Plastic Props
07-19-2004, 08:17 PM
#1
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Waseca,
MN
Posts: 8,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Plastic Props
Maybe I'm opening a can of worms, but why can't we approve a couple other "plastic props"??????????
Some that will let you turn up a few more rpms would be nice, especially in the hot, humid, Muncie weather.
Fred, I'm sure you can make a few differenet variations to help even out the playing field with the hand carved wood out there???
Some that will let you turn up a few more rpms would be nice, especially in the hot, humid, Muncie weather.
Fred, I'm sure you can make a few differenet variations to help even out the playing field with the hand carved wood out there???
07-20-2004, 08:39 AM
#2
Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ramsey, MN
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
Great idea Dave, two more sizes of black APC props that have a little less pitch would help me catch guys like you that turned a 104 and change at the NATS last week. I had a GREAT time there, even though someone from out west cut off my tail LOL
07-20-2004, 09:58 AM
#3
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Arvada,
CO
Posts: 1,260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
Dave,
Submit your proposal to the AMA pylon rules committee. If it passes, we can begin using new props in 07 that is if Fred has them made by then. I don't see how this issue could be pushed through as an "emergency proposal".
I'd like to see a few different sizes in both pitch and dia. and I would also like for other manufacturers to be allowed into this market. Not that I don't like Fred's props, I just don't like monopolies.
One thing that really bothered me about when the plastic prop was introduced before was that it made no allowance for flying at altitude. On a lot of days where I race the 7.4 X 8 and 8.0 are just too big.
Submit your proposal to the AMA pylon rules committee. If it passes, we can begin using new props in 07 that is if Fred has them made by then. I don't see how this issue could be pushed through as an "emergency proposal".
I'd like to see a few different sizes in both pitch and dia. and I would also like for other manufacturers to be allowed into this market. Not that I don't like Fred's props, I just don't like monopolies.
One thing that really bothered me about when the plastic prop was introduced before was that it made no allowance for flying at altitude. On a lot of days where I race the 7.4 X 8 and 8.0 are just too big.
07-20-2004, 10:36 AM
#5
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Waseca,
MN
Posts: 8,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
Thats why I would like to just have a couple more allowed, not open up as a free for all.
Like you mentioned, elevation and weather/humidity/pressure can make the currently legal prop nearly unusable. Also, many of the older/weaker q40 motors just can't turn it.
As to speed creep, the best times at the Nats mostly came from wood props (Kane, Ullinger, Del Ponte, Scott). I think the wood props will remain faster, but a couple different "plastic props" would help without putting a huge load on your engine when the conditions don't allow it to turn up.
Like you mentioned, elevation and weather/humidity/pressure can make the currently legal prop nearly unusable. Also, many of the older/weaker q40 motors just can't turn it.
As to speed creep, the best times at the Nats mostly came from wood props (Kane, Ullinger, Del Ponte, Scott). I think the wood props will remain faster, but a couple different "plastic props" would help without putting a huge load on your engine when the conditions don't allow it to turn up.
07-20-2004, 11:20 AM
#6
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Liquored, FL,
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
Awesome reasoning Dave. I've said it from the git-go.... The plastic prop helps the guy with no money, he can now buy a competitive prop for less than $10 bucks. BUT... he has to spend $165 for a new top end, because his burnt up POS won't turn the current plastic 21.5k ...
Just 2 more versions would be great. We can hardly use them in Florida. Way to hot and humid to turn that thing.
We need our guys to just pass a rule or we can have it written on the sanction for each race... Fred can cut the mold and have a test prop done in a matter of hours. There has to be a way to make this happen quickly. Waiting until 2007 is nuts.
We need to have the ability in our sport to change rules quickly to keep up with the evolution of our hobby. This is a needed change!
Randy Bridge
Just 2 more versions would be great. We can hardly use them in Florida. Way to hot and humid to turn that thing.
We need our guys to just pass a rule or we can have it written on the sanction for each race... Fred can cut the mold and have a test prop done in a matter of hours. There has to be a way to make this happen quickly. Waiting until 2007 is nuts.
We need to have the ability in our sport to change rules quickly to keep up with the evolution of our hobby. This is a needed change!
Randy Bridge
07-21-2004, 09:29 AM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: WerribeeVictoria, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
Why not just allow clipping the Diameter down say 1/4" it would save all the hassle of new props .Here in Aus in our F400 we use QM40 motors on FAI fuel and used to use the grey APC props but some using modified cheaper engines were fracturing blades so they opened up the props to anything made in carbon the times have droped about 10 seconds since and on the F3D course at the Aus champs one guy was doing 65 second times. Too fast I say.
