AndrewLG

Hello all,

Do you prefer wood props or nylon props? I am just about finished building my Great Planes Super Sportster 60, and I would like to know the pros and cons of both wood and nylon props.

Thanks,
Andrew Guazzerotti

Gray Beard

My Feedback: (-1)

Andrew, your sure hung up on props. The norm is to run props like the APC on engines up to 1.20 then go to wood. Nothing is etched in stone though. Wood can be lighter and stiffer and work well on different engines. Some engines will idle better with a prop that has more weight to it. Four strokes seem to really like a heavy prop. Some scale planes look better with a wood prop so even if a pilot knows his engine runs a bit better with a fiber prop they will still use a wood prop. Some people even like a three blade prop because they look cool. I use Master Air Screw props on trainers, they aren't the best working props but they put up with a ground strike a lot better then wood or fiber.
Some wood props work better then others too, I like the Xoar wood props but the smallest one I have in my prop box is 20 inches. People can debate this but I think the best prop on the market is the carbon fiber. My pockets aren't deep enough to be using them so I stick with the APCs, Graupners and once in a while MAS props. In cheap wood props you can always try the Zingers. Test one out and see for yourself.

AndrewLG

Okay, thanks for the reply.  I hear from some people that if you have a prop strike with a wood prop, it will simply break.  But if you have a prop strike with a nylon or composite prop, it can damage your engine.  Is this true?

skeeter_ca

I prefer the MasterAirscrew. They are far more rugged and stand up well the prop strikes. While you might get a little bit more with wood and apc props they tend to shatter on impact.

skeeter

noveldoc

My Feedback: (2)

Wood is a lot less likely to amputate a finger.  I love 'em.

Remember that those little dings that a nylon prop survivies may well leave a dent, put it out of line or unbalance it.  Maybe better to just break.


Tom

WacoNut

I have had this discussion before,

About 15 yrs ago I made the major mistake of putting my hand into a 10x6 MasterAirscrw on a OS .40 at full throttle(don't ask). I almost lost my index finger on my right hand. After a nice trip to the ER they sewed everything back together.

Now here is my reasoning and this usually starts an argument:

Wood Props break easier on prop strikes therefore should cause less trauma to a hand if you pull the same trick I did.

Wood props generally weigh less so less mass spinning equals less damage( in theory but it's still going to do damage).

Nylon props last longer and hold up better to incidental damage and prop strikes. Never had a prop strike hurt an engine unless the plane hit the ground vertical.

I now strictly use wood props period. My reasoning may be wrong but it is my fingers. I feel more comfortable flying with wood props, used to feel comfortable with nylon props.

I now mainly fly gas with props ranging from 20" to 32" and engines from 30cc to 157cc. I don't think having a wood prop is going to help me much in these cases but I do have alot more respect for the props now.
Later!!
Anthony

Ed Smith

I use APC props all the time for glow and electric motors, for sport and competition. They are accurate from prop to prop and very close to being balanced.

You all do balance your props don't you?

Ed s

corch

My Feedback: (1)

I tend to use wood or apc.  I use whatever I need to balance the model.  Tail heavy?  slap an apc on there.  Nose heavy?  Move the battery back a bit and use a wood prop.  I'd rather use an apc prop than start tucking lead in fuselage.

The other factor I take into consideration is how much carving of the spinner it would require.  APCs usually require more carving of the spinner.

acdii

Im thinking of using a MAS 12x8 on my OS .52 Surpass 4 stroke. Any issues with that combo?

Bozarth

My Feedback: (15)

How much difference in weight is there between the APC props and the wood props that you use?

Kurt

Gray Beard

My Feedback: (-1)

Not enough to matter. I have never been able to balance a plane with any prop. If you stick a finger in a prop it makes no difference what it is kinda sorta. They are all a slice and dice. A wood prop is a bit dull compared to a fiber prop but it still goes through flesh. The shapest prop is a carbon fiber, sort of like having a knife blade on the engine. Still, fingers and body parts do not get along with any type of prop.As for ground strikes harming an engine, it can happen and I see no difference between prop brands. It doesn't happen often but it can. The material the MAS props are made of is a lot more forgiving, they don't shatter as much as the other makes, that's why I use them on trainers. MAS makes a prop for the four strokes. Off the top of my head I think it is the K series. Don't etch that in stone. They are a wide blade and heavy prop. They also tend to flex and are a power robber. On a nice scale plane like a Cub they are a nice choice. The number one brand of prop on the market is the APC, there is a reason for it but what type of prop you like is a choice thing. Andrew has a .60 engine, I don't think he is sure what it is but it sounded like a K&B?? Got that from his other post. Still not sure though. If he would go into the beginners forum and read the sticky prop chart it would do him a world of good. Having a mentor to teach him these things would be an even better idea. I teach my students how to test and choose there props. I don't care what the props they choose are made of. I taught them not to strike the prop on take off and landing durng there basic flight training.

corch

My Feedback: (1)

16X6 props

APC 3.70 ounces
Xoar 1.75 ounces

Both reamed and balanced, never flown.

