jsnipes

My Feedback: (3)

LOL! Well, as long as it was DOUBLE SECRET! LOL! Just messing with you ... it looks great!! Can't wait to hear how your maiden goes!

JS

jsnipes

My Feedback: (3)

Exactly!!

Not to mention the trusted service and support from the entire Kingtech Team.

JS

Kelly Rohrbach

My Feedback: (1)

Thanks Jamie, I still have work to do and unfortunately in the middle of a remodel not to mention a couple buddies BVM F4s close to paint. Now my son is after me to get the old Bandit up an going too. Hope to have it ready soon before the snow flys. Can't bring my self to do the at the jet meet build, I like to double and triple check everything. Are you flying at the listed CG or adjust a bit.

sillyness

My Feedback: (25)

As I hem and haw I keep coming back to the Kimgtech Now the question seems to be 140 vs 160. Published fuel consumption seems to be 22% higher on the 160 to get the extra 5 lbs of thrust. Wonder what fuel draw will be in actual flight conditions.

sillyness

My Feedback: (25)

Man these new engines/ECUs look nice, now that I found them. I hope the motors are underrated like the old K-140G.

gunradd

My Feedback: (9)

From what I have found on most installations using a bigger motor but pulling the power back more and keeping the scale speed that the smaller motor would have results in better fuel economy then the smaller engine running at a higher throttle setting.

On the BVM F16 the K160 seems to be the perfect motor for power and fuel economy. This aircraft has an incredibly light wing loading and does not require much power for its size.

sillyness

My Feedback: (25)

You guys need to update the specs on your sales website... like for the 140 it still shows the old diameter etc... confusing! Thanks!

sillyness

My Feedback: (25)

Still can't decide 140 vs 160. Settled on Kingtech though.

AndyAndrews

Go with the 160. You can always slow it down but you can never make the 140 go more vertical than it's capable of doing.

sillyness

My Feedback: (25)

So, I may have to move in a couple years. What's the shortest paved sea-level runway you'd consider for this bird? I found one that's 300'x20'.

gunradd

My Feedback: (9)

After practice you could do 300 if it has smooth runoffs just in case. The takeoff is longer then the landings once you get used to flying it slow.

I wouldn't fly it at any runway under 400 I think that's the safe minimum.

sillyness

My Feedback: (25)

Found one that's 400' paved in town and a small airport that's 2 hours away :/

ozief16

My Feedback: (13)

What're guys finding for CG? Usually BV CG numbers are way too nose heavy for my taste. Is that true here too or because of the different lineage is the stated number more better?

Similarly, does anyone have Xicoy CG machine data for the plane?

Thanks
Dave

Kelly Rohrbach

My Feedback: (1)

Hey Dave
Jamie Snipes on this thread said he has the Xicoy balancer information set up for anyone that needed it, bet he also has the CG. I wondered the same thing if it needs to be move back

jsnipes

My Feedback: (3)

I've got the Xicoy info and will post it in a bit when I get home. JS

gunradd

My Feedback: (9)

You can go just a tiny bit rear but not much. I have flown it tail heavy when we didn't realize how far the cg moves back with ordanace. Its a freaking hand full at a rear cg.

jsnipes

My Feedback: (3)

My Xicoy settings are:
- Distance Front to Mains: 636mm
- Distance Mains to CG: 110mm

You can check but I think this is pretty close to the factory CG recommendation. I don't remember ... I did what Greg said to do as far as the CG goes.

I keep this CG regardless of ordnance, meaning I add or take away nose weight depending on ordnance.

With full ordnance I probably have 2 full sticks of lead in the nose. That is with the ECU and Rx pack up front in the cockpit area where they are designed to go.

JS

ozief16

My Feedback: (13)

Thanks guys, great info!

Dave

ddennison

My Feedback: (15)

I am flying with the 140Rx and find I am holding a fair amount of "up" the first half lap. My CG is on the mark. and I have tried to go back a 1/4". The plane has felt the same in flight and slightly better on landing attitude at 1/4" back (without ordinance). I am not sure if I am getting the pitch down only from the gear but my recollection is that it was still requiring the elevator after the gear was up and going into and coming out of the first 180..

DD

sillyness

My Feedback: (25)

Has anyone replaced servos, leads, etc? Any weak points with the wiring? Air system?

jsnipes

My Feedback: (3)

I've been flying mine since April 2015 and no issues or changes to date. It's been rock solid.
JS

JoelP

My Feedback: (20)

I had to replace the elevator servos...3/16" of gear train slop. Replaced with 8911's and no slop now. You really need to go over every nut and bolt and check for tightness...all the nuts and bolts that secure the fin, stabs and wings mounts were loose. Also check the fuel tanks...the length of tubing for the pickup was half the length of the tank. Everything else is good and the plane looks to be well built. It's your money so check the other guy's work!

gunradd

My Feedback: (9)

Over 200 flights on the Kingtech BVM F16 between Barry and I and have not replaced a thing yet.

One thing I did do is install a separate air tank and fill valve for the brakes so they can run at a lower pressure.

Mark Vandervelden

Hi
How did you separate the the air supply, I thought all the 5 valves were on a common air rail?

gunradd

My Feedback: (9)

Yes separate systems