Terry
Terry
07-21-2004, 10:33 AM
#8
My Feedback: (8)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Taylors,
SC
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
I agree, I think it is time to let APC release more props for Q40. The dreaded speed creep has not occurred. What has happened is that more people are competitive because of the APC prop, but a single size can not be run everywhere. It does work in Q500.
07-21-2004, 10:45 AM
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
I agree Mike, I could not get the black prop to go very well at the nats and neither could Duane, we both swithed to wood and Duane made a smoker that improved his time from a 1:13 to a 1:08!!! I ended up buying 2 props for 35.00 bucks each!!! One was fast one part of the day and then was too much load, switched to the other and went slower... Back to the black prop and had medium speed...
The guys with the good wood where in another speed range all together, Danny Kane and Roy A. where on fire!!!
I am going to keep trying on the prop making, whats strange is Duane had a good prop that was smoking, we made some others just like it, same blank, thickness and diameter and pitch, they did not go like the original....
OH well if you first do not succeed........
John W.
The guys with the good wood where in another speed range all together, Danny Kane and Roy A. where on fire!!!
I am going to keep trying on the prop making, whats strange is Duane had a good prop that was smoking, we made some others just like it, same blank, thickness and diameter and pitch, they did not go like the original....
OH well if you first do not succeed........
John W.
07-22-2004, 09:16 PM
#10
RE: Plastic Props
A few lighter (plastic) props certainly wouldn't hurt and arguably wouldn't increase the speed any.
The plastic props save more time than money. By the time you field a competitive Q-40 ship (usually composite) you've got nearly a grand into it, anyway. $10 props aren't going to make that much of a difference (if you can buy wooden ringers for $35-$50). I've got a pitch gauge and a bunch of blanks but I'd rather spend my time building and flying than carving props. Take that back....I'd rather spend my time doing ANYTHING but carving wood props. Most of mine end up as glue sticks, anyway.
Yes, I believe that those who can carve good wood props may have a slight advantage (all else being equal). The fact is, though, that those guys going fast with wood props also have the airframe/engine/flying skills to utilize whatever advantage the better prop may offer. Ya still gotta fly the plane.....
Once I believe that I'm putting everything on the course (not quite there yet) I'll spend the time experimenting with props. Right now I'm afraid it would be a waste.
The plastic props save more time than money. By the time you field a competitive Q-40 ship (usually composite) you've got nearly a grand into it, anyway. $10 props aren't going to make that much of a difference (if you can buy wooden ringers for $35-$50). I've got a pitch gauge and a bunch of blanks but I'd rather spend my time building and flying than carving props. Take that back....I'd rather spend my time doing ANYTHING but carving wood props. Most of mine end up as glue sticks, anyway.
Yes, I believe that those who can carve good wood props may have a slight advantage (all else being equal). The fact is, though, that those guys going fast with wood props also have the airframe/engine/flying skills to utilize whatever advantage the better prop may offer. Ya still gotta fly the plane.....
Once I believe that I'm putting everything on the course (not quite there yet) I'll spend the time experimenting with props. Right now I'm afraid it would be a waste.
07-23-2004, 09:36 AM
#11
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Arlington Heights,
IL
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
It is very interesting that this discussion has surfaced again!
Randy, there is no way to get it passed before 2007. However, a CD can change the rules if it is published prior to the competition beginning. This is actually how we used the APC prop before it was approved.
All I have to say is why? Randy, you certainly, don't need to go any faster nor does anyone running the plastic. The fastest I have ever gone was with a plastic prop (1:00:??). I don't feel a bigger selection is necessary. In terms of different parts of the country running different props, so be it, do it on a local level to suit your needs. That doesn't mean that those props will work in muncie. And if they do what did we accomplish? What are the means to the end of creating new props? Are we trying to go faster? Are we trying to be more competitive? What would we be accomplishing by having a larger selection?
Take this statement for what it is worth, I am flying wood props because I can. However, if the plastic props worked with my set-up, I would be running plastic. There are things I can change with wood, that you cannot change with plastic legally. That is where the advantage lies. I don't think wood props are vodoo magic. It just seems that people are not willing to spend the time to figure out how to make it work. The names listed previously, DelPonte, Scott, Ullinger and one forgotten Grunk (not at the nats but Mr. Wood). These are the people willing to devote time and energy to finding the right combination. Take the time to figure out what to do!
Dan
Randy, there is no way to get it passed before 2007. However, a CD can change the rules if it is published prior to the competition beginning. This is actually how we used the APC prop before it was approved.
