RCU Forums

RCU Forums (http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/)
-   Scale Racing (http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/scale-racing-183/)
-   -   Sams warbird racing (http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/scale-racing-183/11262859-sams-warbird-racing.html)

airraptor 10-14-2012 09:15 PM

Sams warbird racing
why do you guys have a break out time in unlimited???? its not unlimited then lol

also why do you give a severe disadvanted to the 2 strokes mainly compaired to the YS 115 on 20% nitro is has the same power as the OS 120AX but soon as you jump to 50% it has the OS by 800-100 rpm yet the 120 would need 200+ more square inches of wing. It seems the rules are only set up for the YS four storkes. i am building a couple of planes to race up there but just wondering why the rules are goverend around the YS's.

Jimmy Skids 10-15-2012 07:13 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing

Let me see if I can answer each of these questions. First I have to assume that you are refering to the Sacramento Area Modeler when you say "Sams warbird racing", if I am correct and you are referring to SAM's, then these answers would be in regards to SAM's.

1. SAM's does not have an unlimited class. SAM's runs three brackets, Gold, Silver, and Bronze. Due to AMA requirements associated with field layout, we are unable to run an unlimited class and still be within our AMA site waiver.

2. "why do you give a severe disadvantage to the 2 strokes...." . Well first you would have to understand that the SAM Warbrid rules were originally based upon the SWRA rules. Using their wing area charts. These charts were developed prior to many of today's four stroke motors. A few years ago, we (myself and others) rewrote the rules to bring the 2 stroke and 4 stroke engines closer in comparison. However, the YS engines have really become the choice of many due to the power they produce. At the time of rewrite there wasn't even a YS 1.15 in production or thought there of. With that said, the rules were written to enable more of the 2 strokes to compete, but not discourage the pilots and planes that were being used at the time. Over all the series has continued to grow and many pilots have competed under the current format with little or no issues, and we have seen other clubs use or adapt our current rules for use as well. 2 stoke engines are clearly competitive in the bronze and silver classes and I'm sure that a piped two stroke could be capable of being competitive in gold as well, but I have yet to see pilots choose to go that route. Mark Summich (a great pilot/builder from the bay area) was the last pilot to use a 2 stroke with much success in gold and he has since then switched to a YS.

Now with all that said, since we run breakout times in each class, wing area, engine displacement, etc are not really that important. Not breaking out becomes the biggest issue in each class.

Jimmy Skids

airraptor 10-16-2012 01:51 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
thanks for clearing some of that up. I was thinking of the gold as unlimited.

aas for the ys engines there isnt a 2 stroke that could come close to running with them except the 120AX with a jett muffler. The YS-70 can out turn my OS65 AX as well yet because of the two stroke wing area it wouldnt be competitive. I am not asking you to change it as i will have to run a YS engine be able to compete.

Jimmy Skids 10-16-2012 03:13 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
Looking forward to meeting you at the races next year. Feel free to ask (PM me) if you have any other questions.

I'm pretty sure that we will be looking at some minor rules changes during the off season. I doubt if we will be looking at the wing area charts as part of the re-write since the current version has been working pretty well. When I started racing a decade ago most the racers then were running YS engines. As I "earned my wings" in racing, I also purchased YS engines. Although they are (in my book) one of the best motors available, they do take some time to learn how to operate. I'm now pretty comfortable, and YS motors make up the majority of the engines I own. With that said, I believe the majority of the SAM's racers fly YS. As such changing things would be a heavy burden on the majority of the racers. It is easier to have new racers learn what we have..... buy a YS (just kidding) (sort of) ;).

Jimmy Skids

airraptor 10-17-2012 10:20 AM

RE: Sams warbird racing
well maybe i will make a YS115 plane then throw a OS 120 AX and do a demo race. Maybe the rules could be changed a bit to state "no Pylon or DF" engines allowed but then could drop the wing area down to match. The only reason I stay on the 120 AX thing is that its cheaper than the 115 and might get more guys into the racing. I do like that you guys will allow the WM T-34 in the Bronze class next year. This will do two things. get more guys racing and then they could have one airframe for two different races.

Jimmy Skids 10-17-2012 07:13 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
When I redeveloped the wing area chart is was with the WM Mustang in mind that was being raced as part of the triangle series. The conversations prior were very positive. The results afterwards were non-existent. Basically, we made changes to encourage more cross competition between the northern California clubs and there really wasn't much of a change. We are starting to see some from each club make the trek to compete, but not a lot. Speaking only for myself, I haven't been able to make a trip to race with the Bay Area gang just based upon not having enough time. Maybe someday when the kids are bigger I'll be able to get out more.

