RE: New Hangar 9 B-25

RE: New Hangar 9 B-25
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

Canopy Rails for Warbirds - ARF
Seller: NCIS
Details: $20.00 | 11/19/2008 | Classified Ad
We will rotate YOUR AD in this spot if you select "Forum Featured" when placing or editing your ad!

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> RC Warbirds and Warplanes >> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25

Page: << < prev 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 - 8/21/2008 6:34:30 PM

lesliehowell

Posts: 21
Joined: 10/11/2002
From: Des Plaines, IL, USA
Status: offline

Ken,

I can't see the text very good when I respond. Both engines should point out and not in towards the fuselage. This is the way a twin will fly on one engine in our hobby. The second secret is to not fly at full throttle. I fly at about 75% power and when a engine quits it won't spin in. And besides, I am just like you, if I want more power I will just put a larger engine in an airplane.

Sincerely yours,
Les

(in reply to modawg73)

Post #: 426

RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 - 8/21/2008 9:49:19 PM

modawg73

Posts: 53
Joined: 1/18/2008
From: Mason, OH, USA
Status: offline

Les,

Thanks for the help!

Ken

(in reply to lesliehowell)

Post #: 427

RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 - 8/25/2008 6:14:36 PM

jbarnes

Posts: 507
Joined: 1/13/2006
From: Mead, CO, USA
Status: offline

Just wanted to report that I can't say enough good things about this bird. Been flying it all Summer and its just rock solid, a joy to fly and always a attention getter. This is my first larger electric setup and I must say it is working out great. I've got the following setup in mine;
Eflite 46
Eflite 60 amp esc
5 cell 4000's
13 x 6.5 e props
785 watts per side at 43 amps
About 7 minutes of flying with 2500 mah used per side.

fyi, no retracts on mine.

_____________________________

Longmont Aircraft Modelers Association
Longmont, CO visit our site at www.lamarcclub.com

(in reply to modawg73)

Post #: 428

RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 - 8/26/2008 2:35:02 AM

show871

Posts: 200
Joined: 8/28/2007
From: Fort collins, CO, USA
Status: offline

Flew my B25 for the first time this weekend, and with the .36's it was SKEEEEEEETCHY! I need way more power where I am @, has anyone successfully mounted saito .82s? Is the carb to far back hitting the firewall? If so has anyone done os .55ax's? I have one on another plane and it actually is super quet and deep sounding with the stock muffler. Any pics or feedback on .55ax? Thanks 871

(in reply to modawg73)

Post #: 429

RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 - 8/26/2008 4:34:03 AM

tevans55

Posts: 196
Joined: 8/4/2007
From: Louisville, KY, USA
Status: offline

Show871-
I have OS .46 AX's on mine and it is plenty fast @ 16.75 lbs. Just my opinion but I think the extra power and weight would be a little stressful to the airframe and your nerves.

(in reply to show871)

Post #: 430

RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 - 8/26/2008 2:41:18 PM

show871

Posts: 200
Joined: 8/28/2007
From: Fort collins, CO, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tevans55

Show871-
I have OS .46 AX's on mine and it is plenty fast @ 16.75 lbs. Just my opinion but I think the extra power and weight would be a little stressful to the airframe and your nerves.

I hear ya.....but @ 5000asl a .46 runs like a .36 down in KY. How did the .46 fit? I guess it is the same case as the .55. Thanks 871

(in reply to tevans55)

Post #: 431

RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 - 8/26/2008 10:52:34 PM

tevans55

Posts: 196
Joined: 8/4/2007
From: Louisville, KY, USA
Status: offline

show871-
My B-25 came with the .36's installed. When I changed to the .46's to my surprise the firewall holes on the mounts were slotted and the mounts spread perfectly to fit the OS .46's. I used the Slimline Q Series mufflers which give a deeper sound than the Pitts muffler. Had to open the bottom of the cowl around the muffler but it really doesn't stick out. Here is a couple of shots that give you an idea of how it looks.

As far as the difference in altitude, I have flown at 6100 feet with another plane and I didn't notice any difference in flight characteristics...I did have to adjust the needle valve but I feel confident that the change in altitude won't change your OS .46's into EVO .36's.

By the way...check the stats on OS Engines web site...the .46 AX and .55 AX are rated the same 1.7 @ 16,000 rpm. I realize there is a small torque difference but I honestly think you will be very happy with the fit and power of the .46's. Good Luck!

Attachments

Click to see fullsize image.

Click for fullsize

Click to see fullsize image.

Click for fullsize

< Message edited by tevans55 -- 8/26/2008 10:59:26 PM >

(in reply to show871)

Post #: 432

RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 - 8/26/2008 11:01:03 PM

modawg73

Posts: 53
Joined: 1/18/2008
From: Mason, OH, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: show871

Flew my B25 for the first time this weekend, and with the .36's it was SKEEEEEEETCHY! I need way more power where I am @, has anyone successfully mounted saito .82s? Is the carb to far back hitting the firewall? If so has anyone done os .55ax's? I have one on another plane and it actually is super quet and deep sounding with the stock muffler. Any pics or feedback on .55ax? Thanks 871

871,

Check out the following page with the dimensions posted for the .82.

