RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Search This Thread

Printable Version

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> Pylon Universe - RC Pylon Racing >> Scale Racing >> RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento Page: << < prev 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/26/2009 7:56 PM

still4given

Posts: 968
Score: 100
Joined: 1/27/2006
Last Login: 3/18/2010
From: Victorville, CA, USA
Status: online

Hi Mark,

Thanks for joining in. The 90/120/526 is nowhere close to the current chart. Currently, the 4S-1.20 need 550 squares and the 2S-.90 needs 650 squares. I'm not sure where you got 526. If our main interest is to even up the chart, we should probably leave the 4 stroke side alone. They are not having problems at all. I don't see the need to reduce the wing area for the 4 strokes. Once the 2 strokes are brought up to similar power per wing area as the 4 strokes enjoy now, you will start seeing more two strokes in Silver and Gold. I agree, that the wing area chart works OK for bronze, but changing the 2 stroke side won't hurt them either. When the wing area chart was designed, there was only one class and no breakout. It's when you start trying to go fast that the imbalance of the chart really starts to show. Some folks think it is a good thing because they prefer the "sound" of the 4 strokes and want to give them the edge. Some races I've see, band YS, Jett and Nelson in an attempt to make their charts work.

Someone told me that SAMS made a requirement that the engines need to be able to idle for a certain amount of time. That basically eliminates the use of Nelson engines. Is that fair? Sounds like more bias towards the 4 strokes. It's going to be difficult to get the YS crowd to agree to changes when they have a decided advantage at the present. I'm just trying to open things up so more folks can be a part of it and give people more choices.

Blessings, Terry

_____________________________

Live simply. Love generously. Care deeply.
Speak kindly. Leave the rest to God

Hide Signatures

(in reply to summin)

Post #: 176

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/26/2009 9:09 PM

Jimmy Skids

Posts: 365
Score: 100
Joined: 6/10/2003
Last Login: 3/17/2010
From: Sacramento, CA, USA
Status: offline

Mark,
Thanks for the chime in, good points. One comment, I did put the 90/120 at 550 squares and not 526.

Terry,
I disagree with your comment that there shouldn't be a change to the 4 stroke side, if you look at my proposed change for 4 strokes it lowers some of the motors for wing area below a 120, this was to bring in more ARF's to the mix. For instance I would have a 110 four stroke moved from it's current 513 to 490.

I would again ask what needs to be done. Looking at my proposed chart does it not encourage more 2 strokes? If you want to see more 60 size planes on 2 strokes then what size would be competitive (not dominant, but competitive)? I believe that putting up to a .95 two stroke on a WM 40 Mustang should be more than competitive in Silver and Bronze. As a side bar, I flew a 91 four stroke in our Tango race (silver class) this past week end and broke out on 20% nitro with a WM Voodoo. That is the same plane that could put upto a 140L under the hood.

As for the idle rule, this is for safety. It was to show that a plane could idle and then come back up. Throttle control in flight is important for safety and as such the rule was created.

All,
I've said this before, if we want to make a change, it needs to be small. I don't see sweeping changes getting by all three groups and for those with safety waivers majors changes don't make change worth pursuing. I'm willing to carry minor changes to our race CD's and have approached them on the subject already. There is interest, but I know they will say no way to match of displacement for 2 strokes and 4 strokes. I thought that getting a bigger 2 stroke to 4 stroke ratio would help even things out for the classes and bring in more pilots and choices as to what to fly.

Before we go looking to change the charts, let's a group decide where we want to go.

1. Make WB racing easier to get into for new pilots by having more engine/plane choices to compete with. (then we can figure out how big to go)

or

2. Make it easier for two stokes to compete in Gold.

Jimmy Skids

Attachments

Attachment.pdf

Hide Signatures

(in reply to still4given)

Post #: 177

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/26/2009 9:30 PM

Teddy_Bear

Posts: 44
Score: 100
Joined: 10/15/2007
Last Login: 3/17/2010
From: Elk Grove, CA, USA
Status: offline

Viva YS!

