Welcome to Club SAITO !
03-11-2019, 08:07 AM
03-11-2019, 08:49 AM
03-11-2019, 01:21 PM
03-11-2019, 01:58 PM
they both have a little interest lately she has been showing interest in rebuilding engines. She helped a lot on the first Rascel two. We even started to put a 4*20 with a Saito 30. Should be fun.
03-11-2019, 07:24 PM
My Feedback: (1)
Hi guys, I figure you guys just want to read/hear this, so I will tell you haahaa haa
so, you guys know I had a time of it finding a battery charger that would actually charge a dead battery that had no volts in it, and of course you did not forget that I told you about the 3 unpleasant phone calls to those 3 different unpleasant manufactures.. and you know after looking on line for 8 days/ 2 hours a day, I was happy to find a charger that actually could charge a dead battery,, right,,,,,,, well>>>
so today I thought, "hey now, I will look up that charger on YouTube", and I did, and there it was, right there in front of my eyes, well I thought it was, yes-yes there it was,,, or was it ??
well the charger on YouTube has the correct PT number that Century Tool's listed LOL, but the Amp Output was different, yes-yes of course it was LOL.. (Jim scratches head) sO I spent a half hour looking on Google Images, and low-and-be-hold, what did I find?? well something strange I found, the right PT Number but the wrong Output ratings LOL heehee..
so I called Century Tools, and after 35, 40 minutes on the phone I was told that Century's description for the output for the charger I ordered is WRONG, LOL LOL yee-up of course it was wrong !!, sO I cancel my order Heehee hee,, to add> the charger had not been shipped yet..
you see, California put forth new laws about a year ago, and the charger I want is not allowed to be sold in California, sO Solar said "screw-it" and stopped making that charger . to add Century Tool's had the wrong Model Number on the description for the older charger,,, and of course>>> I wanted that charger that was list with the wrong PT number but was not there LOL heehee LOL
Heehee hee so now I am back to square one, LOL or am I ??
LOL it's just too funny !!!
so I called Clore/Solar, I was told I can still find the charger if I want,, get this>>>> if I look more on-line LOL but I have to look for it at the smaller dealers, than means the price will be $10, $20 higher
well I found it for only $10 more, and tomorrow I will call to order it, but you can be sure I will make 100% sure it IS the one I want LOL,,, wish me luck, I will need it LOL
Jim
Life is crazy, but you got to live it
so, you guys know I had a time of it finding a battery charger that would actually charge a dead battery that had no volts in it, and of course you did not forget that I told you about the 3 unpleasant phone calls to those 3 different unpleasant manufactures.. and you know after looking on line for 8 days/ 2 hours a day, I was happy to find a charger that actually could charge a dead battery,, right,,,,,,, well>>>
so today I thought, "hey now, I will look up that charger on YouTube", and I did, and there it was, right there in front of my eyes, well I thought it was, yes-yes there it was,,, or was it ??
well the charger on YouTube has the correct PT number that Century Tool's listed LOL, but the Amp Output was different, yes-yes of course it was LOL.. (Jim scratches head) sO I spent a half hour looking on Google Images, and low-and-be-hold, what did I find?? well something strange I found, the right PT Number but the wrong Output ratings LOL heehee..
so I called Century Tools, and after 35, 40 minutes on the phone I was told that Century's description for the output for the charger I ordered is WRONG, LOL LOL yee-up of course it was wrong !!, sO I cancel my order Heehee hee,, to add> the charger had not been shipped yet..
you see, California put forth new laws about a year ago, and the charger I want is not allowed to be sold in California, sO Solar said "screw-it" and stopped making that charger . to add Century Tool's had the wrong Model Number on the description for the older charger,,, and of course>>> I wanted that charger that was list with the wrong PT number but was not there LOL heehee LOL
Heehee hee so now I am back to square one, LOL or am I ??
