rjratnip

I'm considering and RCV engine for the Top-Flite Cessna 182. It seems like the 90SP is the choice with a 16X14 prop, but thought I would ask before I commit.

Thanks,

Otto Kudrna

My Feedback: (1)

Hello RJ
I believe that the 60SP would be enough for very scale flight and than some. For aerobatic capabilities the 90SP is the better choice. If you build light, and want to fly scale-like than go with the 60.

Thank You
Otto K.
RCV Tech Support USA

jsmeed

Otto,
I have both a Top Flite Gold Edition Corsair (.60 Size) and a Top Flite Beechcraft Bonanza. What would be you engine suggestions for each of these planes?

Otto Kudrna

My Feedback: (1)

Hello
I think that the RC90SP would be a good choice for both kits. It will be hot in the Corsair and just right in the Bonanza. I am flying a V-Mar Corsair (64") with a 60SP and it is just right for me. If you are looking for a good vertical with the corsair, the 90 should give it to you. With the right choice of prop and fuel it should really move. Just remember to allow for good cooling for the engines.

Thank You
Otto

zero1954

Otto,

I have a RCV 90 SP which I will be putting in a Top Flite P-40. I have broken in that engine, and am very impressed with it. I have a Top Flite Giant Scale P-47 kit, 85" wingspan. Would the RCV 120 SP engine be suitable for this kit, or would it be, too small?

Zero1954

Otto Kudrna

My Feedback: (1)

Hello
I think that the 120SP would "fly" it just fine. It would give you realistic performance just like my Corsair has, but it will not give you vertical. I think with a prop such as a Zinger 18x16 or 18x14 or 20x12 or 20x14 the performance will be nice. Call me on this subject

Thank You
Otto Kudrna RCV Tech Support Americas (630)321-0580

Otto Kudrna

My Feedback: (1)

Hello Gents
I have had some e-mails about the Gold addition Mustang and the new T-34. I think that the RCV90 would be perfect for the Mentor, for scale performance. As for the musting I have in the past recommended the RCV120, after careful reconsideration I believe that the RCV90 would be just fine for a 64" airframe. All the other 60 sized Gold addition war birds would be perfect for the RCV90 also.

Thank You
Otto Kudrna

jneesy

would a rcv 90 pull a 4*120 or a thunderbug 120 around well . just wondering.

jneesy

or by the way how about the 90 on the modeltech 60 size p47d?

Otto Kudrna

My Feedback: (1)

I am not familiar with these airplane kits to answer these questions. If it is a war bird up to about 58" a RCV60 would do fine, up to about 70" the RCV90 is good anything above 80" will require a RCV120. Between 70and 80 inches either the RCV90 or RCV120, depended on the type of airplane it is and the performance you are looking for. I will be flying a 4PI Douglas Skyraider with a 80" span with the RCV90 and a 20x12 wood prop.

Thank You
Otto Kudrna

Juice

Otto,

Have you ever tried running the RCV-90SP (or any other RCV engine) without the muffler? Would the engine be excessively noisy? Would you not recommend doing this?

I'm building a Top Flite .60 sized Corsair and I would like to avoid cutting a hole on bottom of the cowl for the muffler to exit. Preferably, I would like to run the exhaust to a scale location, which is out the bottom of the fuse just behind the cowl flaps. I hear that these engines don't really need muffler back pressure to draw fuel. So what I'm thinking is to not use the muffler at all. Just use the short exhaust header (with a 45 degree bend) and route it through the firewall to the scale location.

Another question... For the prop to clear the cowl, the engine has to be mounted about 1" forward of the firewall. What would your recommendation be for this type of mounting?

Sorry to bombard you with so many questions. My lack of experience is really showing. =)

Thanks,
Joshua

Otto Kudrna

My Feedback: (1)

Hello
I see no problem running the engine without the muffler, if you do not require the muffler pressure for your fuel tank. These engines are very quiet and will not make excessive noise. I am running without a muffler on my Beaver and on my T-6. Even though the engine I am running is the CD series, internally the engine works the same and has the same sound, and noise level. On my corsair I did use the muller with a "tighter bend" exhaust stub. This allowed me to run the muffler closer to the engine and out of the SCALE position, as you wish to do. To get the exhaust far enough back I used an Alluminium arrow shaft piece slipped over the end of the muller and Lock Tight-ed on.
To move the engine farther forward, just mount it on a block spacer between the engine and the fire wall. I prefer to make these out of Maple wood , for the inherent hardness of the wood. Thank You
Otto

Otto Kudrna

My Feedback: (1)

Hello All
Do to the fact that every e-mail I get is a new learning experience, I have made the following determination to keep all of you as satisfied customers.
In the case of modern Sport Type Aviation aircraft such as Cessnas, Beaches, Pipers, and so on. These airplanes in real life have Hi-reving engines turning small props. Even though there is a RCV engine that will give decent performance on these types of airplanes, the RCV engines will give scale flight, but sometimes a larger than scale prop will have to be used. In these situations, or in any situation where a direct drive engine will turn a scale, or close to scale prop, I recommend that a direct drive engine be used. At the moment RCV only has the 58-CD in this category of engines, with a larger one in the works.
I hope that this helps in determining your engine choices in the future. I recommend the RCV SP-Series engines for war bird applications mainly or vintage aircraft which used low-reving engines, which were in many situations geared to turn large props. I know that this may create an interesting situation, because this would mean that I recommend a RCV engine for the Large Stionson, yet I do not recommend a RCV engine for the Cessna-182 or the T-34 or the Beach. If you get this impression, you ARE correct.

Thank You
Otto Kudrna, RCV Tech Support Americas

Juice

Otto,

On your V-Mar Corsair, You mentioned that you use an exhaust header with a "tighter bend". Where did you get that? I'm having problems locating one that will keep the muffler completely within the cowl of a TF Corsair .60.

If I can't keep the muffler inside, my next alternative would be to not use the muffler at all, as I suggested in post #11 of this thread. The only problem I have with this is that I don't know if I will require the muffler back pressure to pressurize the tank. I still haven't broken in the engine to know for sure if I don't need it. Is it possible to confidently PREdetermine if back pressure will not be needed? I don't know what information you'll need to help me make this determination, so I'll tell you as much as I know...

Depending on the size and shape of the fuel tank (still unpurchased), the front of the tank will be about 4.5" to 6" behind the carborator. The fuel line will exit the tank about 1" above the vertical position of the carburator. The back of the fuel tank (where the clunk will be) is 11" behind the carb. I estimate that the entire length of the fuel line, from clunk to carb, will be about 12" to 14".

Of course, my last option, if a proper exhaust header cannot be found and muffler pressure is required, is to cut a hole through the cowl and let the muffler stick out. I would really, really want to avoid this option.

Thanks again,
Juice

Otto Kudrna

My Feedback: (1)

Hello Juice
I make custom headers for $36 plus $3 post in the US $9 outside US, just tell me what angle you want up to 90*. and what engine it is for. I always recommend muffler pressure for a positive fuel flow.

Otto

peternj

My Feedback: (5)

Otto, would you recomend the RCV.60 SP for this twin or would this be over kill? The biggest prop is 10x6 three bladed prop? Thanks in advance