RCU Forums - View Single Post - Engine size VS prop size .
View Single Post
Old 03-24-2007 | 06:03 PM
  #4  
pe reivers
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,571
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
From: Arcen, , NETHERLANDS
Default RE: Engine size VS prop size .

It is torque that makes the engine turn, and it is horsepower that results from the combination of torque and rpm.
We need high torque engines if we want to operate them at ~7000 rpm. More power can be had at higher rpm, but then torque will be lower. My 26cc MVVS will swing a 20x6, the 35cc swings a 20x8, the 45 needs a 22x10, but will have the 20x10 for breakfast. In that diameter, a 20x10 three blade prop loads the engine down to it's best torque range. Power output will be slightly less, so it is up to you to define what you like best in your plane.
On a ST2300, the power output could be adjusted with the prop. An 16x6 would spin the engine right up to it's best power at 12000, but the engine would happily pull a 18x10 for glider tow.
For best engine performance, it is required to pit the engine against the needs of the airframe. An high strung and RPM hungry engine belongs in a speed plane, and a torque engine will be better suited for the slower planes. If you want to use the high rpm engine in slow planes, a reduction is needed to match the propeller to the plane. As an example of the latter, Zenoah engines with reductions have been long used for WW1 scale planes. In these applications, the added weight was welcome.