Saito Single Cylinder Manual

It is slightly bigger than the .62s that I have mounted. I think it would fit without major modifications. I had to drill holes further forward on the engine mount. Then I had to move the cowl forward, and used blocks on the firewall to accomplish this. My guess is that the .82 would fit fine.

The reason I had to move the engine forward was the throttle arm. In my setup I used flexible steel cable for the throttle control, and there wasn't enough room for the needed play to work properly.

I think it would fit. Whether or not it is too much power for the plane is another discussion entirely.

Ken

(in reply to show871)

Post #: 433

RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 - 8/26/2008 11:03:14 PM

modawg73

Posts: 53
Joined: 1/18/2008
From: Mason, OH, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tevans55

show871-
My B-25 came with the .36's installed. When I changed to the .46's to my surprise the firewall holes on the mounts were slotted and the mounts spread perfectly to fit the OS .46's. I used the Slimline Q Series mufflers which give a deeper sound than the Pitts muffler. Had to open the bottom of the cowl around the muffler but it really doesn't stick out. Here is a couple of shots that give you an idea of how it looks.

As far as the difference in altitude, I have flown at 6100 feet with another plane and I didn't notice any difference in flight characteristics...I did have to adjust the needle valve but I feel confident that the change in altitude won't change your OS .46's into EVO .36's.

By the way...check the stats on OS Engines web site...the .46 AX and .55 AX are rated the same 1.7 @ 16,000 rpm. I realize there is a small torque difference but I honestly think you will be very happy with the fit and power of the .46's. Good Luck!

Tevans,

How are those landing lights working out? They sure look cool. Do you fly at night?

Ken

(in reply to tevans55)

Post #: 434

RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 - 8/26/2008 11:24:10 PM

tevans55

Posts: 196
Joined: 8/4/2007
From: Louisville, KY, USA
Status: offline

modawg73-
Nah, can't fly at night...they're just for cool looks! They do look good at dusk and when taking off and landing.

(in reply to modawg73)

Post #: 435

RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 - 8/27/2008 1:51:44 AM

show871

Posts: 200
Joined: 8/28/2007
From: Fort collins, CO, USA
Status: offline

T55, thanks for the info! I just was wondering if the q series sounds are as quiet as the stock muffler. I really dont like the cheap tingy sound you get out of a standard pitts......is the sound pretty good? That is SWEET the mounts slide out to accept the .46! I think I might just go ahead and get the .55 for the slightly extra power, I have had the .55, and .46 back to back on a mojo and there was a noticeable difference in power. This will hopefully buy me enough power to do some trick 3 blades. Thanks for your input 871

< Message edited by show871 -- 8/27/2008 1:52:14 AM >

(in reply to tevans55)

Post #: 436

RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 - 8/27/2008 10:59:04 AM

raveon

Posts: 17
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: WIGAN, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: offline

dear tevans55 i have os 40fxs in my aircraft with 11x7 props does that sound okay to you or do you have any advice that may help me. this is the second b25 ive had first one crashed due to a engine out at low altitude.regards Ray

(in reply to tevans55)

Post #: 437

RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 - 8/28/2008 3:34:20 AM

tevans55

Posts: 196
Joined: 8/4/2007
From: Louisville, KY, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: show871

T55, thanks for the info! I just was wondering if the q series sounds are as quiet as the stock muffler. I really dont like the cheap tingy sound you get out of a standard pitts......is the sound pretty good? That is SWEET the mounts slide out to accept the .46! I think I might just go ahead and get the .55 for the slightly extra power, I have had the .55, and .46 back to back on a mojo and there was a noticeable difference in power. This will hopefully buy me enough power to do some trick 3 blades. Thanks for your input 871

The Q Series muffler does sound much better than the Pitts mufflers. I have had 2 people ask me if I was running 4 strokes because the sound is unique...definately not tinny sounding. Also if you look closely at the engine photo above you will notice that I installed a red colored rubber gasket between the engine mount and firewall. I do this to take a lot of the high frequency vibration sound out of the plane. Most planes are built like drums (a hard frame with some type of skin spread over the frame). When you hard mount an engine I have noticed that you often get loud sounds created by this drum effect. I like to use gasket material or soft mounts when appropriate to help eliminate some of the high frequency vibration...it helps with sound and vibration.

(in reply to show871)

Post #: 438

RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 - 8/28/2008 3:48:05 AM

tevans55

Posts: 196
Joined: 8/4/2007
From: Louisville, KY, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: raveon

dear tevans55 i have os 40fxs in my aircraft with 11x7 props does that sound okay to you or do you have any advice that may help me. this is the second b25 ive had first one crashed due to a engine out at low altitude.regards Ray

I have found the best performance on my .46's was with the 11x6 and 11x7 2 blade props. I think I would try 10x6's on your .40's. That would help them to run cooler with a higher RPM. I think you might find improved performance and more reliability. I spent about 6 weeks breaking in my engines and tweaking the idle and high end performance. I probably burned 2 gallons of fuel. I know this is probably a little overkill but when I took to the air engine reliability was the last thing on my mind. I also was testing the performance of a bunch of different props both nylon and wood. I found that the lighter wood master airscrew props performed best because they were lighter than zingers and rev faster and the engine wasn't rotating as much weight. Hope this helps a little.

(in reply to raveon)