All I have to say is why? Randy, you certainly, don't need to go any faster nor does anyone running the plastic. The fastest I have ever gone was with a plastic prop (1:00:??). I don't feel a bigger selection is necessary. In terms of different parts of the country running different props, so be it, do it on a local level to suit your needs. That doesn't mean that those props will work in muncie. And if they do what did we accomplish? What are the means to the end of creating new props? Are we trying to go faster? Are we trying to be more competitive? What would we be accomplishing by having a larger selection?
Take this statement for what it is worth, I am flying wood props because I can. However, if the plastic props worked with my set-up, I would be running plastic. There are things I can change with wood, that you cannot change with plastic legally. That is where the advantage lies. I don't think wood props are vodoo magic. It just seems that people are not willing to spend the time to figure out how to make it work. The names listed previously, DelPonte, Scott, Ullinger and one forgotten Grunk (not at the nats but Mr. Wood). These are the people willing to devote time and energy to finding the right combination. Take the time to figure out what to do!
Dan
07-23-2004, 10:50 AM
#12
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Liquored, FL,
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
The question is why..?
It's not to go faster. And the idea is not to help ME. I can make wood as good as anybody. I have also done one 1:00 minute times with the plastic, however, my low times were all done with the original version. Not the 7.4x8.0 version. Which is neither here nor there...
The idea is simply to help keep costs down. Which I believe is the reason for passing the original rule? What happens across the country is the majority of people can NOT pull the prop over 23k. Now you add some humidity to the mix and you now have 21,5k. To me, that is simply unacceptable.....
I'm sure this idea has nothing to do with Muncie (at least from my stand point). This would possibly allow the beginner to buy a used plane/motor and have a choice of props for which his "used" motor will operate. And not be stuck the one prop that is to heavy. He could carve his own wood, or spend $35 bucks on a wood prop, but the rule was passed to help avoid this?.. That would put the beginner right back in the same situation we existed in before the original rule was developed.
Maybe my reasoning is not valid? But maybe with a selection, the emphasis on always having a "fresh" bullet would go away.
Randy
It's not to go faster. And the idea is not to help ME. I can make wood as good as anybody. I have also done one 1:00 minute times with the plastic, however, my low times were all done with the original version. Not the 7.4x8.0 version. Which is neither here nor there...
The idea is simply to help keep costs down. Which I believe is the reason for passing the original rule? What happens across the country is the majority of people can NOT pull the prop over 23k. Now you add some humidity to the mix and you now have 21,5k. To me, that is simply unacceptable.....
I'm sure this idea has nothing to do with Muncie (at least from my stand point). This would possibly allow the beginner to buy a used plane/motor and have a choice of props for which his "used" motor will operate. And not be stuck the one prop that is to heavy. He could carve his own wood, or spend $35 bucks on a wood prop, but the rule was passed to help avoid this?.. That would put the beginner right back in the same situation we existed in before the original rule was developed.
Maybe my reasoning is not valid? But maybe with a selection, the emphasis on always having a "fresh" bullet would go away.
Randy
07-23-2004, 11:16 AM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
I will have to disagree with you Danny, I have been trying to make props for about 1 year now, I have put in a lot of time and money and have made only a couple that would go as good as the black prop. The means to the end would be that in Muncie or Florida, you would even the playing field, as has been done on the west coast, the black props work good there, but in high humidity and heat the black ones will not get into the power band.. 22,300rpm is a little low... I thought the whole reason to let in black props was to make the field more level, not make it a who can make the best prop contest, but who can fly the best... I know these go hand in hand, but I also know I do not have the skill to make a good wood prop, although I am trying and will continue trying to achieve this goal, I feel if a couple of lower pitch cf props where allowed it would enable people like myself to go fast or faster in hot humid conditions where the black prop is sometimes too much load.... This would even out the playing field between guys that know how to make a great prop and guys that do not, then its a pilots race, not a prop race... I have put in many hours in the last 3 months testing all different types of props and would rather spend my time going around the poles than carving them, but I was willing to try and maybe some day I will get it, but in the mean time, a larger selection of cf props would give the people that do not know how to make wood a better chance at staying up with the guys that do. I also know if I did know how to make a good wood prop and had a lot of time and money into it I would not be so ready to allow the new cf props into the ballgame, I guess it depends on which side of the fence you reside....
JW
JW
07-23-2004, 01:09 PM
#14
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Liquored, FL,
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
After re-reading this thread, there appears to be 7 guys voicing there opinion in the discussion. If you notice where they live... it's hot and humid... and it's high altitude. They don't have a chance with Fred's prop.