Jimmy Skids

Racewizard 10-18-2012 08:32 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
You know if breaking out was the main problem there then why not make the wing area the same for 2 strokes and 4 strokes? I believe you will get more pilots from other clubs to race at your field. I would say that other races from other clubs do not run YS engine because they are VERY EXPENSIVE. As you may know me I have raced at Sams a few times with my hated Tower .46 in the Silver class and I hold my own, but theres no way I could build a plane with a 2 stroke and compete in the Gold class if I have to add another 100 inches or more wing area to compete, just not going to happen.


Jimmy Skids 10-18-2012 10:29 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
Ah... Racewizard ='s Babe... got it.

I don't think we will see a change in the wing areas. Your point regarding the 2 stroke vs. the YS engines is clearly understood. The Gold Class is definitely more costly than Silver and Bronze, and while we may see an increase if we changed the wing area charts in participation, I would still go back to the fact that when we changed the rules 2 seasons ago, we really didn't see much of a change. Many of the planes can be raced at either SAM's or the Bay Area, yet we still don't see many pilots crossing over. I for one have planes that could go unlimited or race in the 120 class (if still around), but I have yet to make a trip. I barely have enough time between the kids, work, and the local events to attend the races in my own back yard. Our site waiver with AMA is tied to our current version of rules so we don't like to make rules changes that could have an effect on the waiver. In fact, the only changes made over the last couple years have been small changes that have added another layer of safety to the events.

Jimmy Skids

T34RACING 10-20-2012 03:59 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing

Not to stir the pot, but I think what the guys are saying is to do what southern california or Arizona has done, you still have the breakout times to satisfy AMA and the sanctions and allow any airplane with minimums and maximums and let the guys put the power they desire ( 4 or 2 stroke ). With this said, no mater what combination you run, you still cant go faster than the times or you loose. I think AMA doesnt really pay attention to the wing area vs engine displacement. They pay attention to the speeds which can be controlled by the breakout times. I think if you did this, you would see more racers including more of me as I dont have an airplane that falls within the rules at this time without putting a 4-stroke in it. All my stuff has 2-strokes. The bay area guys are 2-stroke oriented. Plus when you crash...it hurts less.

It might be worth contacting Lawrence, discussing the situation and then see if something can be worked out. You never know until it is tried. The cost of racing is hurting everyone right now no matter what. If it isnt the airplanes, it is the cost of traveling. With most of us who have families, we have to watch our pennies so I can relate. I have stuck close to home lately as well. I have a 2 year old and just purchased a home....so I am broke. LOL!!!!!

We all need to work together. Unfortunately, we all have restrictions based on limitations of fields. I think if we all coordinate our dates before the beginning of the year, plan on having races where we are not having pilots choose one race from the other or overlapping , I think participation will go up. Each year, it seems SAMS schedule doesnt get published until later ( Febraury - March ) and it always overlaps on something. I will be working on the Triangle Series schedule next month. I am more than happy to work with you guys to coordinate alternating months to do races so guys can work it into their schedules to race. We are going to focus on the championship points for next year more and try to increase our prizes. I would be nice to get you guys on board. Lets work together this year to see if we can get more participation at all the races.

Next year, we are going to race T-34, 46 Warbird and Unlimited Warbird at all races next year exclusing Salinas. No Unlimited at Salinas.

Give me a call anytime (408) 482-5437


Tommy_Gun 10-21-2012 05:50 AM

RE: Sams warbird racing
There is a safety factor that we have to address due to the constraints of the physical size of our flying site.
As it stands now, we have already made changes in recent years to drop the breakout times and bring to put 4 strokes and two strokes onto a more level plane.

As for the all out racing with no breakout thing.
My observations are as such
1 Most folks visiting us don't have a problem with breaking out as opposed to cutting pylons when they actually come over to race with us.

2 As I have competed in racing at both Morgan Hill and the Fresno area, I have noticed that our Gold racers from the SAMs rules are just as competitive
as the planes built in those areas for your "no breakout" racing. Once again the main factor, even out of town, is cut pylons.

3 The breakout racing we do at SAMs actually adds another element to the race that makes it more of a fun challenge in the fact that you have to have a
good grasp on where you are in the race with respect to your opponents and the clock. This adds to the fun IMO in that it is a bit more demanding of the competitors and
the mind games that can be played during the day of competition.

