RE: NEW NELSON Q-40

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> Pylon Universe - RC Pylon Racing >> QM-40 Racing >> RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/21/2007 6:36:16 PM

proptop

Posts: 4497
Joined: 10/18/2002
From: Rome, NY, USA
Status: offline

You end up chewing the other guys rudder off with your prop...(hey...it worked on Johnny Quest!

)

I was really hoping Mark Martin would get the win too...

Oh well...

_____________________________

It's bad luck to be superstitious...
Revver Bro #77

(in reply to diggs_74)

Post #: 76

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/21/2007 7:04:41 PM

garys

Posts: 755
Joined: 1/31/2002
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: offline

Yeah, but rubbin's racin', and I've used the bump and run successfully a few times over the years

I just won't mention when I've been on the other end of it, or when it's ended up like a bad bump draft

RB, didn't you try that to me in a flyoff a few years ago?

_____________________________

GS

(in reply to proptop)

Post #: 77

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/21/2007 8:06:46 PM

HighPlains

Posts: 2663
Joined: 3/2/2003
From: Over da rainbow, KS, USA
Status: offline

Bump draft? Is that the check you have to write after the bump?

_____________________________

In politics if you want anything said, ask a man. If you want anything done, ask a woman - Margaret Thatcher

(in reply to garys)

Post #: 78

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/21/2007 8:28:58 PM

daven

Posts: 6897
Joined: 12/7/2001
From: Andover, MN, USA
Status: online

Nothings worse than breaking someone elses prop on your plane, and then to have them complain about a broken prop!

_____________________________

Dave Norman

klasskote.com
supertrc.com

(in reply to HighPlains)

Post #: 79

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/26/2007 3:07:42 PM

diggs_74

Posts: 1281
Joined: 1/20/2004
From: Emerald, WI, USA
Status: offline

Looking at the results/times from PHX, I didn't think they were much different than last year other than Matis' blistering :59.24 that he laid down.. But other than that, I they don't seem much different.. With all the talk about the new engine I was expecting more than one sub minute time.. Any thoughts??

< Message edited by diggs_74 -- 2/26/2007 3:08:51 PM >

_____________________________

Lee LaValley
NMPRA# 33w

(in reply to daven)

Post #: 80

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/26/2007 3:14:52 PM

daven

Posts: 6897
Joined: 12/7/2001
From: Andover, MN, USA
Status: online

Considering most people only received 1 motor, a week or two before the contest, I'm surprised the times are as good as they are.

If you had sent most of the top guys 1 new "old" engine a week before the race, I doubt the times would be nearly that good.

Good enough for me, I'm ordering one.

_____________________________

Dave Norman

klasskote.com
supertrc.com

(in reply to diggs_74)

Post #: 81

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/26/2007 3:24:50 PM

diggs_74

Posts: 1281
Joined: 1/20/2004
From: Emerald, WI, USA
Status: offline

That's probably right Dave, I guess expected more because of the hype that went on in the last couple weeks.. By the way people were talking it sounded like minute flat or better times would be the norm with this engine.. That's all I was getting at I guess.

_____________________________

Lee LaValley
NMPRA# 33w

(in reply to daven)

Post #: 82

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/26/2007 3:32:55 PM

daven

Posts: 6897
Joined: 12/7/2001
From: Andover, MN, USA
Status: online

Give it a little time as people work out the best prop / head settings.

I think sub minute times in the SW will become the norm for the better fliers.

_____________________________

Dave Norman

klasskote.com
supertrc.com

(in reply to diggs_74)

Post #: 83

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/26/2007 3:51:54 PM

Ed Smith

Posts: 2834
Joined: 12/29/2001
From: Brantford, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

I am all for speed and product development, but sub one minute times being the norm? Just do not tell the AMA. I am sure it will be right on top of that scenario.

Ed S

(in reply to daven)

Post #: 84

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/26/2007 4:01:38 PM

daven

Posts: 6897
Joined: 12/7/2001
From: Andover, MN, USA
Status: online

Thats only a 3-4% increase in speed. Props, planes, flying skill, and needle settings have a bigger effect on speed than that.

_____________________________

Dave Norman

klasskote.com
supertrc.com

(in reply to Ed Smith)

Post #: 85

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/26/2007 4:54:36 PM

HighPlains

Posts: 2663
Joined: 3/2/2003
From: Over da rainbow, KS, USA
Status: offline

A 4% increase of speed requires a 12.5% increase of engine power.

A 3% increase of speed requires a 9.3 % increase of engine power.

_____________________________

In politics if you want anything said, ask a man. If you want anything done, ask a woman - Margaret Thatcher

(in reply to daven)

Post #: 86

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/26/2007 5:29:20 PM

Ed Smith

Posts: 2834
Joined: 12/29/2001
From: Brantford, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

quote:

Thats only a 3-4% increase in speed. Props, planes, flying skill, and needle settings have a bigger effect on speed than that.

Then why have you ordered a new engine? Figure out how to prop, needle and fly what you already have.

Ed S

(in reply to daven)

Post #: 87

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/26/2007 5:49:46 PM

daven

Posts: 6897
Joined: 12/7/2001
From: Andover, MN, USA
Status: online

I need all the help I can get Ed

_____________________________

Dave Norman

klasskote.com
supertrc.com

(in reply to Ed Smith)

Post #: 88

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/26/2007 6:09:36 PM

Jim Duda

Posts: 216
Joined: 4/10/2006
From: Austin, TX, USA
Status: offline

Could one of the pilots at the Phoenix Q40 Dance please comment if the LS is as easy to needle and set up as the old one? Did the increase in performance cause it to be more "tempermental"?

(in reply to daven)

Post #: 89

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/26/2007 6:49:04 PM

bl10

Posts: 303
Joined: 12/29/2001
From: Chatsworth, CA,
Status: offline

Jim:
The new engines seemed go fall into two categories. I would say the majority were no more finicky than the old engine. However some of us (me included) had our share of problems. I think some of it was due to having to run the 7.8 prop which loaded the engine more than we would have liked. In any case it is clearly better than the old engine. It will take a little time to work out the best combinations. If we could have run the 7.5 or 7.6 props I think there would have been a lot less trouble and the times would have been quicker.

Barry

(in reply to Jim Duda)

Post #: 90

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/26/2007 7:53:20 PM

Ed Smith

Posts: 2834
Joined: 12/29/2001
From: Brantford, ON, CANADA
Status: offline

Barry,

There are some ambiguities here. If I am to believe what I read on the NMPRA site the new lower pitch props were never meant for the LS engine. They came out before any knowledge of the LS engine. We are led to believe.

So, what prop was the LS supposed to run on? Both yourself and RB have said it was next to impossible to use the 7.8 prop. RB had help from Shadel and could not make it work.

Ed S

(in reply to bl10)

Post #: 91

RE: NEW NELSON Q-40 - 2/26/2007 8:08:07 PM

luv to race