So ask this question... Who does the carbon prop rule benefit?? That question baffles the crap out of me.. maybe it's time to rewrite the rule to help those who need it...
And again.. I DON'T NEED THE HELP... just trying to be a voice..
Randy Bridge
So ask this question... Who does the carbon prop rule benefit?? That question baffles the crap out of me.. maybe it's time to rewrite the rule to help those who need it...
And again.. I DON'T NEED THE HELP... just trying to be a voice..
Randy Bridge
07-23-2004, 03:55 PM
#15
My Feedback: (1)
RE: Plastic Props
There has ALWAYS been a slightly elitist attitude espoused by certain members of the pylon racing fraternity. In their minds, if you can’t achieve the skills to carve props, then buy them at unreasonable prices. How does that help grow the event? In the end, I think that this attitude hasten the demise of the Formula One event, since these few were determined to keep the bar high for entry into the club. However when the high performance racing engines for quickie became available, suddenly another fast event arrived and the elitists lost a bit of power because a fun event that was just as fast arrived, and people were no longer filling the ranks in F1. Now there were forward looking racers like Dub Jett that tried to save Formula One with a few well reasoned changes, but the elitists would have nothing to do with it. “You will ruin the event by making it easier for newcomers” they said. So instead it died, which is what happens when an event stagnates instead of grows.
So in an era when nearly no one is building their own airplanes, buying engines that just bolt in and race, and really have no skill level what so ever other than flying, why do we require that you have to carve a prop or buy a carved prop from a hired gun. It’s insane. Why not just place a minimum length on Q40 props, and let Fred do what Fred does so well? It certainly won’t hurt the event, it will make it easier for more racers to compete. What a concept, more people racing.
Bob
So in an era when nearly no one is building their own airplanes, buying engines that just bolt in and race, and really have no skill level what so ever other than flying, why do we require that you have to carve a prop or buy a carved prop from a hired gun. It’s insane. Why not just place a minimum length on Q40 props, and let Fred do what Fred does so well? It certainly won’t hurt the event, it will make it easier for more racers to compete. What a concept, more people racing.
Bob
07-23-2004, 04:14 PM
#16
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Monroe,
NC
Posts: 1,332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
I'm not of the experience level to comment on the pros and cons, but I can offer an interpretation of the rule as it is written.
The prop rule specifies the required strength and other characteristics of the prop.
However, the 7.4 x 8 props come under the heading of "Prior Approval".
This indicates that other props could be allowed as long as they meet the required strength and other characteristics, and approval is granted by the Pylon Racing Contest Board.
I believe the 7.4 x 8.0 was allowed and approved because it was not a rule change, per se.
So perhaps a "Rule Change" is not required to allow additional sizes. To allow modifications to the prop would be a rule change.
The prop rule specifies the required strength and other characteristics of the prop.
However, the 7.4 x 8 props come under the heading of "Prior Approval".
This indicates that other props could be allowed as long as they meet the required strength and other characteristics, and approval is granted by the Pylon Racing Contest Board.
I believe the 7.4 x 8.0 was allowed and approved because it was not a rule change, per se.
So perhaps a "Rule Change" is not required to allow additional sizes. To allow modifications to the prop would be a rule change.
07-23-2004, 04:36 PM
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Stansbury Park,
UT
Posts: 937
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
Ok, I don't live in the humid areas of the country, and didn't go to Muncie this year, but I also have been to events where I couldn't turn the 7.4x8.0 APC prop.
Maybe this is the elitest attitude that Bob is talking about, but I do think that those who want to put in the time and effort to make fast wood props should be rewarded for their effort. The carbon prop will get you going faster than all but the best wood props with no effort. We already have one event that's 100% buy and fly, why not leave one event to those that would like to tinker a little more?
I don't know that simply allowing more props is the answer. I'm sure if more carbon props were allowed, we would see an increase in speeds from where they are now. How can there not be an increase? Can anybody on this forum honestly say that if they had the opportunity to produce a new prop, their goal would only be to increase the RPM's but go the same speed as the current APC prop? I know if I were in Fred's shoes, I'd be working to make the new prop faster, not just turn more RPM, and I wouldn't blame him one bit.
I personally like Terry's answer. What if we were to allow the last .25" (or however much, but just the tip) of each tip of the 7.4x8.0 to be cut, trimmed, thinned, or whatever to increase the RPM's? I think this would allow tired engines to still use it, not increase the speeds from where we're already at (at least not nearly as much as an all new prop could), yet still allow those that wish to tinker with wood props to seek an advantage.....