4 We are trying to keep the planes looking like the full scale aircraft that have raced or fought in the past. As it sits even now there are people that feel it is needed to deviate from scale looks quite a bit to make a plane competitive. There are quite a few planes and pilots that have proven otherwise yet still this is happening and it detracts from the event IMO.
By removing the restrictions to limit speed you will see even more of this happening in the pursuit of that almighty next 5 MPH in speed. This will further reduce the number of viable airframes
that can be successful and make competition even more expensive than it already is. This has been proven in the recent drop in the breakout times at SAMs, once again my opinion.
Since that rule change the Gold class has had planes that were competitive in the 1:30 breakout become just barely capable of running with any success. Now many are vying for smaller airframes to take advantage of the smaller wing area that can be used with the newer YS115. So now order to be competitive in Gold, most are spending more time and money for newer planes as their previous planes can't run competitive as they did in the past.

5 Safety, we have had enough cause forf concern over this issue. And yet another personal opinion, making these planes go even faster in our venue is just asking for something to go very wrong, very fast. There is no need for such a change.

Racewizard 10-21-2012 08:11 AM

RE: Sams warbird racing
Tom were saying we don't need to go faster then the breakout time but the 2 stroke planes are handycaped with having to fly with a larger wing, larger plane and in most cases a heavier plane. Keep the breakout times but make it equal for 2 and 4 strokes. Its going to be hard enough to beat the YS engines that the Sams guys have developed without adding extra weight and wing area. It almost gives the impression that the club is scared of a good running 2 stroke engine and that they will upset cart of 4 strokes, so why the handycap???? Cutting pylons, you need to fly better and not go way beyond the pylons to kill time. Its called racing not who can spend the most time in the air.


Jimmy Skids 10-22-2012 11:39 AM

RE: Sams warbird racing
So it is clear that many outsiders would like to see the wing area displacement removed for 2 vs 4 strokes. My question would be this in order to achieve a greater understanding of everyones thoughts.

Is all this conversation directly associated with the Gold Class, or also related to Silver and Bronze?

Clearly, silver and bronze can be just as competitive with a 2 stroke using the current wing areas. I'm clearly not opposed to review of rules, etc. But what we currently have has a proven track record and making major changes (which is what I would consider this to be) to the rules comes with major concerns in regards to safety and expense.

I'm not saying that the guys in SoCal or Az have it right or wrong, but in looking at the numbers our gold participation is as good or greater in relationship to pilots. As for expense, I see your point (Kevin), it can be expensive to put a SAMs Gold Warbird up and be competitive. This is probably no different than in any other top end race environment. Many pilots have made the effort already and I'm not sure if changing the rules would net that many pilots. So here is a second question.

How many pilots that do not race Gold at SAM's would make the commitment to race next season in Gold if the 2 stroke wing area matched up with the 4 stroke wing area?

I guess while we are on the subject it would be good to hear the opinion of other SAM's racers with regards to the current rules. For the most part Tommy and I are on the same page regarding his post. I'm open to hearing other ideas and like Kevin I believe along the same lines that we all can work together to make the races better for all.


speedracerntrixie 10-22-2012 03:53 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
Jimmy and all, From where I see it the changes that we are looking for would affect the gold class only. Babe and I have no issues being competitive in silver with a 2 stroke. My suggestions were to even out the wing area requirements in a way that regardless of being 2 or 4 stroke the wing area would be the same. This would include YS 110-120 and any .91-120 2 stroke running the same aera. From conversations I have had here in the bay area and a few others I would think this realistically could get another 3 or 4 guys racing. Not a big increase but on average gold is 10-12 guys. 35% increase there. Bringing the T-34s into bronze is a great step.

The other thing I think would boost participation in gold is a nitro limit. I did bring that up over the weekend and it was not acceped at all. In spite of that I still think the idea has some merit and the reasoning brought to light. Right now to be competitive in in gold one has to mix their own fuel or get it from someone who does. I personally am not going to mix fuel. The other thing is that a 400.00 plus YS is going to last longer on 30% nitro. The airframes will last longer, it will reduce the chances of prop issues, demonstrate to the AMA that safety is our #1 concern and make the transition to gold from silver easier. The only down side I see to this is that it would make the airplanes slower but in a way that evens the playing field a little.

As it stands now IMO showing up with a competitive airplane with a YS 115 is still not going to net wins, there is enough under the surface that someone like me is going to have to devote a season learning before I can give guys like Sullivan, Jimmy, Jerry a good run. Race guys are pretty much the same, we all want to hit the top level. We don't go to Reno to watch the biplane class, we go to see the unlimiteds! Same with R/C racing, if a guy wants to race, he is going to set that goal to get to Gold. I think the steep learning curve and cost of running a YS keeps a certain amount of guys out.