LOL it's just too funny !!!
so I called Clore/Solar, I was told I can still find the charger if I want,, get this>>>> if I look more on-line LOL but I have to look for it at the smaller dealers, than means the price will be $10, $20 higher
well I found it for only $10 more, and tomorrow I will call to order it, but you can be sure I will make 100% sure it IS the one I want LOL,,, wish me luck, I will need it LOL
Jim
Life is crazy, but you got to live it
03-12-2019, 12:22 AM
On a sensible note i use apc 14x6 props on all my fa82's in the 46 size decathlon,extra 330 and cap 232 now deceased.I tried a heap of different props which reminds me,flew the decathlon and fa82 with a wooden 14x5 and people reckon decathlons just don't look right hovering at eye level then climbing away.Plastic props like the recommended apc 22x10,when i ran my fg57t in,are very heavy and i'm happy for once it's a gas engine because i hand flick all mine.The thought of getting clobbered by the prop of it's twin brother the fa300 (two real mean fa150's bolted together) made me drink beer when i ran them in,i think?
ps i run a wooden menz 23x10 on the fg57 it's in an edge540v3.
03-12-2019, 03:41 AM
Nice looking fleet Pete. Probably the result of using those ultra high precision cutting tools hanging from the wall back there.
How are your FA82's taching running APC 14x6 props? My two 82s seem to hate them, or so it seems during static testing using 15% nitro.
How are your FA82's taching running APC 14x6 props? My two 82s seem to hate them, or so it seems during static testing using 15% nitro.
03-12-2019, 04:04 AM
Wasp
that is great but you know everything in California cause cancer in lab animals. So using a charger that actually works will give you cancer somehow. Probably the Ora that the charger puts out ha ha.
Glow man thr 82’s i have like the 14-6. I thought because it was an 80 and the go to prop for that was a 13-6 but that isn’t enough. But a 82 with a 14-6 master Airscrew simatar prop will turn 9300. Witch is awesome and a lot like the 91.
that is great but you know everything in California cause cancer in lab animals. So using a charger that actually works will give you cancer somehow. Probably the Ora that the charger puts out ha ha.
Glow man thr 82’s i have like the 14-6. I thought because it was an 80 and the go to prop for that was a 13-6 but that isn’t enough. But a 82 with a 14-6 master Airscrew simatar prop will turn 9300. Witch is awesome and a lot like the 91.
03-12-2019, 04:09 AM
Is that richened to 9300? Fuel?
Last edited by Glowgeek; 03-12-2019 at 04:19 AM.
03-12-2019, 04:22 AM
well you know I think my numbers are off. I will have to rerun the 82 it seems like it turned closer to 10,000. I don’t richen anything to get RPM’s. I go for the most i can get. Also i run 20-30% nitro not by choice just got a hec of a deal on a lot of fuel. I have been trying to mix it down a bit don’t really need that much nitro
03-12-2019, 04:23 AM
Thank for the number, pretty much what I'm getting with that prop on 15%.
03-12-2019, 04:25 AM
03-12-2019, 04:31 AM
My Feedback: (102)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Colonial Beach, VA
Posts: 20,370
Likes: 0
Received 25 Likes
on
25 Posts
UH OH Mike, you left your self open for the lean run speech which doesn't really apply to four strokes since they always have oil in the crank case, even when run lean.
The 82 has been misunderstood some over the years with it's 1.14" bore and .80" stroke it looks like a revver. The truth is that the shorter stroke requires a larger bore to equal the same displacement. This means that the larger piston has more surface area for the combustion pressure to push on. But the 82 is a real torquer turning a 14 x 6 right with the 91. Or within a 100 rpm or so. The valve timing has more to do with the torque curve than the bore and stroke.
The 82 has been misunderstood some over the years with it's 1.14" bore and .80" stroke it looks like a revver. The truth is that the shorter stroke requires a larger bore to equal the same displacement. This means that the larger piston has more surface area for the combustion pressure to push on. But the 82 is a real torquer turning a 14 x 6 right with the 91. Or within a 100 rpm or so. The valve timing has more to do with the torque curve than the bore and stroke.
03-12-2019, 04:51 AM
Yeah
i wish I could be more specific about my tuning techniques.
Its hard for me to explain.
So let me try. I start with 3 turns out on the high end and as close to factory on the low speed. Once running i dial in the high-speed tell it sages. Then richen about a quarter turn or so, depending on how the engine sounds. The low speed is the tuff one , i will let it idle and see how it transition if it sages and puff’s fuel i will lean if it sages and dies i will richen and those adjustments are mad about a 1/16 turns at a time.
Or i just do it all by ear and after a couple runs i have better running engines then the majority of people.
i wish I could be more specific about my tuning techniques.
Its hard for me to explain.