Gary Schmidt
Team Futaba
Maybe this is the elitest attitude that Bob is talking about, but I do think that those who want to put in the time and effort to make fast wood props should be rewarded for their effort. The carbon prop will get you going faster than all but the best wood props with no effort. We already have one event that's 100% buy and fly, why not leave one event to those that would like to tinker a little more?
I don't know that simply allowing more props is the answer. I'm sure if more carbon props were allowed, we would see an increase in speeds from where they are now. How can there not be an increase? Can anybody on this forum honestly say that if they had the opportunity to produce a new prop, their goal would only be to increase the RPM's but go the same speed as the current APC prop? I know if I were in Fred's shoes, I'd be working to make the new prop faster, not just turn more RPM, and I wouldn't blame him one bit.
I personally like Terry's answer. What if we were to allow the last .25" (or however much, but just the tip) of each tip of the 7.4x8.0 to be cut, trimmed, thinned, or whatever to increase the RPM's? I think this would allow tired engines to still use it, not increase the speeds from where we're already at (at least not nearly as much as an all new prop could), yet still allow those that wish to tinker with wood props to seek an advantage.....
Gary Schmidt
Team Futaba
07-23-2004, 04:41 PM
#18
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Waseca,
MN
Posts: 8,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
Gary,
I would be all for allowing the last 1/4" to be shortened.
That works, and would give us a use for the stack of CF props where one of the tips got a little mushed on a nose over. I have no problem leaving the wood carvers alone, but one option for CF is pretty limited.
I would be all for allowing the last 1/4" to be shortened.
That works, and would give us a use for the stack of CF props where one of the tips got a little mushed on a nose over. I have no problem leaving the wood carvers alone, but one option for CF is pretty limited.
07-23-2004, 04:56 PM
#19
My Feedback: (1)
RE: Plastic Props
Gary,
I feel the same way about composite molded wings. I think that if you can’t build a decent wing, why should you be able to buy one that was made from a CNC mold? Same logic. The skill is not from buying the best equipment, but how you use it.
Bob
I feel the same way about composite molded wings. I think that if you can’t build a decent wing, why should you be able to buy one that was made from a CNC mold? Same logic. The skill is not from buying the best equipment, but how you use it.
Bob
07-24-2004, 12:01 AM
#20
RE: Plastic Props
The reason this topic keeps surfacing is because not everyone is satisfied with things as they are.....
REMEMBER FORMULA ONE. That elitist attitude killed the event. This is a buy and fly world now, one of instant gratification. Tiger Woods doesn't build his clubs, Barry Bonds doesn't build his bats, and Jeff Gordon doesn't build his car. Building ANY part of your own airplane doesn't make you a better racer........just more of a modeler (which won't win you any races). Those of you who wish to hold on to your "advantage" (wood props) should insist that nobody sell them to those of us who can't make them. Until that happens we will continue to buy them, you will have no advantage, you will spend more time on the event and the rest of us will spend more money.
Those wanting to hold on to their advantage still will; your advantage is pilot skill and we can't buy that. I've bought your props and still don't go as fast as you do. You've used the "slower" plastic props and still go faster than I do. You're not losing anything-
Some had the same attitude when the APC plastic Q-500 props came onto the scene. Back in those days you had to buy a whole bag of wood props to maybe get one good one then use the rest as glue sticks or F1/Q-40 blanks. Those who knew how to "massage" a stock (?!) wood prop still thought they had an advantage. Just look at how the plastic props have hurt Q-500! Did they? Probably not. It's the most popular event and for a good reason - it's the easiest. And the best guys are still winning (even with plastic props).
I've said it before but it bears repeating: only 3 of you take home trophies at the end of the weekend..........the rest of us are just there to have fun and pay for the event. We need to think we have a chance of winning or we won't bother to show up (and you need a good draw or the clubs won't hold races anymore). We know that we are limited by our equipment and/or flying ability. Don't make it any worse by holding on to yet another advantage. Don't worry - you'll still win based on your piloting ability alone. We just want to be on the same lap when you beat us!
REMEMBER FORMULA ONE. That elitist attitude killed the event. This is a buy and fly world now, one of instant gratification. Tiger Woods doesn't build his clubs, Barry Bonds doesn't build his bats, and Jeff Gordon doesn't build his car. Building ANY part of your own airplane doesn't make you a better racer........just more of a modeler (which won't win you any races). Those of you who wish to hold on to your "advantage" (wood props) should insist that nobody sell them to those of us who can't make them. Until that happens we will continue to buy them, you will have no advantage, you will spend more time on the event and the rest of us will spend more money.
