Dav0012

Hi,
Currently i have been running a os 70 fl 4 stroke in this plane, which i switched for an os 46 ax i had sitting on another plane, now what my question is neither of these motors seem good enough for this plane, i mean basic aerobatics it can do, but some other manuevers i'd say it struggles, expecially vertical performance, so what i was asking is if a os 61 fx which i could buy, is too much for this plane, i have put my 46 ax on my pheonix classic trainer which has excellent performance and only go over half throttle for vertical, it climbs really well even just on 3/4 throttle, but i would like close to the same on my cap, without ripping the wings off it with a more powerful motor, would this motor be able to be put in the plane , the os 61 fx without too much hassles?

mnrcaerobat

My Feedback: (197)

I would get the 91fx before the 61. The 91 is lighter and swings a bigger prop.

HOw about a 91 four stroke?

sigrun

What?!!!! < just surprised> [sm=spinnyeyes.gif]

With which manoeuvres in the particular does it struggle?

What does it weigh (dry)? Probably more importantly, what prop have you got fitted to the 46 AX? That engine should have more than enough poke with that model even if it weighed in at a whopping 6+ lb dry to complete the sportsman pattern sequence including verticals like the top hat, stall turn with ¼ rolls, ½ Immelman continued into a ½ reverse immelman, consecutive upward outside loops from inverted or downward from upright all with ease. It's not going to have 'unlimited' vertical, but it should have 'solid' vertical. If it doesn't, something's wrong.

IMO, yes. Well you could certainly fit one, but it's going to stress the structure, require a bigger tank, alter the CofG forward and increase the wing loading.

Really, adding weight or excess power isn't going to help improve the AX+CAP combos overall aerobatic performance even if it does afford you more outright vertical punch. And don't forget, you'll have to carry more fuel to get it which is also going to worsen the overweight situation at take-off and for the first 30% of the flight time. If you really must have more grunt to mask some apparent problem or just to achieve a typical 3D like vertical performance expectation which is unrealistic of this model and any .46 combo, then my recommendation would be to go with a powerful over-bored .46 cased unit like an Irvine .53, ENYA CX50, Magnum 52, JEN .56 or MVVS .49, O.S. 50SX or <choose one of many> similar. Forget the ST G50 ring though. It's a .50in² in capacity and designation only, and not in the same performance league as the others.....in my humble opinion of course.

Dav0012

i would rather steer clear of a four stroke, not too experienced or not too keen on the price being double of equal sized 2 stroke

Dav0012

also, the ax currently has a 10x6 prop which i have now put on phoenix classic trainer, and i am actually looking to buy another motor for the cap, just not sure whether to get another ax or a different brand, maybe enya 50cx?

and also, thats if your going to fly it in a pattern sequence, but what if i said, 3d, this motor is not going to hover this plane (not very good anyhow) and for most 3d maneuvers you need a bit of vertical punch in the motor which this ax doesnt seem to have on this plane

sigrun

.46AX is cheaper at the moment, yet powerful and good overall. ENYA CX is similar current price as O.S. 50SX, but better and stronger than either in practice.

I'd say you're right. [8D] I'd also say that whilst a great looking and fine flying model doing what it was designed to do, that CAP is not a 3D design, and you could have chosen better if that's what you predominently want to do with your flying?

A stronger motor will unquestionably help outright vertical performance, but a .61FX won't make it hover any better than a properly propped .46AX. In fact probably worse with all that extra weight up the front and a more forward CG. ENYA's CX50 is a decent alternative choice to engine this plane if you wanted a little more vertical punch, but I suspect you'd still be unsatisfied as it's not going to give you the power to weight ratio you really want. A bull of a motor with a more user friendly torque curve than the AX, a bit more grunt, and with a great carb offering superb throttling. However your AX fitted with an APC 12¼ x 3¾ hover prop would probably hover as well as either alternative.

Here's the real fix and obvious best solution.

If 3D is what you want to do, don't buy another motor for the CAP which is a good plane but was designed to fly conventional aerobatics. Spend the money you were going to spend on the motor on a dedicated 3D plane instead, put the AX into it and fit a hover prop. Voila! There are a plethora of 3D offerings in the market which wouold be suitable, but as a well tried and true recommendaton, [link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/magazine/article_display.cfm?article_id=240]Model Tech's Magic Extra 300L[/link] which you can pick up for around $150 or less these days will harrier and hover like crazy plus have that unlimited vertical you're looking for - on a 46AX! Looks great in the air to boot and isa mucho funo...bringa bigga smila to yor faso! [sm=sunsmiley.gif] Wouldn't be without one in my hanger!

