Rascal 40 and tt pro 46
03-26-2003 | 11:19 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Member
My Feedback: (3)
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Davidson,
NC
Rascal 40 and tt pro 46
Is anyone flying their rascal with a pro 46? If so how did you mount it, and how much of the cowl had to be cut away. Pics would be great.
03-27-2003 | 05:57 AM
#4
Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ann Arbor, MI
Rascal 40 Opinion
My first Rascal 40 had a TT Pro 46 motor, and was the best plane I had ever owned.
That plane looked great, handled great, flew great, and in every way, was a great plane.
The kit was flawless in every respect, and was a joy to assemble.
The TT Pro 46 performed beautifully, and was an excellent choice for the Rascal.
Combined with a simple 4 channel radio system, and the most basic ancillary equipment, this set-up was both reasonably inexpensive, and more than satisfying in all regards.
In fact, rite up to the moment of impact, that plane was one of the most wonderful toys I have ever owned.
Now... the gory details.
First , that engine was a real challenge to install, and took an inordinate amount of time to fit properly.
It was a real Chinese jigsaw puzzle to shoehorn that baby into such a confined space, but eventually I did it, and the end results were perfect.
The instructions provided were quite clear, and the kit was designed specifically for that set-up, however, it was a tight fit.
Once installed, the engine performed beautifully, and provided more than enough power to make the Rascal scream.
At all throttle settings, that little motor ran great, and would allow the plane to fly brilliantly at any speed, from a dead crawl, to scary fast.
On takeoff, the Rascal would leap into the air in a few feet, reach altitude in an instant, and allow itself to be put into any attitude I chose, without fail, or complaint.
Then... disaster.
Without going into a lengthy description, I lost the plane.
However, I must say that even the crash was spectacular, and thrilling, to both myself, and the innocent bystanders.
The plane was replaced with an identical example, and although the original motor was undamaged, I chose to install a Saito 56GK power plant on this version, and the results have been astonishing.
More of everything... and then some.
The tork from the Saito motor allows this little gem of an aircraft to do things I didn't think were possible.
Can you say hover?
Then there is that 4 stroke sound.
Ahh... music to my ears.
I have also added a few little extra items for more amusement.
A Futaba 6 Channel computer transmitter, a Nelson inteligent glow driver, a Tru Turn spinner, a Bolly 3 blade prop, and a few other interesting accessories.
I hope you enjoy yours as much as I am enjoying mine.
Mike
That plane looked great, handled great, flew great, and in every way, was a great plane.
The kit was flawless in every respect, and was a joy to assemble.
The TT Pro 46 performed beautifully, and was an excellent choice for the Rascal.
Combined with a simple 4 channel radio system, and the most basic ancillary equipment, this set-up was both reasonably inexpensive, and more than satisfying in all regards.
In fact, rite up to the moment of impact, that plane was one of the most wonderful toys I have ever owned.
Now... the gory details.
First , that engine was a real challenge to install, and took an inordinate amount of time to fit properly.
It was a real Chinese jigsaw puzzle to shoehorn that baby into such a confined space, but eventually I did it, and the end results were perfect.
The instructions provided were quite clear, and the kit was designed specifically for that set-up, however, it was a tight fit.
Once installed, the engine performed beautifully, and provided more than enough power to make the Rascal scream.
At all throttle settings, that little motor ran great, and would allow the plane to fly brilliantly at any speed, from a dead crawl, to scary fast.
On takeoff, the Rascal would leap into the air in a few feet, reach altitude in an instant, and allow itself to be put into any attitude I chose, without fail, or complaint.
Then... disaster.
Without going into a lengthy description, I lost the plane.
However, I must say that even the crash was spectacular, and thrilling, to both myself, and the innocent bystanders.
The plane was replaced with an identical example, and although the original motor was undamaged, I chose to install a Saito 56GK power plant on this version, and the results have been astonishing.
More of everything... and then some.
The tork from the Saito motor allows this little gem of an aircraft to do things I didn't think were possible.
Can you say hover?
Then there is that 4 stroke sound.
Ahh... music to my ears.
I have also added a few little extra items for more amusement.
A Futaba 6 Channel computer transmitter, a Nelson inteligent glow driver, a Tru Turn spinner, a Bolly 3 blade prop, and a few other interesting accessories.
I hope you enjoy yours as much as I am enjoying mine.
Mike
03-27-2003 | 09:59 PM
#5
My Feedback: (2)
Rascal 40 and tt pro 46
I have to agree with everything Mike said about the TT46. It idles and runs great. I has been my experience that new engines do not like to run inverted. Just make sure to break it in on the bench and get ready to thoroughly enjoy this plane.
John
John
03-28-2003 | 02:23 AM
#6
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: ypsilanti, MI
Rascal 40 and tt pro 46
Greetings
.