Those wanting to hold on to their advantage still will; your advantage is pilot skill and we can't buy that. I've bought your props and still don't go as fast as you do. You've used the "slower" plastic props and still go faster than I do. You're not losing anything-
Some had the same attitude when the APC plastic Q-500 props came onto the scene. Back in those days you had to buy a whole bag of wood props to maybe get one good one then use the rest as glue sticks or F1/Q-40 blanks. Those who knew how to "massage" a stock (?!) wood prop still thought they had an advantage. Just look at how the plastic props have hurt Q-500! Did they? Probably not. It's the most popular event and for a good reason - it's the easiest. And the best guys are still winning (even with plastic props).
I've said it before but it bears repeating: only 3 of you take home trophies at the end of the weekend..........the rest of us are just there to have fun and pay for the event. We need to think we have a chance of winning or we won't bother to show up (and you need a good draw or the clubs won't hold races anymore). We know that we are limited by our equipment and/or flying ability. Don't make it any worse by holding on to yet another advantage. Don't worry - you'll still win based on your piloting ability alone. We just want to be on the same lap when you beat us!
07-24-2004, 07:29 AM
#21
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Arlington Heights,
IL
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
These comments are baffling to me. We are talking about some form of competition right? I don't understand where this coming from. EVERY person in any form of competition must feel that they have some sort of advantage. Or else why would you compete? You either have an advantage in either skill, or equipment or both.
I take offense to the ELITEST comment! Obviously, you don't know me. I struggled with form one, I did everything I could to learn how to compete. I don't feel the Elitest's killed form one, I feel Form one killed itself. 65% nitro, An engine a run, Expensive airplanes, and so on.
Has anyone tried changing your timing and deck height to get better performance out of your plastic props? If not shame on you. That is another variable that you can control. I test flew in muncie with a plastic prop. I bought the prop from Horizon Hobby Dist. I bolted the prop on to the same engine that I fly with my wood props. It turned 23.2K. My wood props are turning 23.4 on the ground. Having said this If I gave you a wood prop would it turn over 22k on your engine? Buy the way the engine I set fast time with at the nats is forsale. However it is slightly dented, (bent crank, broken case, broken muffler, etc).
You guys can disagree with me and call me what you want, I have thick skin. I have also been around the block a few times. I don't see any need to put in more plastic props to level the playing field. Someone will always win and someone will always loose. Don't point the finger at someone else because you didn't win. We all follow the same rules, heck 90% of the equipment is the same.
I keep hearing that we need different props to help the event. I don't buy it, as someone pointed out you have at a minimum of $1000 in an airplane. Why are you squabling over $25 or even $100. In 10 seconds you could loose it all. The cost of plastic versus wood is a non issue in my opinion. The ease and effort needed to compete is where plastic has an advantage. Again that is YOUR choice to choose what you run. IF you choose plastic so be it. If you you choose wood so be it. YOUR CHOICE. IF plastic won't run on your engine it is your choice of what to do next.
More plastic props to choose from will only increase speed, or else why would more be available? More plastic props will give everyone something else to complain about. Another point, someone said something about skill of the pilot. Skill is making everything work, that is prop, engine, airplane. If you are not successfull you don't have the skills as someone else. Work on your skills and you will be better.
The "ELITEST A-HOLE" from Chicago,
DKane
I take offense to the ELITEST comment! Obviously, you don't know me. I struggled with form one, I did everything I could to learn how to compete. I don't feel the Elitest's killed form one, I feel Form one killed itself. 65% nitro, An engine a run, Expensive airplanes, and so on.
Has anyone tried changing your timing and deck height to get better performance out of your plastic props? If not shame on you. That is another variable that you can control. I test flew in muncie with a plastic prop. I bought the prop from Horizon Hobby Dist. I bolted the prop on to the same engine that I fly with my wood props. It turned 23.2K. My wood props are turning 23.4 on the ground. Having said this If I gave you a wood prop would it turn over 22k on your engine? Buy the way the engine I set fast time with at the nats is forsale. However it is slightly dented, (bent crank, broken case, broken muffler, etc).
You guys can disagree with me and call me what you want, I have thick skin. I have also been around the block a few times. I don't see any need to put in more plastic props to level the playing field. Someone will always win and someone will always loose. Don't point the finger at someone else because you didn't win. We all follow the same rules, heck 90% of the equipment is the same.
