OS FS 70 or OS FL 70 in Something extra
10-13-2004 | 10:19 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Whitby,
ON, CANADA
OS FS 70 or OS FL 70 in Something extra
Has anyone put the OS FS 70 in the something extra ? If so how does in handle it ?
Was thinking of putting the new OS FL 70 in it. It is a much lighter engine then the OS FS 70.
What do you guys think ?
Was thinking of putting the new OS FL 70 in it. It is a much lighter engine then the OS FS 70.
What do you guys think ?
10-14-2004 | 07:37 AM
#2
Senior Member
My Feedback: (13)
RE: OS FS 70 or OS FL 70 in Something extra
If you're building the kit, then you can move the firewall back to accomodate the longer, heavier engine. If you're doing the ARF or a kit that was built to spec, then you're going to need some serious weight in the tail.
I'm doing an ARF right now; my third SE. I have a 70 Surpass, and IMO this engine is simply too big and heavy for the SE airframe. That's why I bought a Saito 56 for it; and that engine is borderline too big for the included firewall distance and engine mounts. I've been messing around with that for a week, trying to get the engine as far back as I can without causing problems with the throttle linkage and fuel lines. The prop still sticks out farther than I would like- there's a photo of this in one of the other Somethin' Extra threads in the past week or so. Find that photo, and then realize that the 70 Surpass is somewhat longer and larger (and heavier) than the Saito 56.
Also be aware that if whatever engine you choose swings a prop longer than 11", you will need the TNT extended landing gear for prop clearance. This airplane was designed for a 40-46 two-stroke. I used a four stroke because I'm a hard-head, but I don't subscribe to the current popular craze to insanely over-power my models.
Yes, the extra power is nice to have and the airframe will probably handle it. But as the weight/wing loading goes up, the excellent handling/flying characteristics of this marvelous plane start to disappear.
YMMV.....
I'm doing an ARF right now; my third SE. I have a 70 Surpass, and IMO this engine is simply too big and heavy for the SE airframe. That's why I bought a Saito 56 for it; and that engine is borderline too big for the included firewall distance and engine mounts. I've been messing around with that for a week, trying to get the engine as far back as I can without causing problems with the throttle linkage and fuel lines. The prop still sticks out farther than I would like- there's a photo of this in one of the other Somethin' Extra threads in the past week or so. Find that photo, and then realize that the 70 Surpass is somewhat longer and larger (and heavier) than the Saito 56.
Also be aware that if whatever engine you choose swings a prop longer than 11", you will need the TNT extended landing gear for prop clearance. This airplane was designed for a 40-46 two-stroke. I used a four stroke because I'm a hard-head, but I don't subscribe to the current popular craze to insanely over-power my models.
Yes, the extra power is nice to have and the airframe will probably handle it. But as the weight/wing loading goes up, the excellent handling/flying characteristics of this marvelous plane start to disappear.
YMMV.....
