Never had a problem with my 8611's, that is weird that you got that problem. I really cannot think of anything for you to try there. I agree with all of you on the lightness, I wish I could have it at 16 or less but... Thats one reason why I stayed away from a tuned pipe, adds weight and little to no power, unless you went with full tuned pipe which is too long, and not worth the hassle. I am happy with the plane thus far, granted I have not flown mine yet. It was better quality than Aeroworks. I used the CA hinges and have before on others without a problem, but there always is that first time. The covering, ugh, I wish it was Ultracote, the chinakote is a joke. Looks nice, but sticks as well as a wet paper towel.

I have had two of my 8611's dance on my Vision rudder during installation. Send it to JR and ask them to soften up the feedback. OR fit two 8411's :-)

Eric.

I've had the same problem with 8611's before, which is why I won't use them anymore. Came and went... didn't feel good about that. I used a 5995TG on my Vision. I've heard of issues with that servo too, but so far mine has not misbehaved.

Tom

Doesn't chip use CA hinges on his own Vision? I see some seem to shy away from these but I know people who use them on birds of this size no problem and you definitely read of many here who use them without problems. If worried why not double up a few more slots and add a few extra hinges? Have you ever tried to pull a CA hinged surface out? Most times it seems as if you would rip the wing apart before those hinges will break the control surface free. I've pulled on these things really hard and don't worry.

I think most failures come from either bad CA hinge material or improper installation. You really need to trim the covering around the slot, have a tight slot, drill a small hole in the center, use good fresh CA and soak the heck out of it. By soaking it you make the wood around the hinge itself very hard along with solidifying the hinge itself in the slot. I've never had one fail yet. My hinging time with CA hinges takes a good deal of time as I make sure every hinge is done like this w/out exception.

I used chips hinges, and have on others, I like them, no problems. Like you said, big thing is getting them saturated with glue. These are the only planes I use them on. On my fun fly planes and bang around stuff, I sew the hinges with aircraft string tie, used for cabling on full scales, I sew it one, zap it, and it will never fail, and has zero resistance. Old timers used to do this, usually people see my planes with those hinges and that is the talk of the day. Its nothing fancy, but works great.
But on nice gas planes I use CA hinges, looks a touch cleaner.

I agree that there is certainly nothing wrong with using CA hinges. We both stripped our Visions and because we could, we opted to add blocks and use hingepoints.

There is a level of failure on everything. I've had CA hinges split in the past taking two of the tip ones out on a smaller plane. They could have been defective or maybe I had too much CA... they didn't pull out, they just split like they were cut with a knife. And so for that reason I choose to use hingepoints when feasible.

Many have used the CA hinges on 50cc planes and wring the crap out of 'em (Chip's video is pretty wild) and there is no strength issue at all...

There could be a longevity issue, but I doubt it. Likely CA hinges will last the life of the plane... (may it be long and prosperous)

It really wasn't just the issue of using CA hinges per se. The hinges supplied were bad material and about 6 of mine had delaminated and fell apart before I ever got a chance to put them in. If that had happened after installation, I'd have had a serious problem.

Also, like you said, the slotting is the key. When I stripped the covering, I found EVERY hinge slot (precut) was doublecut. There were two slots about 1/16" above/below each other at every point. These slots were all crooked as well, causing them to meet at one end, forming a "V" wedge between them. This wedge had broken loose on most of them and slivers of balsa were just falling out of the surfaces.

Also, the LE and TE of the surfaces wasn't exceptionally thick, with slivers of balsa falling out of the backside into the wing, which left you very little surface area for the CA hinge to glue to and a very poor glue joint. I just did not feel safe with these things after seeing what I really had. Everything looked fine with the covering on... had I not stripped the plane, I would never have known what I was in for... just like the crushed ribs.

Tom

Tom,

I will look to see if mine has a similar problem. that is a good heads up.

With that in mind. Could you not have just made new slots an inch away from the bad ones and had a much easier time as quick fix and replaced the bad ca hinges with some good ones? I keep a ton of extra CA hinges on hand. Also you could double up and add a few extra's along the surface. Perhaps add an extra one in between a few of the new existing hinges. I just look at all that work to get those robarts in on this and while the end product is awesome the time involved is significant. In your case maybe a bit less since you were stripping anyway plus you are master builder. For me I would really mess things up trying to do what you did!

On mine I'll pay real careful attention to the slots and if necessary add a few extra slots and replace any hinges that look to be a problem.

Can't wait to hear your flight reports...knowing you guys should I expect some video?