< Message edited by Teddy_Bear -- 10/26/2009 11:44 PM >

_____________________________

Todd "Teddy Bear" Chandler
.................Respect the Bear.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Jimmy Skids)

Post #: 178

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/26/2009 10:20 PM

Teddy_Bear

Posts: 44
Score: 100
Joined: 10/15/2007
Last Login: 3/17/2010
From: Elk Grove, CA, USA
Status: offline

< Message edited by Teddy_Bear -- 10/26/2009 11:45 PM >

_____________________________

Todd "Teddy Bear" Chandler
.................Respect the Bear.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Teddy_Bear)

Post #: 179

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/26/2009 10:25 PM

summin

Posts: 14
Score: 100
Joined: 6/12/2005
Last Login: 3/18/2010
From: Mountain View, CA, USA
Status: offline

Terry, I think I got the 90/120/526 from a table you might have posted some pages back. Jim, your table looks good although it still kicks a 91 2c up the chart. I would prefer the current 1% fudge factor approach which would let me run a 91 DF motor at 550 sq. in. I do think you've stated the objectives very well and I believe they can both be achieved.

I suppose a very simple approach would be to just multiply the 2c displacements by 1.5 and leave the 4c displacements and wing areas the same.

Mark

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Teddy_Bear)

Post #: 180

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/26/2009 10:41 PM

Jimmy Skids

Posts: 365
Score: 100
Joined: 6/10/2003
Last Login: 3/17/2010
From: Sacramento, CA, USA
Status: offline

Mark,
I'm sure that we could move every 2 stroke up by .01 and make it work. I was just trying to ball park it for starters.

Guys,
Mark has put out a differnet direction which in theory seems to look good. What about going 1.5 times the displacement of a 2 stroke for a 4 stroke. This would mean if we kept the 2.40 as the maximum 4 stroke that we would then look to raise the maximum 2 stroke to a 160. I would state that we still keep at the 400 min wing area and let anything fly as long as it meets 400 squares.

Skids

Hide Signatures

(in reply to summin)

Post #: 181

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/26/2009 11:31 PM

still4given

Posts: 968
Score: 100
Joined: 1/27/2006
Last Login: 3/18/2010
From: Victorville, CA, USA
Status: online

Hi Jim,

My statement about the four strokes was based on the fact that many 4 stroke guys are breaking out of Gold with the current wing areas. Why do they need to go to a smaller wing, to make it easier? The only thing I see happening there is to let folks flying YS 1.10's to use a Kyosho Tony. Almost all of the ARFs currently being used in our warbird racing have more than ample area for a 1.10. I can't think of a single ARF that has 513 squares. If someone is flying that size they either clipped the wings or built a special wing for it.

As far as the Nelson, I hardly know anyone who idles their engines in the Gold class. Most take off at full throttle or close to it and land dead stick. Some don't but the majority do. You can't make me believe that a YS 1.20 on a .40 size plane running 60% nitro is somehow safer than a Nelson on a smaller warbird. Nah, I'm not fooled, that rule was made to keep Nelsons out of the mix. It takes skill to fly either plane and neither should not be flown by a beginner.

AFAIAC, that is the same reason that guys are fighting the use of the bigger two strokes. The engines are no bigger or heavier than their 4 stroke counter parts. Guys just don't want to run against them. You rarely see .60 size birds in Gold because they need a $600-$700 engine to make them competitive. You might see more if the larger 2 strokes are allowed.

As far as the two choices you listed, I think we can accomplish both with the chart I made up. It probably needs some tweaking, but I believe I could put together a Gold plane with a two stroke by using that chart and it really opens up the possibilities for new-comers.

Anyway, I'm enjoying the discussion and it's good to see others are joining in. Maybe we really will accomplish something this time around.

Blessings, Terry

_____________________________

Live simply. Love generously. Care deeply.
Speak kindly. Leave the rest to God

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Teddy_Bear)

Post #: 182

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/26/2009 11:37 PM

still4given

Posts: 968
Score: 100
Joined: 1/27/2006
Last Login: 3/18/2010
From: Victorville, CA, USA
Status: online

Sorry, you guys posted while I was typing. I would rather see a 1.3 multiplier. That would pit a .90 two stroke against a 1.20 YS which I think is a better match.

_____________________________

Live simply. Love generously. Care deeply.
Speak kindly. Leave the rest to God

Hide Signatures

(in reply to still4given)

Post #: 183

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/27/2009 12:11 AM

Jimmy Skids

Posts: 365
Score: 100
Joined: 6/10/2003
Last Login: 3/17/2010
From: Sacramento, CA, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: still4given

Hi Jim,

My statement about the four strokes was based on the fact that many 4 stroke guys are breaking out of Gold with the current wing areas. Why do they need to go to a smaller wing, to make it easier? The only thing I see happening there is to let folks flying YS 1.10's to use a Kyosho Tony. Almost all of the ARFs currently being used in our warbird racing have more than ample area for a 1.10. I can't think of a single ARF that has 513 squares. If someone is flying that size they either clipped the wings or built a special wing for it.

