:	47.4 KB
ID:	410287  
bobzilla is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2006, 08:20 PM
  #16  
Texan
My Feedback: (10)
 
Texan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Georgetown, TX
Posts: 568
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

Taurus TS 42 requires a lot of cowl trimming. However, cooling shouldn't be a problem
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Wu59896.jpg
Views:	90
Size:	40.1 KB
ID:	445423   Click image for larger version

Name:	Av68867.jpg
Views:	113
Size:	64.4 KB
ID:	445424  
Texan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2006, 08:50 PM
  #17  
jstanton
My Feedback: (14)
 
jstanton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Millington, TN
Posts: 3,119
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

How about a Brillelli 25GT that weighs only 2lbs 12oz and puts out 14lbs 4oz of thrust with an APC 18x8 sport prop. I don't know what type of flying you prefer, but I do know this little engine is awesome. The best thing is this engine only cost $265.00 w/ei and the support you get from Scott and Mark at Brillelli cannot be beat.

Here is a review I did on this little engine and in the review I was testing the engine with a magneto on it. Even with the magneto this engine pulls my GB Giant big stick around with authority. The GP Giant Big stick is rate for a 160 2 stroke or a 30 -35cc gas engine. I have a Dyanflight SE-5a that has a 64" wing span that I am going to be putting this engine in.

http://www.rcuniverse.com/magazine/a...article_id=688
jstanton is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2006, 09:12 PM
  #18  
Texan
My Feedback: (10)
 
Texan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Georgetown, TX
Posts: 568
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

Jim,

A 25cc gasser is not going to allow the Super Stinker to perform up to its full aerobatic potential. However, for general flying around and basic manuvers it would probably work. At 14 lbs of thrust you would be right at 1:1. Personally, I would shoot for 1.5:1 or 2:1...(21 to 28 lbs static thrust) but that's my style. Does Brillelli offer a gasser in the 40cc range?

Scott
Texan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2006, 10:40 PM
  #19  
bobzilla
My Feedback: (63)
 
bobzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Henderson, NV
Posts: 945
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

Right on..Texan. Power=fun. My MOKI 2.10 turns my 20x8 at around 7700 on NO NITRO. At 4.1hp..it cranks it out and it makes my
SS fly like a BIPLANE..not a trainer! I know there are some that like SCALE flying, but I went out of scale with my trainer..
The only other engine I would consider for my SS, would be my OS 160. Just my 2cents worth.
Bob....
Hey..enjoy my new flying site..and some videos.at

www.airbornelizards.com



bobzilla is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2006, 02:56 PM
  #20  
jstanton
My Feedback: (14)
 
jstanton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Millington, TN
Posts: 3,119
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

Texan

Yes he does. He has 2 engines that are in that arena. A 46cc you can get with ei or magneto that puts out almost 30lbs of thrust. I have the new 42cc w/ei that will put out 25lbs of thrust and it is going on the GP GBS. It will hover that big red bird. Both engines weigh about the same(right at 4lbs w/ei). Scott says the 46cc is better pulling larger props at a lower rpm and the 42cc is better with a smaller prop at higher RPM. You can get eith the 42cc or 46cc from starting at $325.00 w/ei or you can get the 46cc with magneto for $240.00.

Give Scott or Mark a e-maill at www.brillelli.com
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Jg14300.jpg
Views:	61
Size:	49.8 KB
ID:	446826   Click image for larger version

Name:	Pk29456.jpg
Views:	69
Size:	58.8 KB
ID:	446827  
jstanton is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2006, 04:30 PM
  #21  
Texan
My Feedback: (10)
 
Texan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Georgetown, TX
Posts: 568
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

The 46cc with ei looks interesting. The price is right.
Texan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 10:31 PM
  #22  
JoeAverage
 
JoeAverage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Georgian Bluffs, ON, CANADA
Posts: 188
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

If any of you good fellows are still watching this thread I was wondering what your reactions would be to using a brand new Irvine 1.50 Mark II to power the Super Stinker. This is a ringed 32oz + Bisson Pitts muffler 25cc alchohol engine. I bought a NIB Super Stinker for posterity and I am removing all the parts from the carriers and using them for templates to build as light a model as possible without sacrificing the kit. I bought new LG and Canopy from Midwest while they had them, gone now. A friend said these were a sweet flyer and I want to keep it light. I think the Irvine should be adequate but I would welcome any thoughts.

Thanks, John
JoeAverage is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2007, 07:08 AM
  #23  
Texan
My Feedback: (10)
 
Texan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Georgetown, TX
Posts: 568
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker

John,

My Super Stinker is still waiting for covering. However, I fly a Cermark Pitts S2B that is very similar in size, weight, and wing area with a Moki 1.35. The 1.35 has plenty of power for all standard aerobatics. I think the 1.50 Irvine should work well in the Stinker.
Texan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2007, 12:02 PM
  #24  
JoeAverage
 
JoeAverage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Georgian Bluffs, ON, CANADA
Posts: 188
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker


ORIGINAL: Texan

John,

My Super Stinker is still waiting for covering. However, I fly a Cermark Pitts S2B that is very similar in size, weight, and wing area with a Moki 1.35. The 1.35 has plenty of power for all standard aerobatics. I think the 1.50 Irvine should work well in the Stinker.

Thank you for the encouraging reply. I figured it would be adequate and I like scale flight performance. The Irvine have become uneffective, cost wise that is, to be marketed in North America. The Irvine 1.50 was $489.00 (w/o muffler) Cdn and cheap at that at a large retailer who dropped the line. Once Sig quit distributing the, that was it. Many people have no experience with their stump pulling ways and when I have asked them the question they cannot honestly answer.

It's good to have a positive second opinion to my own. The model is in that size range where it can get heavy with gas or expensive with glow fuel. I think the Irvine will run on FAI fuel.

Thanks, John
JoeAverage is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2007, 12:51 PM
  #25  
JoeAirPort
My Feedback: (41)
 
JoeAirPort's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 10,259
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default RE: Engine for Midwest Super Stinker


ORIGINAL: jstanton

Texan

Yes he does. He has 2 engines that are in that arena. A 46cc you can get with ei or magneto that puts out almost 30lbs of thrust. I have the new 42cc w/ei that will put out 25lbs of thrust and it is going on the GP GBS. It will hover that big red bird. Both engines weigh about the same(right at 4lbs w/ei). Scott says the 46cc is better pulling larger props at a lower rpm and the 42cc is better with a smaller prop at higher RPM. You can get eith the 42cc or 46cc from starting at $325.00 w/ei or you can get the 46cc with magneto for $240.00.

Give Scott or Mark a e-maill at www.brillelli.com
Those thrust numbers seem a little high IMO. Were they from Scott's thrust measuring scale? If so then I would have to believe them. His thrust scale is pretty good design.


JoeAirPort is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service