Oberst

For my WWI planes? All my girls like wood.

Pete

acdii

Kinky

Gene Margiotti

My Feedback: (4)

Funny question - I haven't used a "nylon" prop in 35 years. Where do you buy "nylon" props?

Gene

Loopman

My Feedback: (195)

Just keep this in mind! "Wood will break, Nylon will take". Nuff Said!

Happy Flying!

Loopman

ronwc

My Feedback: (404)

Having run most props over the last 40+ years, I now use APC on anything .25 to 1.60. As mentioned above, they are consistantly strong, balanced and give overall best performance IMHO. I used to fly Quikee 500 type racing back in the 80's, we were all using TF racing props on Webra 40 engines (pic of some leftovers). When APC came out with their pylon props, everyone changed over. We used to lean the engines up to about 19,000 and richen back down to 18,700rpm at takeoff. Of course of you're flying a nice slow WWI biplane, a nice scale wood prop sure looks good.

on_your_six

My Feedback: (11)

From the APC website:
[link=http://www.apcprop.com/v/Research/research.html]http://www.apcprop.com/v/Research/research.html[/link]

flycatch

My Feedback: (26)

"APC" props can be liken to a surgical blade ready to amputate your fingers. On the other hand wood props can inflict damage but not to the same extent. All propellars are dangerous and the spinning arc must be treated with safety being paramount. That said I favor wood over plastic material. Wood props can be rated as; good, better and best. Always remember you pay for what you get. I use nothing but "VESS" props, yes they are costly when compared to "Zinger" but their efficiency negets the price.

Bozarth

My Feedback: (15)

Favoring one prop over another based on what kind of damage they will do to your hand is like picking what type of saw blade you want on your table saw!

Kurt

MTK

Ha, ha that's pretty close to what I was thinking too. That's what chicken sticks are for no? OR, god forbid, starters.

The better combo is wood laminated with carbon sock and epoxy. Not for the average Sunday flier maybe but if you want performance and save a few ounces in nose weight, that's a good way to it. I use wood electric props, XOAR has a good variety, and laminate them for all my gas engines. Much lighter than woodies intended for gas and far stiffer and stronger. Much lighter than straight carbon such as Mezjlik or Falcon. Thinner too

BTW- there is a very good reason apc trailing edges are so sharp. Sharp TE's improve efficiency and quiet down the air rushing together back there. Remember when a prop is noisy, it takes power from the engine to generate the noise

Gene Margiotti

My Feedback: (4)

On your six ..... thanks for the info!!

Gene

jimmyjames213

My Feedback: (2)

i use apc props most often due to low price and thrust, however i like the look of wood. The prop arc of wood is also much easier to see and looks cool in flight

rowdog_14

My Feedback: (5)

I have used APC, Evolution, Zinger, and MAS props. For sport flying all the above work fine for me no matter what engine I put with them. Right now I mostly fly evolution props, they only make these up to a 16x6 I think. When I get into bigger props I go with either a MAS or a Zinger. I only have one wood zinger prop now and it is on a Top Flite 1.60 Staggerwing.

My prop main decision is usually based on what looks better with the plane on the ground (all my planes are scale but 1), then I fly it with that prop and make my final decision based on the flight and landing. Other than that I really have no preference over the type of prop.

Every prop strike I have had with wood has been with a broken prop.

wcmorrison

My Feedback: (2)

No, I don't think wood props do any less damage or that fiberglass reinforced propsdo greater toengines either. I have suffered more damage due to the egine striking the earth, the harder the surface the greater the damage. Conversely the softer the earth, the lessor damage. But in all cases such a vertical manuever results in a broken prop. Biggest after crash problem is cleaning up the engine and assessing any damage like bent push rod tubes, broken mounts etc. It amazes me how fiber glass reinforced engine mounts seem to surfvive crash quite well. Of this I can speak from much experience.