First, most guys are not breaking out of gold where we are in Sacramento, and there are close to 20 pilot who raced gold this year...... and I've also seen 2 stroke guys break out in the Gold as well. Second, you have to remember that the YS 120 and 110 motors are out of production so now you're looking at a 115 motor which based upon the old rules would require 533 (appx) and there are quite a few ARFs and Kits that are just under that number by going to 520 you allow for more options.

As far as the Nelson, I hardly know anyone who idles their engines in the Gold class. Most take off at full throttle or close to it and land dead stick. Some don't but the majority do. You can't make me believe that a YS 1.20 on a .40 size plane running 60% nitro is somehow safer than a Nelson on a smaller warbird. Nah, I'm not fooled, that rule was made to keep Nelsons out of the mix. It takes skill to fly either plane and neither should not be flown by a beginner.

Well in Sacramento everyone idles their motors so I could send you a list of over 20 pilot's who do and can. No matter what motor you put on a plane that is moving at 140+ MPH it will be dangerous in the wrong hands, I never stated otherwise, infact my main goal is safety first and not to enable those that aren't capable of the speed to have a cheap way to get there before they are ready to do so.

AFAIAC, that is the same reason that guys are fighting the use of the bigger two strokes. The engines are no bigger or heavier than their 4 stroke counter parts. Guys just don't want to run against them. You rarely see .60 size birds in Gold because they need a $600-$700 engine to make them competitive. You might see more if the larger 2 strokes are allowed.

So for you it's about making gold more competitive and not brining in more racers. I for one prefer the 40 size planes but maybe that's because they take up less space around the pylon and give me more room to get by.

As far as the two choices you listed, I think we can accomplish both with the chart I made up. It probably needs some tweaking, but I believe I could put together a Gold plane with a two stroke by using that chart and it really opens up the possibilities for new-comers.

I think it would be clearly possible to create a gold plane by upping the 2 stroke size, however, your statements all imply that currently a YS is the Golden Key. I would say that to be competitive in Gold it takes 4 things. Skill, Motor, Plane, Luck. Skill, you need to be able to handle what ever power plant it takes to go that fast and I would add here that there are many who can not get gold results out of a YS engine. Motor, no matter what motor you fly you will need to know how to tune, care for, and maximize it's potential. Plane, pretty much all gold racers that I see are custom built (and in my opinion, should be) for the purpose of going fast. Just sticking a high performance 2 (or 4) stroke on the nose of an ARF isn't going to cut it. Luck, well that one should be pretty clear.

Anyway, I'm enjoying the discussion and it's good to see others are joining in. Maybe we really will accomplish something this time around.

My goal out of this discussion would be to bring more new racers to the table. Personally I think a YS is the only way to go for racing, but I understand that there are people who love other brands of motors and would prefer to run a different gun. But let's be clear, my driving force is not to make changes to racing just to improve someone's chance to compete in gold. It's to open the door for new bronze and silver pilots who with time can come up to Gold. And as stated before, there have been many who have been competitive in Gold with 2 strokes so there really doesn't need to be all the crying of how disadvantaged the 2 strokes are.

Blessings, Terry

Jimmy Skids

Hide Signatures

(in reply to still4given)

Post #: 184

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/27/2009 12:19 AM

Jimmy Skids

Posts: 365
Score: 100
Joined: 6/10/2003
Last Login: 3/17/2010
From: Sacramento, CA, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: still4given

Sorry, you guys posted while I was typing. I would rather see a 1.3 multiplier. That would pit a .90 two stroke against a 1.20 YS which I think is a better match.

1.3 wouldn't quite get you to 1.20, but if you look at the chart I propossed the 90 and 120 are matched together. In fact that is where I started and worked forwards and backwards.