I keep hearing that we need different props to help the event. I don't buy it, as someone pointed out you have at a minimum of $1000 in an airplane. Why are you squabling over $25 or even $100. In 10 seconds you could loose it all. The cost of plastic versus wood is a non issue in my opinion. The ease and effort needed to compete is where plastic has an advantage. Again that is YOUR choice to choose what you run. IF you choose plastic so be it. If you you choose wood so be it. YOUR CHOICE. IF plastic won't run on your engine it is your choice of what to do next.
More plastic props to choose from will only increase speed, or else why would more be available? More plastic props will give everyone something else to complain about. Another point, someone said something about skill of the pilot. Skill is making everything work, that is prop, engine, airplane. If you are not successfull you don't have the skills as someone else. Work on your skills and you will be better.
The "ELITEST A-HOLE" from Chicago,
DKane
07-24-2004, 08:32 AM
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Brantford, ON, CANADA
Posts: 3,305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
Another point, someone said something about skill of the pilot. Skill is making everything work, that is prop, engine, airplane. If you are not successfull you don't have the skills as someone else. Work on your skills and you will be better.
Ed S
07-24-2004, 08:36 AM
#23
My Feedback: (1)
RE: Plastic Props
Dan,
I don’t recall referring to you at “the Elitist”, with the attitude, nor do I recall Chicago as a Formula One hotbed. Perhaps you have misconstrued my commits or those of others on this thread. You do have a considerable advantage living in Chicago, since the weather there should be very much like the weather in Muncie. So perhaps the testing you can do on the engines is much more valid than what others at high altitudes or more humid or drier climates are able to perform.
When I was working my way through college, a considerable part of the time was at Progress Manufacturing, which made Rev-Up Props back in the 70’s. I can assure you that there is considerable differences and variations in wood props. Depending on where the tree was grown, the angle that the plank was cut, and where in the plank the prop was cut you get a tremendous variation from prop to prop, and usually blade to blade on the same prop. So carving a racing prop is subject to a wide variation in how the blades flex in use. When everything comes out right, a wood prop works extremely well. Usually, though, these variations limit how well it performs.
All we are asking is to remove some of the variables that are really uncontrolled from the equation. If I want randomness, I will pick up dice and roll them. As far as the speed creep that some worry about, I don’t think that the upper speeds will be changed much, since airspeed is really a function of engine power output, and the efficiency of the prop. The very best efficiency of any prop is only in the 80 to 85% range regardless of construction. What allowing a selection of propeller sizes in carbon would facilitate the tuning of an engine as conditions change.
We did see a tremendous speed increase when we switched from wood to plastic in Quickie, and that was due to the restrictions on the wood prop in terms of diameter and modifications. Since Q40 props are already modified to achieve the maximum performance, then adding plastic props will only add consistency.
I don’t recall referring to you at “the Elitist”, with the attitude, nor do I recall Chicago as a Formula One hotbed. Perhaps you have misconstrued my commits or those of others on this thread. You do have a considerable advantage living in Chicago, since the weather there should be very much like the weather in Muncie. So perhaps the testing you can do on the engines is much more valid than what others at high altitudes or more humid or drier climates are able to perform.
When I was working my way through college, a considerable part of the time was at Progress Manufacturing, which made Rev-Up Props back in the 70’s. I can assure you that there is considerable differences and variations in wood props. Depending on where the tree was grown, the angle that the plank was cut, and where in the plank the prop was cut you get a tremendous variation from prop to prop, and usually blade to blade on the same prop. So carving a racing prop is subject to a wide variation in how the blades flex in use. When everything comes out right, a wood prop works extremely well. Usually, though, these variations limit how well it performs.
All we are asking is to remove some of the variables that are really uncontrolled from the equation. If I want randomness, I will pick up dice and roll them. As far as the speed creep that some worry about, I don’t think that the upper speeds will be changed much, since airspeed is really a function of engine power output, and the efficiency of the prop. The very best efficiency of any prop is only in the 80 to 85% range regardless of construction. What allowing a selection of propeller sizes in carbon would facilitate the tuning of an engine as conditions change.
We did see a tremendous speed increase when we switched from wood to plastic in Quickie, and that was due to the restrictions on the wood prop in terms of diameter and modifications. Since Q40 props are already modified to achieve the maximum performance, then adding plastic props will only add consistency.
07-24-2004, 11:28 AM
#24
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Arlington Heights,
IL
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
ORIGINAL: HighPlains
There has ALWAYS been a slightly elitist attitude espoused by certain members of the pylon racing fraternity. In their minds, if you can’t achieve the skills to carve props, then buy them at unreasonable prices. How does that help grow the event? In the end, I think that this attitude hasten the demise of the Formula One event
There has ALWAYS been a slightly elitist attitude espoused by certain members of the pylon racing fraternity. In their minds, if you can’t achieve the skills to carve props, then buy them at unreasonable prices. How does that help grow the event? In the end, I think that this attitude hasten the demise of the Formula One event
Secondly, I never stated that Chicago was a Hot-bed for FORM ONE. I simply was stating that I lived in Chicago.
