RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion?

RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion?
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> Profile and Fun Flying Planes >> RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion?

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion? - 2/1/2008 10:54:36 AM

TJR1

Posts: 272
Joined: 3/20/2007
From: Mobile, AL, USA
Status: offline

Rockin'!

Quique would be proud.

_____________________________

Check your six... I might be on it!
AMA#: 741093 Member: Azalea City Model Aeronautics

(in reply to Spacey)

RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion? - 2/1/2008 2:14:21 PM

Posts: 1391
Joined: 3/29/2004
From: williamstown, NJ, USA
Status: offline

I test mounted the engine/tank & radio gear to get a feel for the CG, Then I did the weigh in, only 7 lbs.!!!! I didnt have the prop on, thats another 4-5 oz. I think, but man is it light!!! Should be the lightest loading of any plane I've had to date. With the OS 1.20AX almost all the way back on the rails,batt in the hatch, the CG is around 8.75. I used a 5 cell 2500 Mah Nimh batt too, could even cut the weight down to less than 7lbs. On a side note: FUTABA 7C, 6EX AND TM-7 MODULES MAY HAVE A POTENTIAL CODE PROBLEM THAT CAN CAUSE A CRASH. After checking my SN#, I found out my 7C is one of the suspect radios,I had 16 flights on my Double Vision without a hitch, but was just lucky no one else had one of these 3 radios on, could have been a disaster! If you have any of theses 3 radios, see the Futaba web site for information.

_____________________________

Jimmy touch tail & I dont care!!!

(in reply to TJR1)

RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion? - 2/3/2008 1:44:41 PM

RCToon

Posts: 113
Joined: 11/14/2002
From: Dubai, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AFSalmon

The 120 ax IS a perfect engine and a great fit. The 120 AX is virtually the same size and weight as the 91 FX. When I replaced my 91 FX with the new 120 AX on my 65" Yak it was a bolt on replacement with no mods, not even a CG change. If the rails are too tight then slowly cut or sand some off both rails evenly and test fit the engine. The width was specified for the 91 FX so you should be REAL close to begin with.

Mike,

I just ordered a Fusion 90 and am trying to decide between a 91FX and a 120AX. I am a little confused by your post. You mention that the choice does not effect the CG? The difference in weight is 300 gms. Also the dimensions according to tower are different. Can you clarify please?

_____________________________

RCToon
---------------

(in reply to AFSalmon)

RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion? - 2/3/2008 3:47:47 PM

Posts: 4424
Joined: 10/10/2002
From: ELK CITY, OK, USA
Status: offline

Spacey, What kind of set up is that you have on the ELEV. It looks like you mounted a servo in the front someplace to drive a push rod to a bell crank. Can you give a few details?

David

_____________________________

"Choose your shirt and shoes by the color. Choose your friends by their character." unknown

(in reply to RCToon)

RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion? - 2/3/2008 6:53:47 PM

Spacey

Posts: 1879
Joined: 1/27/2004
From: Pretoria, SOUTH AFRICA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: daveopam

Spacey, What kind of set up is that you have on the ELEV. It looks like you mounted a servo in the front someplace to drive a push rod to a bell crank. Can you give a few details?

David

Hi David,

Nothing fancy no, just installed a link through the fus so I could use a single servo setup with still split elevators so I could fine tune things if needed. I don't like the little wire U shaped elevator joiners myself and never been able to get em perfect to be honest. All it is a couple of aluminium H9 servo horns with the clamp setups and my buddy machined me a little shaft and some spacers. We dug out a few old bearings that came out a heli somewhere and machined some ply holders for them. Here's a pic of it.

Cheers,
Spacey

Attachments

Click to see fullsize image.

Click for fullsize

(in reply to daveopam)

RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion? - 2/4/2008 1:54:13 PM

Posts: 3817
Joined: 5/24/2002
From: Beavercreek, OH,
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCToon

quote:

ORIGINAL: AFSalmon

The 120 ax IS a perfect engine and a great fit. The 120 AX is virtually the same size and weight as the 91 FX. When I replaced my 91 FX with the new 120 AX on my 65" Yak it was a bolt on replacement with no mods, not even a CG change. If the rails are too tight then slowly cut or sand some off both rails evenly and test fit the engine. The width was specified for the 91 FX so you should be REAL close to begin with.

Mike,

I just ordered a Fusion 90 and am trying to decide between a 91FX and a 120AX. I am a little confused by your post. You mention that the choice does not effect the CG? The difference in weight is 300 gms. Also the dimensions according to tower are different. Can you clarify please?