Jimmy Skids

Attachments

Attachment.pdf

Hide Signatures

(in reply to still4given)

Post #: 185

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/27/2009 1:11 AM

summin

Posts: 14
Score: 100
Joined: 6/12/2005
Last Login: 3/18/2010
From: Mountain View, CA, USA
Status: offline

Hi guys,

Great discussion. Just to be clear, my proposal literally meant multiplying the current 2c displacements by 1.5 and keeping everything else the same. That means the 60/120/550 category becomes 90/120/550. 40/80/400 becomes 60/80/400. 120/240/735 becomes 180/240/735.

I'm really open to any changes and will conform to whatever rules come out of this. Adjusting a multiplier on all the 2c motors gives less of the appearance that someone is trying to "game" the system for a particular aircraft and engine combination.

I have to agree that making a viable 2c Gold contender is hard. The only ways I have been able to do it is with a Quickie Jett 40 with the red throttling carb or the 91 DF motor. Ordinary output 2c engines just don't have enough to overcome the 2:1 displacement handicap. I will say that I'm enjoying the YS110 very much. Compared to the 91 DF it has been reliable, easy to needle, great on plugs and more fuel efficient. The only downsides that I have seen so far are more vibration and higher fuel cost due to the nitro level. I like all motors and enjoy the engineering challenge of putting together a fast plane.

Mark

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Jimmy Skids)

Post #: 186

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/27/2009 4:04 AM

still4given

Posts: 968
Score: 100
Joined: 1/27/2006
Last Login: 3/18/2010
From: Victorville, CA, USA
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimmy Skids

quote:

ORIGINAL: still4given

Sorry, you guys posted while I was typing. I would rather see a 1.3 multiplier. That would pit a .90 two stroke against a 1.20 YS which I think is a better match.

1.3 wouldn't quite get you to 1.20, but if you look at the chart I propossed the 90 and 120 are matched together. In fact that is where I started and worked forwards and backwards.

Jimmy Skids

It would actually have to be 1.33. 1.5X.90=1.35

The problem with using a multiplier is that as the engines get larger the difference in power becomes less. By the time you get to 2 cubic inches, both are turning pretty much the same prop and RPM.

IMO, we should do our best to equalize the 2 vs 4 strokes. That was the spirit of the chart in the first place. Let the pilots decide what they want to build and run. Trying to match up someones favorite engine and plane would be a mistake.

A plane doesn't need to idle to be safe. It only needs to have a way to kill the engine. There are hundreds of race planes running with that set-up.

Blessings, Terry

_____________________________

Live simply. Love generously. Care deeply.
Speak kindly. Leave the rest to God

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Jimmy Skids)

Post #: 187

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/27/2009 5:36 AM

ChrisAttebery

Posts: 740
Score: 100
Joined: 9/15/2004
Last Login: 3/18/2010
From: Gilroy, CA, USA
Status: offline

I agree with Terry. I think the idle rule was meant to keep the really high strung motors from racing (ie, DF, Nelson, modified Rossis) If you raise the timing too much the idle goes to crap. Mark has to run a hot plug to get his motor to idle low enough, but then he risks popping the plug and flaming out each heat. There aren't many people that have the patience and skill to do what he has done with them. Personally, I don't have a problem with keeping the "racing" motors like Nelson out of Warbirds. It would be nice to see some of the 2 strokes be a bit more competitive though.

I think that if you can get 90/120/550 set as the median and follow suit with the other sizes you will get more entries. That would allow the guys running 75AX in a MW mustang to run in Silver with a pipe.

_____________________________

WM T-34 - OS 46AX
Phoenix Strega - YS 110

Hide Signatures

(in reply to still4given)

Post #: 188

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/27/2009 5:48 AM

pjakew

Posts: 138
Score: 100
Joined: 7/10/2008
Last Login: 3/18/2010
From: Willits, CA, USA
Status: offline

So what was the results of the two minute tango?

_____________________________

"You Can Teach...Monkeys To Fly Better Than That!"

Hide Signatures

(in reply to ChrisAttebery)

Post #: 189

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/27/2009 6:47 AM

JPGale

Posts: 285
Score: 100
Joined: 3/9/2006
Last Login: 3/17/2010
From: Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Status: offline

In relation to what Chris said about the WM mustang and a 75AX. Having now broken out of Silver (insert appropriate explicative here) I am sure that a WM mustang with 75AX and no pipe would be competitive, with a pipe it would be able to break out of silver. If I can actually keep a setup in the air long enough I will try and do a speed comparison with Rick's WM mustang and YS1.10 and see where exactly we are. I will be back next year, if I could run a 75 then I would for at least one race, gives me time to build a YS powered beast, I am just addicted to that sound and smell. I am thinking Corsair

As for the charts, I am in favor of making small changes, if it can allow the mustang with 75 to run then even more better.