Jimmy Skids 10-22-2012 06:12 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
Well the topic is starting to get a little meat to it. Everyones input is helpful. First of all, thank you Speed, your post almost seems like a compliment. This is pretty far from you video post of shooting up a Skids Foundation Spitfire. :D

When I worked up the wing area charts I really tried to keep the motors close without giving too much weight to either side. I have run a YS 1.10 against a OS 120ax and I can state the 120ax out pulled the 1.10 in a heavier pattern bird than my 6 pound warbird. Our current charts has the .95 or less 2 stroke on part with a YS 1.20. I would think the combos would be almost equal, but then again, I haven't played much with the 2 strokes. In fact when I developed the chart I started with the .90 2 stroke and 1.20 4 stroke and then worked the numbers from there.

Speed, I would totally disagree regarding changing the rules with regards to nitro, that would be like telling a two stroke pilot.... no tuned pipes.... hmmmmmm [:@]

I have thoughts regarding cost, experience, etc and these are my personal thoughts only.... First, many have stated that "the expense" is too great for the YS vs. any two stroke. Well I've seen some pretty expensive two strokes. Also, when I'm racing I like to know that every pilot I'm up against has a similar investment in the air with me (these are my own personal thoughts only) and as such has a respect for their investment and mine. Nothing worse than looking at your investment be taken down by a pilot who has less to loose and as such flys with less regard to others investment. In fact I personally would pay double (more personal thoughts here) for the exact same plane I'm currently flying if I didn't have to invest the time in it to build it. In fact I would pay four times the amount (more personal thoughts) if I didn't have to invest the time and knew that it would not mid-air. So sometimes the expense can add to other pilots enjoyment in the competition. (but seriously).... the arguments are worth considering on both sides of the isle.

I totally agree with Speed when he says no matter what it would take time to "master" gold. I'm sure that a 2 stroke could win within the current rules. I also think that just because you are a hot shot pilot, have a YS 1.15, and can tune your motor that you are not going to walk away with the title of Gold Champion. You also need LUCK, experience, LUCK, time, LUCK, and of course LUCK. I can say this because I have been on the good and bad side of the luck. I personally have won the series 4 times (for Gold and another in Silver) and every year I learn something new. In the 10 plus years I have been flying I have learned how to build. How to tune. How to crash. How to rebuild. How to repair motors. How to practice. What fuel works for me. And what fuels don't work. Plus probably many more things. I believe I am getting better each year..... problem is, everyone else is also. [&o]

OK, so there are a few more of my personal thoughts. We had a ton of rain in Sacramento today so I had to cancel the little ones soccer practice. Thus the time to elaborate.

Keep the thoughts coming in. Try to see things both ways. Keep safety in mind (that is the ultimate driver here).

Jimmy Skids

speedracerntrixie 10-22-2012 07:29 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
Jimmy, I appriciate your response. Most of the time these type of discussions go downhill quickly. I'm glad to see we are not going down that path. I am still in favor of reducing nitro though. Like you had stated, safety is our #1 concern. I still beleive that a 30% nitro cap would increase the safety margin. It also makes it where commercially available fuel would be competitive. I think we both can admit that most guys would figure out how to turn 1:25 on 30%. Then again I know I can always count on you for all my fuel needs LOL. I agree that we would want some real world comparisons on 1.20 2 strokes VS YS 1.15. I do beleive that a heavier pattern airplane with a 1.20 AX would be just as fast as one of the 1.15 powered racers. . The pattern airplane has better aerodynamics. Wing/stab/thrust line refinements makes for much reduced drag. I do want to go on record that I by no means think that SAM's formula is broken. I'm just throwing some ideas out there to attract new participation. There is not going to be one easy answer. As priviously stated, the T-34s in bronze is a big step. The next would be for a SAM's representitive making appearences club meetings of clubs that participate in racing. These would be Fresno, Salinas and Morgan Hill. A personal invitation gets great results. I will also be stepping in to help Kevin here in the bay area in any way I can. Maybe this will help out getting more cross participation. In my talks with guys that race down here there are two items that come up on a regular basis. One being the breakouts and the other is the preceived advantage of a YS running 50%+ nitro. Obviously the breakouts are staying but from what I hear having more of a selection of competitive engines could net more pilots. Last weekend we had 30 pilots. I was the only one of those 30 to race SAMs this weekend. Most of the .46 warbirds would have been competitive in silver. The unlimiteds would have been a bit slow for SAM's gold but could be competitive with some rules tweaking.