This is from the Tower Hobbies website:

Admit it: if you could ratchet up horsepower without having to increase the mounting space, you’d probably jump at the chance. Well, here it is. The 120AX boasts 25% more displacement than a .91 (think of the bigger props you can swing!) — and bolts into the same space, with almost no extra weight.
And that’s not all. The 120AX’s innovative Power Box muffler offers mounting versatility that translates into value. Plus, the angled heat sink head not only looks sharp, it adds more surface area, for better cooling. Here's a golden opportunity to boost your airplane's flying capabilities — with almost no modification!

Not sure where you got your info but I bolted in right in the same spot as my old .91 FX and never adjusted any CG.

_____________________________

Mike (Salmon) Pilkenton, Chief Slab Designer
Ohio Model Planes, Team OMP Captain

(in reply to RCToon)

RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion? - 2/4/2008 3:13:45 PM

Posts: 1391
Joined: 3/29/2004
From: williamstown, NJ, USA
Status: offline

For me, the CG & OS 1.20AX wasnt much of an issue, but the fit was. I had to cut part of the covered fuse out to fit it, the cut went all the way thru the balsa plank which left openings into the fuse, not good if oil has a clear path into the frame. I ended up cutting out a little more to allow 1/8" ply sheets to close the holes up, since there are no ply doublers up front, I used some hard wood tri stock to tie in the rails-balsa plank& sheeting together, hope this will hold the front end together, with that "hemi" & 17" prop up front, things might get to shaking pretty good!

_____________________________

Jimmy touch tail & I dont care!!!

(in reply to AFSalmon)

RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion? - 2/4/2008 3:14:48 PM

Posts: 4424
Joined: 10/10/2002
From: ELK CITY, OK, USA
Status: offline

Thanks for the picture Spacey. That looks like a nice set up. I have a Acro 50 ARF that uses a similar plastic set up. I like the solid feel of the set up. I just cant get 3D throws out of it. The inner pushrod will bind against the pivot point at about 30degrees of throw. Your set up looks to have more flexability in the arms.

David

_____________________________

"Choose your shirt and shoes by the color. Choose your friends by their character." unknown

(in reply to AFSalmon)

RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion? - 2/4/2008 5:43:15 PM

RCToon

Posts: 113
Joined: 11/14/2002
From: Dubai, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AFSalmon

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCToon

quote:

ORIGINAL: AFSalmon

The 120 ax IS a perfect engine and a great fit. The 120 AX is virtually the same size and weight as the 91 FX. When I replaced my 91 FX with the new 120 AX on my 65" Yak it was a bolt on replacement with no mods, not even a CG change. If the rails are too tight then slowly cut or sand some off both rails evenly and test fit the engine. The width was specified for the 91 FX so you should be REAL close to begin with.

Mike,

I just ordered a Fusion 90 and am trying to decide between a 91FX and a 120AX. I am a little confused by your post. You mention that the choice does not effect the CG? The difference in weight is 300 gms. Also the dimensions according to tower are different. Can you clarify please?

This is from the Tower Hobbies website:

Admit it: if you could ratchet up horsepower without having to increase the mounting space, you’d probably jump at the chance. Well, here it is. The 120AX boasts 25% more displacement than a .91 (think of the bigger props you can swing!) — and bolts into the same space, with almost no extra weight.
And that’s not all. The 120AX’s innovative Power Box muffler offers mounting versatility that translates into value. Plus, the angled heat sink head not only looks sharp, it adds more surface area, for better cooling. Here's a golden opportunity to boost your airplane's flying capabilities — with almost no modification!

Not sure where you got your info but I bolted in right in the same spot as my old .91 FX and never adjusted any CG.

From Tower:
O.S. 91 FX
Weight: 550g (19.42oz) 24.3oz w/muffler
Horsepower: 2.8 BHP at 15,000 RPM
Length: 96mm the distance from the backplate to drive washer
Width: 42.6mm width of engine neglecting engine mounting flanges
52.0mm distance between centers of the mounting holes

O.S. 120AX
Weight of engine: 22.82oz (647g) without muffler,extension or adaptor
Weight of muffler: 7.074oz (219.2g) with 90° adapter installed
Weight of muffler: 7.907oz (245g) with extension installed
Distance Between Mounting Holes Opposite Side: 2.3" (58mm)
Width Between Mounting Tabs: 2.6" (67mm)

Difference in weight=approx 300 gms
Difference in distance between mounting holes=6 mm
Difference in crankcase width=24.4 mm !!

Or am I reading something wrong?