James

_____________________________

James Gale - Series Director T-34 and Warbird
www.t34racing.com

Hide Signatures

(in reply to ChrisAttebery)

Post #: 190

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/27/2009 2:09 PM

still4given

Posts: 968
Score: 100
Joined: 1/27/2006
Last Login: 3/18/2010
From: Victorville, CA, USA
Status: online

Hi James,

Good to hear you managed to break out in Silver with your plane. A friend of mine is running a 75AX in his VQ Tony and his best time at Phoenix was 2:16. His is stock though. Presently, you have to have 602 squares to run a .75. A Hanger 9 PTS mustang just makes it. A PTS with a .75 AX might be able to get to Silver Breakout with a pipe, I'm not sure. I use one as a backup for Bronze with a Tower .75 in it. Works well if I don't fly too tight. When I built it I had hoped for Silver but it just won't get there. Just another example of the imbalance in the charts.

The problem with making small changes in the chart is that it won't be enough to even things out. When the YS 4 strokes came on the scene, they offered a huge boost in power. It wasn't a small change. I believe it is going to take more than a small change to get things evened up again. Some of the guys have been talking about adopting the SWRA chart which is Even-Steven 2 stroke to 4 stroke. It will be interesting to see what shows up at the races if we adopt that.

Blessings, Terry

_____________________________

Live simply. Love generously. Care deeply.
Speak kindly. Leave the rest to God

Hide Signatures

(in reply to JPGale)

Post #: 191

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/27/2009 3:48 PM

RocketRob

Certified

Posts: 1160
Score: 100
Joined: 12/27/2002
Last Login: 3/18/2010
From: San Francisco, CA, USA
Status: offline

A little something for everyone!

90 - 140 - 550 with .1% fudge factor

Bit smaller wing for 4strokers

1.5ish displacement bias for 2 strokers

_____________________________

Space Available

Hide Signatures

(in reply to still4given)

Post #: 192

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/27/2009 4:42 PM

still4given

Posts: 968
Score: 100
Joined: 1/27/2006
Last Login: 3/18/2010
From: Victorville, CA, USA
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: RocketRob

A little something for everyone!

90 - 140 - 550 with .1% fudge factor

Bit smaller wing for 4strokers

1.5ish displacement bias for 2 strokers

Let's see, a PM Strega has 550 squares. I'm picturing one with a YS 1.40 on it. Hmmm?

It seems to me that if we reduce the wing area for the current 4 strokes, we are doing nothing to help the newcomers in the sport. Except for the Gold class, almost everyone running a 4 stroke is already running more wing than necessary based on the chart. How is reducing the wing area for the 4 strokes going to encourage more folks to get involved?

I don't own a .90-.91 2 stroke. Aside from a DF engine, can they really compete with a YS 1.40 on the same plane?

Blessings

_____________________________

Live simply. Love generously. Care deeply.
Speak kindly. Leave the rest to God

Hide Signatures

(in reply to RocketRob)

Post #: 193

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/27/2009 5:55 PM

JPGale

Posts: 285
Score: 100
Joined: 3/9/2006
Last Login: 3/17/2010
From: Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Status: offline

Just to be clear, I was not racing a WM mustang with 75 at sac, I was indeed flying a pheonix spit with a YS91 on it, but I am now familiar with both in racing action (I fly (read crash) in the bay area series).

_____________________________

James Gale - Series Director T-34 and Warbird
www.t34racing.com

Hide Signatures

(in reply to still4given)

Post #: 194

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/27/2009 6:42 PM

still4given

Posts: 968
Score: 100
Joined: 1/27/2006
Last Login: 3/18/2010
From: Victorville, CA, USA
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: JPGale

Just to be clear, I was not racing a WM mustang with 75 at sac, I was indeed flying a pheonix spit with a YS91 on it, but I am now familiar with both in racing action (I fly (read crash) in the bay area series).

Hi James,

Thanks for clarifying that.

I know a couple of guys running the PM Spitfire with a YS .91. That is a very potent combination. As a matter of fact, Carry Buschbaum is leading the Silver class in RCPRO with that very setup.

