Thunder Tiger Cub engine ??
#1
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: AU
I have been given a T/T 82.7" J3 Cub, with a recommended engine size of 46-61 2 stroke.
I intend fitting a OS 46 FX, but am a little unsure if this is enough power for this large span plane.
Anyone with experiance or any thoughts on this matter ???. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif[/img]
I intend fitting a OS 46 FX, but am a little unsure if this is enough power for this large span plane.
Anyone with experiance or any thoughts on this matter ???. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif[/img]
#2
Banned
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,923
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: gone,
How good of an R/C pilot are you? Can you fly the plane on the wing, or do you always run your planes at full throttle?
The low end engine in the recommended range will give realistic (scale) performance. However... the full scale J3 originally came with an engine that required 90% power to get it airborne.
The typical R/C arcraft can take off at under 1/2 throttle (often under 1/4...). Many people never do learn to fly the aircraft... they just guide the engine around. If you are part of that group you won't be happy using less than a .61 on that model.
(I'll bet you get a bunch of people saying to stick a .91 4-stroke in it... when a .50-.60 4-stroke would do fine for realistic performance.)
The low end engine in the recommended range will give realistic (scale) performance. However... the full scale J3 originally came with an engine that required 90% power to get it airborne.
The typical R/C arcraft can take off at under 1/2 throttle (often under 1/4...). Many people never do learn to fly the aircraft... they just guide the engine around. If you are part of that group you won't be happy using less than a .61 on that model.
(I'll bet you get a bunch of people saying to stick a .91 4-stroke in it... when a .50-.60 4-stroke would do fine for realistic performance.)
#3
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: AU
Thanks FHH.
All i really want is scale like performance as I have heaps of planes that will bore holes in the sky at a rapid pace.
That said I would still like to perform the odd gracefull loop and slow barrely roll.
91 fs. I don't think cubs are meant to have endless vert capability. I am pretty sure the 46 will be ok, just wanted to get some other opinions.
Thanks again.
Patrick.
All i really want is scale like performance as I have heaps of planes that will bore holes in the sky at a rapid pace.
That said I would still like to perform the odd gracefull loop and slow barrely roll.
91 fs. I don't think cubs are meant to have endless vert capability. I am pretty sure the 46 will be ok, just wanted to get some other opinions.
Thanks again.
Patrick.
#4
Banned
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,923
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: gone,
You want scale performance... stick the longest. lowest pitch prop you can on the .46.
For loops... you may have to do like the full scale J-3 and dive a bit to build speed. The .46 probably won't pull it through a loop from level flight. (Think powered glider...)
For loops... you may have to do like the full scale J-3 and dive a bit to build speed. The .46 probably won't pull it through a loop from level flight. (Think powered glider...)



