I did mean CCW as if in front of the plane but cw if in the cockpit.

I think the ones I used were by Ernst. I think they're the ones discribed by Ollie earlier. I don't know if they are still available but I still see Ernst stuff in the LH

Thanks folks for the input on where to purchase shims and alternative mounting techniques. I understand that Ernst is no longer in business. As to my current project which is a Pilatus Porter 94" ARF the sanding option is a bit difficult, although I will use it in future kits that I build.

So, I am going to try molding a shim to fit the backplate area of the BGX-1 from epoxy, graphite, and fibres unless someone talks me out of it. I have been advised by others that using washers on larger engines places the mount in jeopardy...so, building a tapered shim is suggested...(per ken laski).

Stewart Tittle

To DKjens: GP does not negate the yaw force created by P- factor or somehow convert it to a pitch force, it causes a pitch force which is in addition to the yaw force. This pitch force is in fact a response to the actual yaw motion caused by GP, not a response to the GP force per se. Consider this: A prop with zero mass would cause P-factor forces, but no GP forces. A prop with mass but zero pitch would have no P-factor effect (because it would produce no thrust), but would still produce the GP effect if airplane is yawed. The advice not to bring the issue up with the flight examiner was good.

I stand corrected...Ernst still makes shims for 40 and 60 size motors. Purchased some sets from Tower Hobbies last week. Sorry for passing on bad information...a lesson in checking out facts before repeating stories from trusted sources...
W. Stewart Tittle

To add to the stew--
setting up the correct thrust -is really posible ONLY for one specific condition - -The precise amount needed, shifts -dramatically with speed - loss of speed during maneuvering and AOA of the prop disc- (shimmed up -or shimmed down relative to actual path of the model)
Theory says there is a twisted stream of air - OK so be it -
If the model has extremely low wing loading and enough power to maintain a constant speed -regardless of attitude -- then the trim never changes and the amount of thrust offset needed does not change - - No I did not forget about gravity -
Our old pattern designs ran on inertia -and in a climb -especially vertical - they bled speed and typically yawed and tucked .
setting in more right thrust -and depending on CG and the engine placement in the design-a little up/down thrust -- a lot of the need for rudder correction and elevater correction was diminished.
On my latest overpowered design - with extremely low wing loading - I have flown quite a few prop types - 8-12 " pitch - 18-22" dia 2 and three bladed - to see what happens -
Bottom line - the slower setups need more thrust corrention - I did not change the engine thrust - which is a degree right - -just noted rudder trims required.

I really should read what I write - and check spelling and typos.
Please decipher as best you can.

Gentlemen...theres been some very thoughtful and useful comments on the do's and don'ts of using right thrust...(note : for a clockwise rotating prop).....Looking at "P" factor on a 3-dimensional axis....Prop slipstream ...upside blade angle of attack vs downside blade angle of attack....its all good info to use....The question that really counts that I ask is what do I want to accomplish?.....The answer is different for each of us depending on application...I fly Giant Scale warbirds and thru experimentation have found that right thrust doesnt make enough difference to require its usage.....What I have found is during takeoff if the throttle is applied quickly much more rudder is required to maintain runway heading vs applying throttle gradually...but once airborne and after trimming the warbirds fly very straight and true.....on an occasional loop or stall-turn moderate use of rt rudder keeps the nose on upline easily....also makes cowlings much easier to install......but I can see where thrust angle offset makes sense on Aerobatic or Pattern type airplanes.....its more a matter of what application is used and personal choice.....either way works....just my .02 cents worth.....Bill