So let me try. I start with 3 turns out on the high end and as close to factory on the low speed. Once running i dial in the high-speed tell it sages. Then richen about a quarter turn or so, depending on how the engine sounds. The low speed is the tuff one , i will let it idle and see how it transition if it sages and puff’s fuel i will lean if it sages and dies i will richen and those adjustments are mad about a 1/16 turns at a time.
Or i just do it all by ear and after a couple runs i have better running engines then the majority of people.
03-12-2019, 06:50 AM
My Feedback: (102)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Colonial Beach, VA
Posts: 20,370
Likes: 0
Received 25 Likes
on
25 Posts
About the only thing I see that's different I use 1/8th turn until the last two or so, as you probably do, I favor the better transition over the lower idle. Sometimes you can't have both.
03-12-2019, 10:02 AM
My Feedback: (1)
Wasp
that is great but you know everything in California cause cancer in lab animals. So using a charger that actually works will give you cancer somehow. Probably the Ora that the charger puts out ha ha.
Glow man thr 82’s i have like the 14-6. I thought because it was an 80 and the go to prop for that was a 13-6 but that isn’t enough. But a 82 with a 14-6 master Airscrew simatar prop will turn 9300. Witch is awesome and a lot like the 91.
that is great but you know everything in California cause cancer in lab animals. So using a charger that actually works will give you cancer somehow. Probably the Ora that the charger puts out ha ha.
Glow man thr 82’s i have like the 14-6. I thought because it was an 80 and the go to prop for that was a 13-6 but that isn’t enough. But a 82 with a 14-6 master Airscrew simatar prop will turn 9300. Witch is awesome and a lot like the 91.
I canceled the Atech LOL LOL, because it wont charge a dead battery, so I called Clore/Solar again and they told me that I should be able to buy the charger I want from Napa, so LOL I called Napa here in my town and it will be here tomorrow LOL, can you believe it LOL,, and,, I save $10 more $$$, so all and all including paying NO shipping I will save $38 over ordering the newer up to date model,,, now, I'm just hoping it's the correct one>(2510), it looked to be the correct one on the Napa Web site
PL 2510
https://www.napaonline.com/en/p/SORPL2510
Jim
Last edited by the Wasp; 03-12-2019 at 10:05 AM.
03-12-2019, 10:22 AM
My Feedback: (1)
the plastic, wood prop wars,,
I agree that the plastic props are heavier, but I found that the Zoar's pull more air so they do not turn up as high. in fact I found that the Zoar 17X6 pulls more air than the APC 17X8, here are the "rounded off" numbers from the Magnum 180 Fr I "had",
APC 17X8..... 8,800
Zoar 17X6..... 8,600
Zoar 17X8..... 8.200
my thoughts for that Magnum is that it's torque starts dropping off somewhere around 8,300, but it ant no big thing
Jim
I agree that the plastic props are heavier, but I found that the Zoar's pull more air so they do not turn up as high. in fact I found that the Zoar 17X6 pulls more air than the APC 17X8, here are the "rounded off" numbers from the Magnum 180 Fr I "had",
APC 17X8..... 8,800
Zoar 17X6..... 8,600
Zoar 17X8..... 8.200
my thoughts for that Magnum is that it's torque starts dropping off somewhere around 8,300, but it ant no big thing
Jim
Last edited by the Wasp; 03-12-2019 at 10:25 AM.
03-12-2019, 10:46 AM
My Feedback: (1)
UH OH Mike, you left your self open for the lean run speech which doesn't really apply to four strokes since they always have oil in the crank case, even when run lean.
The 82 has been misunderstood some over the years with it's 1.14" bore and .80" stroke it looks like a revver. The truth is that the shorter stroke requires a larger bore to equal the same displacement. This means that the larger piston has more surface area for the combustion pressure to push on. But the 82 is a real torquer turning a 14 x 6 right with the 91. Or within a 100 rpm or so. The valve timing has more to do with the torque curve than the bore and stroke.
The 82 has been misunderstood some over the years with it's 1.14" bore and .80" stroke it looks like a revver. The truth is that the shorter stroke requires a larger bore to equal the same displacement. This means that the larger piston has more surface area for the combustion pressure to push on. But the 82 is a real torquer turning a 14 x 6 right with the 91. Or within a 100 rpm or so. The valve timing has more to do with the torque curve than the bore and stroke.
Jim