I found a website that lists the engine performance of many of the engines we have been discussing. I though it might be interesting as it applies to the comparisons between some of the larger 2 and 4 stroke engines.

http://rcfaq.com/RPMSTATS/RPMBYCC2.HTM

Blessings, Terry

_____________________________

Live simply. Love generously. Care deeply.
Speak kindly. Leave the rest to God

Hide Signatures

(in reply to JPGale)

Post #: 195

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/28/2009 6:24 AM

Tony Pacini

Posts: 322
Score: 100
Joined: 1/11/2002
Last Login: 3/15/2010
From: Prescott Valley, AZ, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChrisAttebery

I agree with Terry. I think the idle rule was meant to keep the really high strung motors from racing (ie, DF, Nelson, modified Rossis) If you raise the timing too much the idle goes to crap. Mark has to run a hot plug to get his motor to idle low enough, but then he risks popping the plug and flaming out each heat. There aren't many people that have the patience and skill to do what he has done with them. Personally, I don't have a problem with keeping the ''racing'' motors like Nelson out of Warbirds.

Since when is an essentially stock engine with a factory-supplied muffler and running on 15% nitro considered "....really high strung"? And yet a YS (often modified) with an open header on high nitro is NOT considered high strung? I can tell which combination is more likely to make metal and come undone...............and it isn't the Nelson. Also, that "idle rule" was aimed at one particular fellow running a Nelson with an open venturi. Then he installed a carburetor and his engine was able to idle. They eventually ran him off somehow, but I don't think it was over the idle rule.

This rule revision campaign shouldn't be based on personal preference. 2 strokes and 4 strokes are both allowed to encourage diversity. If high-performance 4-strokes (like YS) are allowed, then high-performance 2-strokes (like Nelson/Jett, Rossi) should also be allowed. It's only fair. I've seen both go fast, but it's easier to go fast with a YS at this point. At the very least, you've got a greater variety of airframes to choose from when using a 4-stroke. To go fast with a 2-stroke requires that you do a bit of homework.

< Message edited by Tony Pacini -- 10/28/2009 7:20 AM >

Hide Signatures

(in reply to ChrisAttebery)

Post #: 196

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/28/2009 1:46 PM

RocketRob

Certified

Posts: 1160
Score: 100
Joined: 12/27/2002
Last Login: 3/18/2010
From: San Francisco, CA, USA
Status: offline

Terry - perhaps a ys 140 on a 550 Strega might be a bit much and may not exactly encourage beginners.
I was trying to offer up something for the 4stroke guys but I guess they already have it

Obamma was right - just no pleasin everyone.

With the withdrawl of that suggestion I endorse the previous suggestion on the table of .90/1.20/550 with a 1% fudge factor for displacement.

And I have to agree with Toni's last post of High performance engines allowed for both engine types.

_____________________________

Space Available

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Tony Pacini)

Post #: 197

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/28/2009 3:00 PM

still4given

Posts: 968
Score: 100
Joined: 1/27/2006
Last Login: 3/18/2010
From: Victorville, CA, USA
Status: online

Hi Tony,

You are always able to say what I'm trying to say with so much more clarity.

Hi RocketRob,

I wasn't trying to pick on what you suggested, just used it to help make my point. This discussion about wing area in this thread, was started because someone, (Jimmy?) created a chart revision to give a slot for the new YS 1.15 to run in so that they didn't have to jump up to the 1.20 size wing, which is where it would have to run with the current rules. He also changed some of the 2 stroke sizes while he was at it. Since a few of us at RCPRO have been discussing this issue, I jumped in and made some suggestions because I think it would be cool if RCPRO and SAMS were using similar charts so those who would be interested in flying at both venues could use the same planes. While my main concern is to try and give newcomers as big a selection as possible to help them get started, as a racer, it is hard not to keep the Gold class in the back of my mind. While the Bronze class is there to give folks who are new to racing a place to start, there are also a lot of guys who already have a lot of racing experience in AMA and other styles, who are looking at the Silver and Gold class as a place for them to get involved. I believe, that since we have breakout times controlling each of the classes, that the wing area chart shouldn't need to be so restrictive. As Tommy Gun brought up earlier, he feels the need to run a bigger engine in his radial engine planes than he would if he were flying a pointy nosed model. I say, why not? We have a breakout time anyway. If a guy tries to put too big of an engine in a plane, it is not going to fly right anyway. There is limit to what someone can do and still have a manageable plane.