tIANci

I think 61 sized motors are a waste of time because the extra weight penalty is a lot and it affects the flying characteristic of a light plane. For me a 5 lbs plane will be great fun on a SA82. If not then almost any 46 2C will do, my preferred prop is the APC 11x5. She will definately hang with a TT46 46AX or even an ASP 52 (this baby is reliable and cheap, try it with a nice 12x4 or 12x5).

aussiesteve

I agree with tIANci on the prop. We weren't too impressed with the performance of our 46AX when we first got it - followed all the instructions and ran 10x6 prop - after asking the question here on RCU, we tried an 11x5 and it sure seemed to suit us better - we now have a few of these motors on various models including a Blackhorse SU31 (which is probably the closest we have to your Cap) and they all run either 11x5 or 11x6 props quite happily (15% nitro fuel). On the 2 3d models that we've had them fitted to (Phoenix Future & Seagull Harrier) - they've had the 12.25 x 3.75 props as sigrun has mentioned.

I've recently "donated" all but one of my 2 strokes to the two sons (apparently) and now run nothing but 4 strokes in all but one of my planes - Saito 82 (or 72) and Magnum XL70 are a great way to go in this size model.

tIANci

aussie - in Malaysia a lot of people run their 46 2Cs on a 10x6, its great for speed but it will kill the engine soon. I used to have the 12.25x3.75 but then I found that an 11x5 will give me more revs and the throttle seems more linear and the engine is more responsive. The CAP with a SA82 on 25% nitro and a 14x6 will be loads of fun!

aussiesteve

I couldn't agree more - we only use the 11/6 on very light models - just for the adrenaline, otherwise we use the 11/5's for exactly the reasons that you quote.

I've been thinking about taking the SA82 out of my Spacewalker and putting it in the SU31 - As much fun as it is in the Spacey (Seagull Spacewalker II with HT475MG servos and CF Control rods) I think it will be even more fun in the SU31. Maybe I'll just have to put a 56 or a 72 in the Spacey and use it for what it's really supposed to be used for.

The 82 also goes really well in a 40 sized Stick (V-mar Extreme Stick) with the 14/6 Prop - I'm addicted to that model of motor in 40 size planes nowadays.

sigrun

Agree with Aussiesteve and Tianci. The two props which will work best with an AX on your CAP are either an APC 10 x 7 (not for your ops) or Bolly 11.5 x 5 depending upon what you want to do with it and how you want to fly it. For prop hanging as best it can, the 11.5 x 5 Bolly or alternatively an 11 x 5 APC is the way to go. On the AX which is an absolute boar of motor in class once run in if tuned right, personally I'd go the 11.5" blade.

The APC 12¼ x 3¾ is a great prop, but really belongs on a dedicated fun fly or 3D ship. The = or + 11 inch diameter x 5" pitch ones mentioned above are "no brainers" which will work better all round on your CAP.

Question for Aussiesteve. What sort of a run have you had with your Magnum 4 strokes? Reliable? Any problems at all? Carburation etc?

aussiesteve

G'day Sig
I've had excellent runs with the Magnums but they're only on fun fly / lazy fly type planes where I'm not chasing optimum performance. Where I want high performance I use the Saitos (Before the YS crowd reply to me on this - YS's are not as commonly found in Australia as Saitos and I'm not YS serious about any of my flying)

The biggest Magnum that I have is the XL91 which doesn't seem to produce quite as much power as the Saito 90 but is every bit as reliable.

I haven't had to rebuild either brand yet (My oldest Saito is 5 years old & my oldest Magnum is 4 years old) so can't quote the longevity of either.

I run all of my engines on 15% Nitro, 20% total oil (3% Castor 17% Coolpower) having recently upped the Nitro from 10% because the two teenagers are now chasing more adrenaline.

Whenever I tune a motor I tend to set them slightly rich and rarely need to readjust either the Magnums or the Saitos (Other than for the Summer / Winter weather changes)

In short - I think that the Magnums are every bit as good as the Saito as long as your not trying to wring out the very last oz of thrust (In which case I suspect that the YS may be better but I've never owned one of those).

When I finally get to start the project in China next month, I guess that I will be predominantly using Magnums there so will get an even broader view of the product then.

How's your SA1.25 going? Mine's been installed in a CMPro Swallow and I'm pretty happy with it so far but it's only done a few flights so it's still getting dialled in.

sigrun

Thanks. Tempted to get a couple of those Magnums (for a sport flying project I have in mind) given their pricing at present.

Not so concerned about any minor power differential. Mainly about tuning and running consistency and reliability (particularly carburation) with reasonable longevity. Doesn't matter how inexpensive any engine is, if the carburation or some other aspect isn't right and just makes them a PITA to idle, transition start or run consistently, the only fitment they find is the shelf, and as such are a false economy to me.