My wife's Rascal 40 ARF performs very, very well with a seasoned TT .36 pro swinging a MA 10 x 6 prop and a Fox RC long glow plug using 7% Omega (Our custom blend.). She originally tried an 11 x 5 but it didn't work as well.
To get the engine installed, she cut both sides of the bottom of the of the fuse off, to 1/4" over the engine mounting face, back to within 1/2" of the firewall. She then made cut-outs for the muffler and needle access and routed the fuel tubing to the outside.
Lite ply tabs were glued to the un-cut portion to which the loose sides were then screwed. The cut edges were mono-koted.
She re-located the landing gear 1 1/4" forward to eliminate any chance of nosing over. The tail feathers were keyed and doweled to the fuse for alignment and strength (experience with her H9 trainer). The aileron servo mounting plates are lined with lite ply rather than have the blocks simply glued to the plastic (again, experience). Wing mounting and landing gear screws are changed to 1/4-20 nylon. It all came to 5.5 pounds.
During flight tests we found that the wing incident angle needed changing. A phone call to SIG resulted in "...Duhhh...ours flew o.k." The trailing edge was raised about 3/16" which required adding a piece of balsa on top of the fuse directly behind the wing saddle.
Even tho the model is well done, I personally feel it is over-priced compared to the others on the market and the past 36 ARF's we've done. But it was her money!
regards,
DGO
.
My wife's Rascal 40 ARF performs very, very well with a seasoned TT .36 pro swinging a MA 10 x 6 prop and a Fox RC long glow plug using 7% Omega (Our custom blend.). She originally tried an 11 x 5 but it didn't work as well.
To get the engine installed, she cut both sides of the bottom of the of the fuse off, to 1/4" over the engine mounting face, back to within 1/2" of the firewall. She then made cut-outs for the muffler and needle access and routed the fuel tubing to the outside.
Lite ply tabs were glued to the un-cut portion to which the loose sides were then screwed. The cut edges were mono-koted.
She re-located the landing gear 1 1/4" forward to eliminate any chance of nosing over. The tail feathers were keyed and doweled to the fuse for alignment and strength (experience with her H9 trainer). The aileron servo mounting plates are lined with lite ply rather than have the blocks simply glued to the plastic (again, experience). Wing mounting and landing gear screws are changed to 1/4-20 nylon. It all came to 5.5 pounds.
During flight tests we found that the wing incident angle needed changing. A phone call to SIG resulted in "...Duhhh...ours flew o.k." The trailing edge was raised about 3/16" which required adding a piece of balsa on top of the fuse directly behind the wing saddle.
Even tho the model is well done, I personally feel it is over-priced compared to the others on the market and the past 36 ARF's we've done. But it was her money!
regards,
DGO
03-28-2003 | 04:58 PM
#7
My Feedback: (2)
Rascal 40 and tt pro 46
Wow. I didn't have to change anything!
Stuck the TT 46 in on the motor mounts with the muffler off. Sharpen the end of a allen wrench and pushed the point into the side of the fuselage. Removed the engine and transferred the holes to the outside using a large hat pin poking thru the side. Then used a Dremel to cut out the muffler opening. Yes the engine was in and out of the mounts a bunch of times.
Not saying you didn't have incidence problems, but I didn't. This is a very well built ARF - Except (isn't there always an except) the the landing gear block needs to be reinforced. I haven't experienced any landing problems after replacing the block.
I think the plane is a good value for the money. Just about what it would cost to finish if the kit was $90.00. By the way, I wish this plane did come in a kit!
John
Stuck the TT 46 in on the motor mounts with the muffler off. Sharpen the end of a allen wrench and pushed the point into the side of the fuselage. Removed the engine and transferred the holes to the outside using a large hat pin poking thru the side. Then used a Dremel to cut out the muffler opening. Yes the engine was in and out of the mounts a bunch of times.
Not saying you didn't have incidence problems, but I didn't. This is a very well built ARF - Except (isn't there always an except) the the landing gear block needs to be reinforced. I haven't experienced any landing problems after replacing the block.
I think the plane is a good value for the money. Just about what it would cost to finish if the kit was $90.00. By the way, I wish this plane did come in a kit!
John
03-29-2003 | 03:24 AM
#8
Senior Member
My Feedback: (23)
Rascal 40 and tt pro 46
Hi,
My wife as the blue rascal and she put a Satio 56 in the nose. The plane flew straight off the board and required little trimming. Right now we are in the process of fine tuning the engine and I put a glow driver into it to see if I can get the engine to idle a little slower. But, the plane is great. We've been having a ball.
Dave
My wife as the blue rascal and she put a Satio 56 in the nose. The plane flew straight off the board and required little trimming. Right now we are in the process of fine tuning the engine and I put a glow driver into it to see if I can get the engine to idle a little slower. But, the plane is great. We've been having a ball.