Jimmy Skids 10-22-2012 07:55 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
Great ideas... except for the Nitro part.... :D

For me between coaching the little ones team, driving the big one to matches, our OUTLAW events and work, out of town events are pretty much out of the question. Maybe in a few years I'll be able too, but I have to be honest with myself and realize that there just isn't enough time to make all the events in norcal. With that said, I believe we can "tweak" a bit to make it more interesting for all. I don't think it is broke also, in fact I believe a lot of attendance is down accross the hobby due to outside factors effecting the all facets of the hobby.

Jimmy Skids

T34RACING 10-22-2012 07:58 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
Shawn, I know what you mean by limiting nitro, but I dont care if you put 100% or 5%, you cant go faster than the breakout. Pilots running higher nitro just have to spend more on parts and nitro of course. Limited to 30% will only cause issues only that how do you monitor it without going around and checking everyone's fuel with the guages. Guys are going to dump a little more here and there and in some cases, you would have to build in tolerances because not everyone's math is the same...LOL

PLANEBENDER 10-22-2012 09:58 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
Having personally raced the Gold class since the demise of SWRA I can say this: As a 20 Year NHRA drag racer with many Championships to my name, Racing certin classes are not for everyone. A racer can have a bunch of fun with both the flying aspect as well as the building and creating one as well. Not to mention the thrill of competition. This Warbird racing can be lots of fun and provide you with great fellowship. However racing model airplanes is expensive! I don't care if it's Bronze, Silver or Gold. You must choose the class that suits you best. Choose what your pocketbook and or ability allows and go for it. The Gold class seems to be the most mentioned one in this discussion so I would like to elaborate a little if I may. Gold class racing is NOT for everyone, It is the most expensive, It requires the most maintinance to the planes, and of course requires the highest skilled pilots. It will cost you alot more money (Per Flight) that it's other 2 brothers Silver and Bronze. I find it to be the best fit for me and thats why I continue to keep doing it. I personally don't care if they allow the same wing size for 2 strokes as 4 strokes. I went to the board a couple of years ago with all of this and it took alot of grinding it out to try and convince the SAM group we would benifit from the 2 stroke/4 stroke change and we will have many more racers making it to our racing events that already have fast 2 stroke planes that they have tons of time and research invested into. So a change was made to kind of meet in the middle with wing/2 stroke rules. ( I Myself) really did not see anyone new with 2 strokes that were not already racing with us decide to join in as a result of the "NEW" rules. But as I have already mentioned, I have ZERO issues with the engine size being the same for 2 or 4 strokes. Also cost was mentioned, Do you really think someone could produce a 2 stroke engine to compeate in Gold with a 515" wing at a lower cost than a YS-115? I doubt it. With the exception of Jeff W. I have never seen a 2 stroke plane run fast enough in our 1:25 B.O. time. I'm not saying that it coulden't be done, If Speed Racer put a large Hybrid Bad Boy 2 stroke in that trick plane of his he could for sure break out. Or Mark S., Prolly the most sucessfull 2 stroke Warbird racer I have ever seen. If they ever try to turn the GOLD class into a Club race by limiting the Nitro or curb weight.....I'm Gone. Remember guys this entire statement is just my own opinion for the 1.4 cents that it's worth.LOL


airraptor 10-23-2012 03:51 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
The way I see the gold racing is there is only one engine that is dominate and thats the YS-115.

I started this with the thought that the YS-115 on 40%+ nitor is = to a 120 AX. Here are some numbers I was able to get with the 120AX

16x8 was 9,600
14.5x14.5N was 9,000-9,100
13x13N was 11,200-11,300
14x12regular was 10,000 if i remember correctly but not sure on this rpm number here.

So with that is has pretty close to the same power as the 120AX. These numbers were all on APC props and the Jett 120 Long red muffler. take 1,000 rpm away if on the stock muffler.

so same power and I would have to fly with 200 more sq inches.
I would like to see this changed up some so i could run this engine if I wanted. I would also like to see if you do change the wing area rule to state somehow that the Pylon or DF engines are not included in this. maybe with a statement that all Two strokes must be side exhust or something or just no DF/Pylon engines.

I plan to race more up there either way next year.

