jake_027

My Feedback: (1)

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

flyinrazrback

My Feedback: (69)

the G38 is heavy and not much power, a zdz 40 would probably be a better choice, or something in that range.

JoeAirPort

My Feedback: (41)

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.

ben beyer

My Feedback: (23)

I was thinking about getting one of these. Power would be an MVVS/EVO 26.

Don M.

My Feedback: (5)

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.

Rcpilot

My Feedback: (78)

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.

rcdude7

My Feedback: (264)

A friend of mine flew his stinker with a brison 2.4 and it was a very good match for this plane.

jake_027

My Feedback: (1)

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

Flip and Fly

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.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

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.

Rcpilot

My Feedback: (78)

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.[:'(]

dhammond

My Feedback: (2)

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

Texan

My Feedback: (10)

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.

bobzilla

My Feedback: (63)

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.

bobzilla

My Feedback: (63)

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.

Texan

My Feedback: (10)

Taurus TS 42 requires a lot of cowl trimming. However, cooling shouldn't be a problem

jstanton

My Feedback: (14)

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

Texan

My Feedback: (10)

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

bobzilla

My Feedback: (63)

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

jstanton

My Feedback: (14)

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

Texan

My Feedback: (10)

The 46cc with ei looks interesting. The price is right.

JoeAverage

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

Texan

My Feedback: (10)

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.

JoeAverage

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

JoeAirPort

My Feedback: (41)

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.