Marc,

In retrospect, knowing what I do know about my CG issue, maybe I should have done that... at least in the tail. Ailerons didn't effect the balance nearly as much. At the time, I expected a noseheavy plane, so I "thought" I was helping the CG, not hurting it. []

At any rate, part of the problem with moving the slots was that they were VERY long, at least twice as wide as the CA hinges themselves. In some cases they would have pushed the "new" slots into areas where ribs were, making me skip over another inch or so. This made for some bad hinge positions, with uneven spacing. Also, the ones on the two ends of the surfaces were right up against the ends so I couldn't get a "new slot" in there without moving it to about 6 inches from the ends. That's just too far from the ends in my opinion.

Again, if I had REALLY worked hard at it, I might have been able to pull it off. But, not liking the CA hinges in the first place, and having bad hinge material, and thinking I was going to end up noseheavy anyway... I made a choice. Now I have to compensate for it. I only suggest that you at least look into the "stability" of your hinge slots on this plane before just CA'ing the hinges in and thinking you're OK. I'm not saying that you should use Robarts like I did... just be aware of the slot problems that I found.

Tom

Did anybody install the new Quiet Pipe from Chip Hyde yet? Weighs 8 oz.

http://www.chiphyde.com/html/hardware/quietpipe.html

I'm going to put this on mine. Wanted to see if anyone had pics of their install or how this setup compares in weight to stock da mufflers or slimline muffler.

No, have not tried it. I will stick with the basic muffler. Looks nice, and if I flew at a field that had noise problems I would buy it. No power gain and more weight so I will pass.
I see the new Vision is on his site, new colors, and its now only 495.
I dont feel too bad, I got mine for 525 this winter at Chief, but still, be nice if they came down in price. The DV also dropped. Might have to get one of those this summer. Toledo is going to be expensive again this year! haha.

Maudib should chime in here. I know he tested the Quiet Pipe against stock DA, and both Bisson and another brand Pitts wraparound. Interesting results (which I can't remember now), but I do know that Chip's pipe had substantially higher RPMs than ALL other mufflers. It was much quieter too, he tested them with a DB noise meter.

However, he installed and tested these on an EF Yak, not the Vision. Performance will be the same but installation would obviously be different.

Tom

Fastlif - what is weight on standard muffler vs the quiet pipe. chip's is supposed to be lightest pipe in this class.

Yep... I have a post in the 87" Yak thread with all the details... best I recall the QP was 8 oz, stock pipe like 4.8 and the Bisson wraparound was 12 or so....

QuietPipe gave 100 rpm more than stock pipe and was VERY quiet.... nice... the Bisson robbed several hundred (like 400-500 rpm) due in part I guess to the swaged exits.

It's fairly short too so doesn't put aby weight behind CG. A big thumbs up over all...

Interesting..so for another 3 oz or so you pickup 100 rpm on that big prop. sounds like it is worth it with the QP's light weight plus the benefit of being quiet.

Actually, it's a little more... a total of 8 oz with header, coupler & clamps... but on a 23x8 prop... 100 rpm at the top end makes over 1 lb more thrust.

It is still 1/4 lb lighter than the tuned pipe. The TP puts a lot of it's weight behind CG and costs $60 more though is supposed to give an extra 200-300rpm over the CHQP.

All in all the CHQP was a hands down winner for the Yak, and would be an excellent option for the Vision/DV too...

Sounds like it. May have to look into one. I just know what I know from talkin to the guys at DA. One the pipes they sell, I figured that chips quiet pipe would of taken a few rpms away as well, so it would not "gain" us anything by spending more on it.

After following this thread it looks like I may have found a home for my "new still in the box, close to 1 year old DA 50" [X(]

I had originally purchased the DA 50 for a "still on the work table CA models 27% Extra" [X(] but looks like its going to be a long build, so.... here I am needing a home for it. This will be my very first gasser so I hope I can count on all of you guys to pull me through this, I'm going to need help with the complete build including setup and configuration.

Here's what I have for electronics thus far.
5 - HS 5945's
1 - PCM 1024 receiver
1 - HS 5245
Was planning on using one of the 5945's for rudder also.

Thanks
Blackie

Ive just bought a nearly new Vision with ZDZ 50. Ive not seen one in the flesh to know just how big the surfaces are but I take it 9204's will be powerfull enough on aileron + I was planning on using a 9206 on rudder. Enough torque?

cheers,

Angus

I forget the torque, arent the 9204s like 111 in oz or is it 131? 130 and up I think you will be fine. Use something real strong on rudder.

Aye, they're 130oz/inch or 9.5kg/cm @4.8V. I'll start off with them anyway and see how I get on.

Angus

130 will be fine, just use a bigger one on rudder and you will be good.

Placed my order yesterday eve.

Welcome to the Crue.

Gotta say im really looking forward to flying this plane. Ive got renewed interest in 3D already and I havent even flown it yet! Looks just great. After seeing the size of the rudder I ordered a 8511. Reckon the rest of the servos will def be ok though.

Angus