Anyway, this is great discussion, and once we decide on how to deal with the wing area rules, this thread will help folks understand how we got there.

Blessings, Terry

_____________________________

Live simply. Love generously. Care deeply.
Speak kindly. Leave the rest to God

Hide Signatures

(in reply to RocketRob)

Post #: 198

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/28/2009 5:22 PM

Tommy_Gun

Posts: 906
Score: 100
Joined: 4/7/2004
Last Login: 3/18/2010
From: Ione, CA, USA
Status: offline

OK I have just looked at the rules for the SAMs Warbird racing and the RCPRO rules for the same.

http://www.sacramento-rc-flyers.org/documents/SAM_Warbird_Racing_Rules.pdf

http://www.rcpro.org/html/rules/warbird_racing/warbird_racing_rules.htm

I see NOTHING that says you can't use a high performance ( Jett, Nelson, etc. ) two stroke in either set of rules.

There is only the idle rule which is a safety consideration.

As some of you have pointed out. There are regular sport four strokes and then there are YS four strokes.
In that same vein, there are sport two strokes and then you have the other brands of more powerful two strokes.

So.....whats all the deal?!

I agree that the chart can stand a little tweaking as Skids has suggested .
But drastic sweeping changes are to be avoided in my opinion.

_____________________________

Yeeeeahhh seee.
Say hello to my leetle fren.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to still4given)

Post #: 199

RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento - 10/28/2009 6:14 PM

ChrisAttebery

Posts: 740
Score: 100
Joined: 9/15/2004
Last Login: 3/18/2010
From: Gilroy, CA, USA
Status: offline

Tony,

I have a Nelson QM40 with a Q500 air valve on it. I have also run that motor with an OS heli carb. It won't idle below about 7.5k. One lean run and that Nelson liner is shot. IMHO they are high strung. Maybe the Q500 motor isn't as bad though.

I think the intent is that you don't have guys spending $$$ and/or hours and hours in the shop reworking motors. I did that with my boat motors and believe me, you don't want that. You will have mass exodus as only the single guys or those with $$$ will be able to keep up.

You can take a box stock YS and run it on 55% and it will still idle at ~2800 and be capable of breakout. The only guys breaking them are the ones that push them WAY too hard or haven't learned to tune them.

Personally, I think you guys can dump the wing area rules and allow run what you brung. You have a breakout. It will control speeds all by itself.

In our series there is no breakout, so our rules have to be more strict on what meets the rules.

Again all of this is IMHO.

Chris

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tony Pacini

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChrisAttebery

I agree with Terry. I think the idle rule was meant to keep the really high strung motors from racing (ie, DF, Nelson, modified Rossis) If you raise the timing too much the idle goes to crap. Mark has to run a hot plug to get his motor to idle low enough, but then he risks popping the plug and flaming out each heat. There aren't many people that have the patience and skill to do what he has done with them. Personally, I don't have a problem with keeping the ''racing'' motors like Nelson out of Warbirds.

Since when is an essentially stock engine with a factory-supplied muffler and running on 15% nitro considered ''....really high strung''? And yet a YS (often modified) with an open header on high nitro is NOT considered high strung? I can tell which combination is more likely to make metal and come undone...............and it isn't the Nelson. Also, that ''idle rule'' was aimed at one particular fellow running a Nelson with an open venturi. Then he installed a carburetor and his engine was able to idle. They eventually ran him off somehow, but I don't think it was over the idle rule.

This rule revision campaign shouldn't be based on personal preference. 2 strokes and 4 strokes are both allowed to encourage diversity. If high-performance 4-strokes (like YS) are allowed, then high-performance 2-strokes (like Nelson/Jett, Rossi) should also be allowed. It's only fair. I've seen both go fast, but it's easier to go fast with a YS at this point. At the very least, you've got a greater variety of airframes to choose from when using a 4-stroke. To go fast with a 2-stroke requires that you do a bit of homework.

_____________________________

WM T-34 - OS 46AX
Phoenix Strega - YS 110

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Tony Pacini)

Post #: 200

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

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> Pylon Universe - RC Pylon Racing >> Scale Racing >> RE: Two Day Warbird Race in Sacramento
Page: << < prev 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 next > >>

Jump to:

Charities we support that also need your help
Yorkie Rescue | Humane Society | ASPCA | Crohn's-Colitis America

2.750RCU1