Dave
03-29-2003 | 06:02 AM
#9
Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ann Arbor, MI
Rascal 40 Opinion
After reviewing my previous post, I would like to add a few negative comments, in order to project a more balanced opinion. I will attempt to divide these comments respective to engine, and plane.
Negative Comments Part One:
The installation of the TT Pro 46 engine would have been easier if the needle valve protruded straight out, rather than at an angle, as it does. This angle is intended to provide a safer, and more convenient method of adjustment. This angle also makes for a more challenging installation. It would be less of a problem if the needle valve was of the remote type, at the rear of the motor.
I dislike the appearance of the large side-mounted muffler, and find that it detracts from the otherwise clean lines, and physical beauty, of the Rascal. This is, of course, subjective.
After removing the internal baffle plate, I find a slight increase in power from the engine, and a slightly more desirable tone from the muffler. This, without any noticeable increase in objectionable sound level, or apparent decrease of engine longevity. Be advised that you may find the opposite to be true.
I do not care for the long, skinny, Phillips head bolt and nut system that holds the muffler parts together. This could be replaced with a larger diameter Allen head bolt and nut assembly, without too great a penalty in additional weight.
I replaced all of the Phillips head engine hold-down screws with Allen head cap screws, as I find the former to be harder to tighten, and easier to damage, than the latter.
Ditto for the bolts that attach the engine mounting plates to the fuselage, and be sure to use Loctite thread locker, to prevent engine vibration from loosening same.
You must also drill two additional holes into the side of the fuselage in order to access the muffler attachment bolts, and take care not to over tork these bolts, or you will distort the shape of the cylinder wall.
Negative Comments Part Two:
The main landing gear attachment block needs to be reinforced, and will fail under minimal stress if left in stock configuration. This can be rectified with the addition of a small wooden block, and some epoxy.
Attention must be paid to the heat sealing of all seams in the covering material. If left unattended, the Oracover panels can become detached, with alarming results. It is necessary to go over the entire surface of the plane with an iron. Omit this step at your own demise.
All joints in the fuselage that can be reached should be reinforced with either epoxy, or cyanoacrylate, as the adhesive used by the manufacturer may be less than ideal.
The tremendous forces generated by negative air pressures on the wing surfaces when in flight can exceed the ability of certain structural joints to maintain integrity. The weak link appears to be at the root edge of each wing half. Should the outer panel of the wing become detached from the inner rib at this point, the results can be catastrophic, and this area needs to be reinforced.
Negative Comments Part Three:
I can't think of anything more to say on this subject for now, so I'll reserve the right to add more at another time.
Thank you, and good day. Mike :sleeping:
Negative Comments Part One:
The installation of the TT Pro 46 engine would have been easier if the needle valve protruded straight out, rather than at an angle, as it does. This angle is intended to provide a safer, and more convenient method of adjustment. This angle also makes for a more challenging installation. It would be less of a problem if the needle valve was of the remote type, at the rear of the motor.
I dislike the appearance of the large side-mounted muffler, and find that it detracts from the otherwise clean lines, and physical beauty, of the Rascal. This is, of course, subjective.
After removing the internal baffle plate, I find a slight increase in power from the engine, and a slightly more desirable tone from the muffler. This, without any noticeable increase in objectionable sound level, or apparent decrease of engine longevity. Be advised that you may find the opposite to be true.
I do not care for the long, skinny, Phillips head bolt and nut system that holds the muffler parts together. This could be replaced with a larger diameter Allen head bolt and nut assembly, without too great a penalty in additional weight.
I replaced all of the Phillips head engine hold-down screws with Allen head cap screws, as I find the former to be harder to tighten, and easier to damage, than the latter.
Ditto for the bolts that attach the engine mounting plates to the fuselage, and be sure to use Loctite thread locker, to prevent engine vibration from loosening same.
You must also drill two additional holes into the side of the fuselage in order to access the muffler attachment bolts, and take care not to over tork these bolts, or you will distort the shape of the cylinder wall.
Negative Comments Part Two:
The main landing gear attachment block needs to be reinforced, and will fail under minimal stress if left in stock configuration. This can be rectified with the addition of a small wooden block, and some epoxy.
Attention must be paid to the heat sealing of all seams in the covering material. If left unattended, the Oracover panels can become detached, with alarming results. It is necessary to go over the entire surface of the plane with an iron. Omit this step at your own demise.
All joints in the fuselage that can be reached should be reinforced with either epoxy, or cyanoacrylate, as the adhesive used by the manufacturer may be less than ideal.
The tremendous forces generated by negative air pressures on the wing surfaces when in flight can exceed the ability of certain structural joints to maintain integrity. The weak link appears to be at the root edge of each wing half. Should the outer panel of the wing become detached from the inner rib at this point, the results can be catastrophic, and this area needs to be reinforced.
Negative Comments Part Three:
I can't think of anything more to say on this subject for now, so I'll reserve the right to add more at another time.
Thank you, and good day. Mike :sleeping:
