Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (Full Version)

All Forums >> [RC Airplanes] >> ARF or RTF >> NitroModels Support



Message


sdueck -> Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (2/26/2007 3:17:40 AM)

Does anyone have experience with this model? Any thoughts?

http://www.nitroplanes.com/newaepocat50.html

I want to get one and put a Magnum .91 on it... [:D]




andersm3 -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (2/28/2007 4:48:51 PM)

[:'(] I bought one of these, but mine was the previous one that is all red and looks almost identical. The model is assembled in a cost efficient manner. Directions have no writing (only pictures) which makes it almost impossable for inexperienced modelers. Dont follow the tail wheel directions, I would toss the included tail wheel. I was just taken by a crook from Nevada on a OS 46 AX that I was going to put in mine, went by the user name RENOHELIPRO. Ordered the OS 46 AX from Tower Hobbies yesterday and its on the way now. I have my model ready to go, only need the motor for the Bisson pits muffler that I have sitting around.




opjose -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (2/28/2007 5:00:27 PM)

The Tower .46 doesn't really settle in until it has had about 1 gallon of fuel run through it.

Check your tunings by running the engine upside down, head down.

If it runs reliably this way, as well as nose up and down, you'll have no problems.

It's also a bit touchy with fuel tank pressurization.... which the included muffler is not great at.

It's best to tune the engine on 1/3 of a tank of fuel, no more.

It also doesn't like to run too rich.




andersm3 -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (2/28/2007 10:38:22 PM)

If I knew how to post pics here I would, I was able to load them to my gallery. The .91 would be way to much for this model, as it is very light, not sure what mine weighs in at, but am sure the OS 46 will rock this plane.




sdueck -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/1/2007 1:38:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: andersm3

If I knew how to post pics here I would, I was able to load them to my gallery. The .91 would be way to much for this model, as it is very light, not sure what mine weighs in at, but am sure the OS 46 will rock this plane.


Would an OS max .40 do ok? I am at altitude though... (5500 ft above sea level)

Email me the pics, I post them up... I'll PM you my email...




andersm3 -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/1/2007 3:22:39 AM)

I would think that the O.S. 40 would pull this plane fine. I was going to pull a O.S. 40 LA off a trainer and stick it on this model, but then I would have to put something else on the trainer.




sdueck -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/1/2007 4:04:22 AM)

Here are some of andersm3 pics... Enjoy

[IMG]http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m295/smdueck/PoleCat2.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m295/smdueck/PoleCat1.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m295/smdueck/PoleCat3.jpg[/IMG]




andersm3 -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/9/2007 7:33:32 PM)

Decided to put the OS 40 LA on this plane, as I think that the 46 would be a little to much for it. Also decided to use the stock muffler and not the pits muffler I had. Will let you know the weight and flight characteristics soon, as the snow is melting fast :)




superman65355 -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/18/2007 6:54:42 AM)

I am thinking of gettin one of the pole cats i have a the giles 202 with a magnum .52 and katana with a ys .61 both planes fly GREAT so I'm sure another 52 will do fine in the pole cat..... whatcha think?




rcplaneworld -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/18/2007 4:12:51 PM)

I have about 30 planes in my hanger and I have been flying for over 30 years. I have come to the realization that more power is better. You do not have to fly at full throttle all of the time. I would put a nice 45, 46 50 or 51 engine on the plane. I am disappointed in the new OS engines, the remote needle valves are touchy, and the LA series is sleeved and works better as a paper weight. I do have an AX 46 that is reliable and fast, about 5 clicks and you’re out of tune big time. The Super Tiger, Thunder Tiger, are economical and just as fast and reliable.

4 strokes cost way too much, yet I own Saitos, YS and Magnums, and you think well I will save fuel and recoup the costs.... 4 strokes burn about 1/3 the amount per flight compared to 2 strokes. Check on the cost of 25% nitro fuel, yes you can use 15% but the 4 strokes idle more reliable and at a lower RPM with the higher nitro content. Now figure your weekly fuels cost double when you go to the higher nitro content.

I also fly, Rossi, Dub Jett, Webra, Neson, Norvel and some old Como engines. All of these engines have their own merits.

Always make sure your engines bolts are tight including the mount and prop, yes your new engine may have loose bolts from the factory. Make sure the carb is seated all of the way down on the O-RING. Your engine should die when you put your finger over the carb intake at idle. If not you have an air leak. Many pilots do not understand that there is a low idle adjustment on the arm side of the carb. Set your engines needle valve rich then start it. At full throttle pinch the fuel line and let go, it should pick up RPM, if not your too lean, if there is a large swing in RPM turn the needle valve in a few clicks (3 to 5) and try it again, you should have a minimum of 400 rpm increase if your new at this, richer is better for new engines (higher swing in RPM).

Now bring the engine down to idle, most engines at this point have a problem, the factory sets them too rich. Let the engine idle and listen to it, if it starts to sputter and or drop rpms the longer it idles then the rich engine is loading up on fuel. It builds up in the crank housing until the engine has trouble pushing the fuel around the crank. Try turning the low idle screw in 1/8th of a turn at a time, this screw is located on the arm side, mainly located inside the arm pivot of the carb; some carbs have a second needle valve instead of a screw head. Now restart the engine and bring it up to full throttle to clear the engine of access fuel. Now back to idle, and repeat until it will idle on its own for at least 3 to 4 minutes. Now quickly go to full throttle from idle. If the engine goes "RAP" and dies then it could be too lean at low idle, if it slowly picks up RPM or sputters it has built up fuel as it is still too rich. If it transitions quickly and runs smoothly then you’re done. Otherwise again 1/8 turn in to lean it out a little, 1/8th turn out to go richer, repeat full throttle then idle for a few minutes and test again by going quickly to full throttle.... you get the idea. If you don’t idle for a few minutes you don’t give the engine a chance to load up. Examples of this in real life is sitting by the runway waiting to taxi or building up your nerve take off!!!

Tuned pipes are prone to this, ever watch them run them up to full throttle and taxi quickly out? That’s why.......

As to the EVO engines, same rules apply, but they have mechanical limits installed to keep novices from ruining the engine by running it too lean. After you are done playing around with your EVO and want a reliable strong motor to get your inexperienced flying out of trouble? Then pull the prop and go to a 10x6 2 blade and spinner. Next pull the stop pins from the low and high idle screw and needle valve, also take the nut and bolt out of the length of the muffler and pull the baffle out of the middle of it and throw it away. Make sure you use lock tite when you screw the muffler back together, the rear part of the muffler has threads in the casting, put the bolt in tight first, and then put the lock nut on last, kind of a cheap double nut type design even though you only have 1 nut.

Re tune the engine per the above instructions, and be totally amazed how well the EVO runs now smooth, fast, and no more dead stick landings.

LASTLY!!! It is so much easier to land if your engine will idle at a LOW RPM and not die. Follow these instructions and dead stick lands will only happen from running out of fuel as your will enjoy flying so much more that you might stay up too long and run out of fuel.




samuel_a15 -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/20/2007 11:50:27 PM)

I was thinking about buying this plane since it looks good and is cheap. How is it flying? To land and so on? Is it a good 3d plane? It feels like the engines in the specs would be to week but perhaps Im wrong. I had a trainer with about the same weight and it had a size 40 engine and it didnt do any 3d, was rather slow and so on.




rcplaneworld -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/21/2007 3:13:48 PM)

I would go with something bigger than a 40. The engine brands have wildly different amounts of power. Rossi is a work horse but heavy. Dub Jett has a sport 40 that uses a 8.5x7n prop, 21000 rpm, great for speed, not 3D and expensive. Go with a Super Tiger 46 or even a 50 sized motor, cheap on fuel, cheap on the wallet. I have one of these engines on a 40 sized Free Style ARF, flys all of the 3D manuevers with no problems. One of the best things about flying this plane is it did not cost enough to worry about crashing it. Go spend a bundle on a plane and see how much more timid you fly it.




opjose -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/21/2007 4:13:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rcplaneworld

Go spend a bundle on a plane and see how much more timid you fly it.



Oh so true!




rcplaneworld -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/21/2007 4:36:09 PM)

I was just reading the review on the 33% Katana, great looking plane! I was adding up in my head costs.... Even the 600.00 arf, engine 1100.00 and multi metal servos per control, 1024 pcm radio recv, voltage regulators batteries, seperate ignition systems, carbon gear and wing rod..... hmmmmm maybe 40 sized 3D is a much better way to go......




johnnychimpo -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/21/2007 7:35:38 PM)

Here are some pics of my Pole Cat after the repairs i had to make. Put wires on the tail section.
[image]http://image.rcuniverse.com/forum/upfiles/166610/Ki20583.jpg[/image]
[image]http://image.rcuniverse.com/forum/upfiles/166610/Up48010.jpg[/image]




WYDAH -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/23/2007 5:58:36 AM)

Hi Johnny,

Can I ask where you put the CG point for balance? I have a very similar model (the red one like andersm3) which has a slightly different rudder and elevator. My maiden flight last fall went horribly wrong. It flew (if you could call it flying) like my CG was way off. It was nose up, flying on it's tail for 3/4's of a lap around the field before I gave in and tried to set it down. Ended up just breaking the landing gear mounts out of the belly. Should be fairly easy to repair, but I don't understand why it behaved so badly in the air. I was running a OS 46AX and had the CG right where the manufacturer recommended at 85mm back.
Before pic below:

Thanks.




johnnychimpo -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/23/2007 12:45:29 PM)

85mm ????? Sounds like you were definitely tail heavy with those characteristic's in flight. My CG is slightly fwd of the main spar on the wing. The book calls for 60 to 65mm from LE where the wing meets the fuse which was not on the spar so i moved it back just a tad. 85 sounds like way too much. Make sure you measure it strait line and not along the curve of the airfoil.

What size alum spinner do you have on yours? I like your style elevator much better. Mine has too much throw on it IMO and too much surface area. I think the designers of this versions thought that it would attract a 3d crowd. Its too heavy to do those types of maneuvers.

Mine has about 9 tanks run thur it right now and i think that with a .52 4 stroke its perfect. A larger engine might tear it apart at full throttle. [8|] I never run at full throttle unless im climbing. This plane flys awesome! I love the landing, stall characteristics, and feel. I think i need a bit more throw on my aileron dual rates but im having a blast flying it as is. Every landing has been predictable and smooth as silk.




opjose -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/23/2007 4:10:06 PM)

Nice job on the tail supports.

What did you use?





johnnychimpo -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/23/2007 7:13:58 PM)

It was a product by Dubro. The package has either wire or Kevlar string you can use to secure you tail section. Has all hardware except the screws that go thru the surfaces.




opjose -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/23/2007 7:18:27 PM)

Somewhere I have several of those yet unopened...

I've been using CF rods on the smaller planes, which are trivial to install with a little epoxy.

Have you flown it since the fix?

Has this cured the flutter?





johnnychimpo -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/23/2007 8:19:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: opjose

Somewhere I have several of those yet unopened...

I've been using CF rods on the smaller planes, which are trivial to install with a little epoxy.

Have you flown it since the fix?

Has this cured the flutter?



Oh yeah. Its flying great now! I still think the elevator would benefit from 2 servos instead of the Y push rod but i'm not messing with it right now. Just having fun flying it. I have been flying cautiously and never full throttle on a dive or anything.




andersm3 -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/23/2007 10:30:47 PM)

I havent balanced my red one yet, Just got the motor mounted a few days ago, only have to balance it now. My plan's also say the CG is supposed to be at 85mm from the leading edge, glad I havent done it yet, sounds like a bad place to have it yet. So the CG is best around 67mm??? Spending some time flying other planes today, 62 and almost windless. [:D]




WYDAH -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/23/2007 11:42:28 PM)

Thanks Johnny for the info. I'll have to attempt a repair and try to adjust my CG forward. I remember having to add a couple of ounces of lead way down in the back of the fuse near the tailwheel in order to get the CG back to 85 where the mfg said it was suppose to be. I doubt I'm going to be able to remove it since I had a heck of a time getting that far back and I epoxied it in there pretty good. That means adding more weight to the nose to bring the CG forward again. Some of these overseas manufacturers really need to pay attention to more of the specifics which can make or break (literally) a good flying model.

The spinner is a Great Planes 2-1/4". I like the GP spinners, they are cheaper than say True Turn, and they seem to be good quality and are polished up nicely. You can find it HERE

I guess I had mine originally set at 80mm. I just found some pics I took when I first balanced the plane. Sounds like i need to move it forward almost 20mm more to achieve 60mm.

Thanks again for the info.





johnnychimpo -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (3/24/2007 2:23:05 AM)

Just pick it up by your fingers in the middle of the main spar. This is where i have it. 60 maybe too far forward with a full tank. It will be seriously nose heavy. The red one looks sweet you guys. I wish i got that version actually.




papajeff -> RE: Pole Cat 50 - 51" ARF (10/4/2007 4:37:03 PM)

Hey guys, nothing since March??????????? Come on......how about an update. I just got my PoleCat and need some of your experience to get me through the basically lacking instruction manual. Any help you could give will be most appreciated!!!!




Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>  

Valid CSS!




SITE MAP!   : :   FORUM RULES

© 2001 - 2007 24-7 RC, LLC, all rights reserved.
0.640625