_____________________________

RCToon
---------------

(in reply to AFSalmon)

RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion? - 2/4/2008 6:31:27 PM

Posts: 3817
Joined: 5/24/2002
From: Beavercreek, OH,
Status: offline

The difference in mounting holes is only 3mm per opposite side. That is the key figure, not the overall crackcase width. The difference in weight is only a few onces. The mounting hole width on the same side is identical from the two engines. I'm telling you I literally unbolted the .91FX and bolted the new 120 in it's place. Very little hole adjusting was required. The Yak has been flying with the new 120 since NashBro. Works great. If you are worried about the size you can stick with the 91 FX...it is still a great engine.

_____________________________

Mike (Salmon) Pilkenton, Chief Slab Designer
Ohio Model Planes, Team OMP Captain

(in reply to RCToon)

RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion? - 2/4/2008 7:06:21 PM

RCToon

Posts: 113
Joined: 11/14/2002
From: Dubai, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AFSalmon

The difference in mounting holes is only 3mm per opposite side. That is the key figure, not the overall crackcase width. The difference in weight is only a few onces. The mounting hole width on the same side is identical from the two engines. I'm telling you I literally unbolted the .91FX and bolted the new 120 in it's place. Very little hole adjusting was required. The Yak has been flying with the new 120 since NashBro. Works great. If you are worried about the size you can stick with the 91 FX...it is still a great engine.

Not really worried, can always modify the mounting...already ordered the 120AX

I would not call a difference of 12+ ounces, a few, though...

_____________________________

RCToon
---------------

(in reply to AFSalmon)

RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion? - 2/4/2008 7:23:32 PM

Posts: 1391
Joined: 3/29/2004
From: williamstown, NJ, USA
Status: offline

There must be some differences in production then, I didnt mind shaving the rails, thats easy enough, but the flanges didnt clear the fuse sides, had to do a bit of carving there. Oh well, between the covering falling off, I'm not about to sweat the appearance at this point.

_____________________________

Jimmy touch tail & I dont care!!!

(in reply to RCToon)

RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion? - 2/4/2008 7:40:29 PM

TJR1

Posts: 272
Joined: 3/20/2007
From: Mobile, AL, USA
Status: offline

I had to do some trimming myself on the fuselage. It's no big deal really. The mounting flanges on the 1.20 aren't rectangular and flat like most engines. They have, for lack of a better word, ears, in the area of the bolt holes where the material (metal) is a little beefier.

_____________________________

Check your six... I might be on it!
AMA#: 741093 Member: Azalea City Model Aeronautics

(in reply to MIXMASTER)

RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion? - 2/4/2008 8:05:57 PM

Spacey

Posts: 1879
Joined: 1/27/2004
From: Pretoria, SOUTH AFRICA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCToon

From Tower:
O.S. 91 FX
Weight: 550g (19.42oz) 24.3oz w/muffler
Horsepower: 2.8 BHP at 15,000 RPM
Length: 96mm the distance from the backplate to drive washer
Width: 42.6mm width of engine neglecting engine mounting flanges
52.0mm distance between centers of the mounting holes

O.S. 120AX
Weight of engine: 22.82oz (647g) without muffler,extension or adaptor
Weight of muffler: 7.074oz (219.2g) with 90° adapter installed
Weight of muffler: 7.907oz (245g) with extension installed
Distance Between Mounting Holes Opposite Side: 2.3" (58mm)
Width Between Mounting Tabs: 2.6" (67mm)

Difference in weight=approx 300 gms
Difference in distance between mounting holes=6 mm
Difference in crankcase width=24.4 mm !!

Or am I reading something wrong?

One thing to note, Tower's weight of the 91FX is without muffler. I'm sure it's just a typo. Go visit O.S.'s website and you'll see that all their motors are always listed without muffler. Why they do it this way I can't say but it's always been like this. In their manuals it's indicated the same. You'll see the 91FX is listed as 550g and the 1.20AX as 647g. Sure the 1.20 is heavier without muffler but I highly doubt that the 1.20's muffler is heavier than the 91's, matter a fact it might even be lighter as the new AX style muffler is much smaller than the FX's. So yea, difference in weight I highly doubt is 300gram...maybe a 100, maybe even less. Unfortunately I don't have a .91FX so I can't compare, I do own a 1.20 though and it's a wonderfull motor. My research ages ago revealed to me that out of the motors in this size range and weight range the Saito 1.25 was actually the lightest at around 715g if memory serves with muffler, I didn't check out the YS 1.10 though. But I did have the .91FX, 1.20AX, Saito 1.20's and some 1.08's in the research.

Edit: Forgot the link to the specs: http://www.osengines.com/engines/engine-specs.html

(in reply to RCToon)

RE: Why you love the OMP Fusion? - 2/4/2008 8:14:51 PM

Spacey