Predicting the future is a bad thing. I don't care what anyone says you cannot predict what will happen if the prop technology changes. Everything is cause and effect. With different props comes different engines, different airplanes and so on. So in our effort to make the event more competitive we will make equipment obsolete. So we saved $25 on a prop but spent thousands trying to make it work.
I am not in favor of new props. I have no problem with people running different props at there local contests due to elevation or humidity or competitiveness. That is your deal. We need to have rules and guidlines in place in which we abide by at a national level. We can't just change the rules because someone didn't win or because someone isn't competitive. Those are bad reasons in my opinion. Everyone follows the same guidlines as everyone else.
IF not allowing different props is the demise of QM40 so be it. We will re-invent the wheel once again, and in 3 years from that point we will be discussing that people are not competitive and this cycle will start over again.
Dan
07-24-2004, 12:46 PM
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Stansbury Park,
UT
Posts: 937
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Plastic Props
The current carbon prop works in many conditions, maybe not all conditions, but many. This discussion started because somebody said they couldn't turn it enough RPM's. Why would a whole new prop be introduced for this, if the same prop could simply be shortened to turn up more? I think it can also be said that those that were the fastest at the Nats have also been to races where their wood props were at a disadvantage to the APC 7.4x8.0. If that's not the case, then I guess the APC's have never won or taken fast times at any major events.
People have compared allowing more carbon props into Q40 to the APC props in Q500. There is a big difference in my opinion. The wood props that were used in Q500 still had to be stock, where Q40 has always used modified wood props. I really don't think anything should be allowed that could obsolete modified wood props.
Bob,
There is a difference between composite wings and carbon props. I legally can make my own composite wing to try to get an advantage. I can't do the same with a carbon prop. You say allowing another carbon prop won't add speed, just consistancy? Can you guarantee this? The wood props have been modified to achieve the best performance, the carbon ones haven't....yet. The current carbon prop is based on a Chip Hyde prop from about 5 years ago, maybe longer. It's faster than all but the fastest wood props now, let alone than those from five years ago. Fred could probably make a faster carbon prop just by copying a more current wood prop. I'm sure with the experience Fred has gained since making the current prop, he can make a new one that's faster.
Tony,
Most pro baseball players and golfers have bats/clubs made to their specs that aren't available to you or I. Jeff Gordon's cars are built by his team for him, and are different than the production race cars many other teams use.
I don't have a problem with people buying competitive wood props. I often use the carbon prop myself, but I can still try to make my own to be able to gain a little advantage, and I don't have to sell them. Tom and Grunk don't have to sell theirs either. I can't make my own carbon props to gain an advantage, I guess that's where I have the issue. The one item that has always been truely different in Q40 than Q500 is the ability to modify props. If we were to allow a carbon prop that ended up faster than any wood prop, it would take that difference away.
GS
People have compared allowing more carbon props into Q40 to the APC props in Q500. There is a big difference in my opinion. The wood props that were used in Q500 still had to be stock, where Q40 has always used modified wood props. I really don't think anything should be allowed that could obsolete modified wood props.
Bob,
There is a difference between composite wings and carbon props. I legally can make my own composite wing to try to get an advantage. I can't do the same with a carbon prop. You say allowing another carbon prop won't add speed, just consistancy? Can you guarantee this? The wood props have been modified to achieve the best performance, the carbon ones haven't....yet. The current carbon prop is based on a Chip Hyde prop from about 5 years ago, maybe longer. It's faster than all but the fastest wood props now, let alone than those from five years ago. Fred could probably make a faster carbon prop just by copying a more current wood prop. I'm sure with the experience Fred has gained since making the current prop, he can make a new one that's faster.
Tony,
Most pro baseball players and golfers have bats/clubs made to their specs that aren't available to you or I. Jeff Gordon's cars are built by his team for him, and are different than the production race cars many other teams use.
I don't have a problem with people buying competitive wood props. I often use the carbon prop myself, but I can still try to make my own to be able to gain a little advantage, and I don't have to sell them. Tom and Grunk don't have to sell theirs either. I can't make my own carbon props to gain an advantage, I guess that's where I have the issue. The one item that has always been truely different in Q40 than Q500 is the ability to modify props. If we were to allow a carbon prop that ended up faster than any wood prop, it would take that difference away.
GS