Jimmy Skids 10-23-2012 04:22 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
Well I can state that I have never won using a YS 1.15 engine. I currently am flying a YS 120 on a plane with 550 square inches. An ARF with a stock wing. The YS 120 I was running is about 10 ounces heavier, then the 1.10s or 1.15, and is stated to put out the same power. I have used various props, but was using a 14x13 APC at about 10.2 RPM for the most part. So with that said, there are other engines besides the 1.15 that can dominate. When I'm not having engine issues (most of last year I did), I have the power and ability to break out easily. In fact, I have a back up airplane running a 1.10s that can do times around 1 minute 20 seconds using an APC 13x13.5n turning 10,700 RPM on the ground. The plane is a stock Great Planes Spitfire kit with 527 square inches.

The point is that I'm basically running bigger, heavier airplanes than the guys running 1.15s and have been as competitive or more so when you look at my performance over the past 4 years (two wins and two seconds). This doesn't discount what you are saying with regards to the 1.15 being the engine of choice of most the pilots. I also am looking at a smaller bird to take advantage of 1.15 engine. It is my hope that I can take a stock engine with 30% fuel and be competitive. I may have to go with a bit hotter juice, but I won't know until I try.

Needless to say, the rules are in discussion, I don't know if anything will change, but there are discussions going on. This is good. I just wish someone would reply to my original questions.....

1. Is this mainly for Gold, or is this feeling in relationship to the other two classes
2. How many pilots would commit to flying gold if the wing areas were the same

I really would like to see how many people are behind this movement. Rules changes are not something to be taken lightly. To change the rules we have to go through AMA. The approval process isn't easy and isn't something to take lightly.

Jimmy Skids

speedracerntrixie 10-23-2012 04:30 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
After some thought I would have to agree with Dave. If someone wants to run gold he will pay what is required. I have seen this in just about every other aspect of R/C that I have done. When I make another run for gold it will be with a YS but I really want to start out with commercially available fuel. I'm just concerned about how elite the gold class has become and wonder how many guys are going to work through the ranks to keep the class alive. in IMAC it took me 10 years to work up to unlimited. Soon after that the class died to the point to being a two or three pilot contest. Not much fun to match up skills with only a couple guys with 10K in equipment costs. I would hate to see this happen here.

Jeff, not sure where you are getting 200 sq? From what I see the current chart shows the 120 2 stroke at 610 SQ and the 115 YS at 515 SQ. Even being 95 sq difference is a bit much but is still workable. Remember, high aspect ratio wings turn better. I still think that a 2 stroke can win but it will have to be a fairly exotic setup. An airplane with the frontal area to house a 1.20 with a tuned muffler is going to be draggy IMO. I have thought about a Rossi .90 RIRE as they come up for sale all the time but frankly I am tired of doing R&D. I know if I have any issues getting good reliabilty out of a YS I will be able to get help. My reasons for lower nitro is simply less wear and tear on the engine and airframe. It will be interesting to see what guys come up with for next season. Who knows, I may just get lazy and run the same airplanes I have now LOL.

Jimmy Skids 10-23-2012 04:36 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
YS 1.15 needs 515 squares minimum wing area

speedracerntrixie 10-23-2012 04:57 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
My bad, my notes read 515 but I typed 440. Still a 95 SQ difference.

PLANEBENDER 10-23-2012 08:25 PM

RE: Sams warbird racing
Speed, The shortest path with the least resistance is always the better move. No one is trying to get you to "Drink the koolaid here" But to look at it this way, The 120 2 stroke will require some custom port work not alot but some. It will also require work to get the pipe just right along with the cost of the pipe and header. Add all that up and make sure to include your VALUABLE time and what do you have? Prolly the cost of the YS-115 or close. Their are so many YS engines being run at these dang races you could pick up stuff guys are dropping on the floor and almost put an engine together. LOL Consider this: I have said this to ya before, If your sleek airframe or even a slightly larger version had a YS-115 OR a 110 in it it would desimate all!!! I know as I have raced one of the draggiest airframes in Gold for 8 years. Also one more thing, A YS-110 would compeate in todays Gold with NO problem. I did nothing for years but breakout in the 1:30 class with a 110 running a 13X13N at 11.6 RPM in a 8lb plane. I'm with Jim Skids here, How many guys are we going to pick up next year if changes are made to wing charts / 2 stroke allowances?


airraptor 10-24-2012 09:13 AM

RE: Sams warbird racing
Yes its for the gold race only.
yes as I said i will be racing up there. I have a ME-209 short kit already;)

Speed maybe i read some old rules or something as I thought the 120 2S needed 710 sq

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:55 PM.