I've been followng the U.S. market posts generally about Magnum which depict them as a bit of a lucky dip, which makes me nervous about buying them over O.S. as the price in particular is slashed to more reasonable retail margin to try and compete. Anything Sanye reminds me of Australian manufactured or assembled cars. I've owned a couple in between imports. Never again by choice. I'm definitely a Japanese or German import buyer for their QC and assembly please. OTOH, I have a Nikon digital camera which was assembled in PRC pretty obviously with Japanese standards of QC, and although admittedly it has a Japanese lens, it's been an absolute pearler and you wouldn't pick it in operation or external appearance from earlier versions Made in Japan!

Sorry not quite following you there. SA1.25? I think you may have me or that project confused with someone else?..??

badz

My Feedback: (1)

What prop are you using? I fly a OS 70 surpass in mine and it's great I run a 14x4 most times..or a 12x6 depends how I wanna fly that day. Whatever you do don't toss a .91 on this thing...it'll tear apart easily, it's not designed to be overpowered that much. Your 70fl should toss it around pretty good.

aussiesteve

Yes it would appear that the Magnums are a lucky dip. All but two of mine have been purchased and used in Australia and I've had no problems at all. Maybe the scene here in the US, Where there is a lot more fliers than in Aus (Eg - within a 20 mile radius of where I live there are at least 5 clubs all with significantly larger memberships than any of the clubs near my home in Perth) so I guess that the overall number of "dud" products will be greater than we hear about in Australia.

I've never owned an OS 4 stroke so I can't comment on those (I was lucky - I nearly bought one of the problem 70 size ones a couple of years ago when they were "on special" but they were all sold out before I got to do so). Everyone I know with them is happy with them and they don't seem to spend much time "tuning" them at the field.

Compared to the Saitos, the Magnums probably are a little more fiddly to set initially and they do require a bit more setting whilst they are running in but once run in they are pretty good - I am very fussy about using fresh & filtered fuel on all of my planes and am also fussy about accurate measurement of all of the fuel components when I mix it 20 lt at a time (I weigh the ingredients into the mixing container) (Between the three of us we go through around 5lt each weekend).
I also insist on using a Tacho when running in and setting up my motors - Then once set I am more interested in flying instead of playing with the motors (unlike some people that I know who spend most of their day "Adjusting" their motors to compensate for their poor throttle thumbs).

For 100% consistency in good quality and excellent power its Saito all the way for me when it comes to 4 strokes. For a generally good quality product at an excellent price - It's Magnum. (I can't recall anyone actually having been stuck with a bad Saito and can only recall hearing of a couple of incidents where people have not been happy but they've had their engines replaces quick smart under warranty - I am sure that there are exceptions to this - I just don't recall hearing about them - maybe my Olztimers disease is setting in - like me confusing you with another poster that bought his Saito 125 at the same time I got mine)

BTW - I don't buy Aussie cars either for the same reason. It's BMW, Landcruiser (for the horse float) and Kia (Van for the models) for us.

badz

My Feedback: (1)

I've had a few Magnums hold up real well but they all do seem to loose their guts after some time where the Saito and OS gain power. I prefer mostly the Saito's in the larger sizes...82 and up since the idle's are perfect and the torque is oustanding.

Heavy1000

Dav0012 i understand your worries, i had an FL70 in mine and not only did i feel it was lacking in performance i couldn't get it to idle or respond to the throttle application properly even with some very experienced guys at the field giving it the once over, finally lost interest and bit the bullet and put an FS70 surpass II on it and after a few tries found a 12X7 master airscrew to be the best combo, i wasn't interested in 3d just good scale aerobatics and this combo delivered, unlimited vertical straight from take off and any other maneuver i asked it to do, couldn't be happier. I personally wouldn't go for a longer prop purely because i find the gear on the -46R very bendy and i can imagine grinding down a few props on a windy day.

Dav0012

yeh heavy, i am running a 12x7 on the fl, but if i took off straight into a vertical climb, the motor would give up within no time, now im not sure whether its because its a new motor, only had about 2-3 hours running time, but i thought it'd be nearly at its peak by now???, and yes i have noticed the very!!!!! very!!! weak undercarraige.

spearhead jr

Aussie steve,
where about will you be working in China? I've been posted to Beijing recently working for an aussie financial institution and have only been using OS, Enya, YS and Saito. Of the four brand I owned, price/performance wise, Saito is my personal favourite. Plus that all so fabulous sound......But looking at the price tag on Magnum here, I rather tempted to give it a try probably on some sports plane. I've heard mix reviews on them, mainly complains on the cab.

So back to the topic, how you like your WM cap232? I am thinking of getting one.

Cheers.