maral

I have seen where folks have used an OS52 and have been happy with this setup. I have a Magnum 61FS and I'm wondering what folks thoughts are on using this engine. Is it overkill for this plane?

Thanks,

djlyon

I have a YS53 in mine and think it's about right. So the magnum certainly won't be overkill

av8er50

My Feedback: (6)

What about a Magnum .52 in a Kyosho stearman??
I have one in a GP .40 cub that I am going to replace with bigger due to the extra drag of the floats. I was planning on putting it in my Kyosho PT-17.

Jeff

richblin

I flew the Stearman with a 52FS, very good combination. The new Magnum/ASP/SC 61 fourstrokes are bored out 52's, so the weight is even a bit less and adds quite some more power!

joeyM

I put a saito 56 in mine--havnt flown it yet --does anyone else have this combo and how does it perform?.......joe

Damnathius

My brother has a Saito 50 in his and it flies great. Anything larger than a 50 class engine would be overkill... Unless you want to hover or have "unlimited" vertical, which is not very realistic for this type of plane.

Flyer DC-3

I have a Super Tigre 51 ringed version turning a 12x6 and it is a super combination. It is in fact a little overpowered for scale in flight performance. Will pull vertical for a while into a stall and then magnificent spin back down.

I have had a great time flying mine. JR 8103 and JR servos and receiver on a 1000 mah pack. Used the pack to get the balance correct. I used a slimline pitts style muffler so cowl installation is clean. I also used safety nut on prop installation.

fossil

My Feedback: (25)

Are you guys talking about the Kyosho PT 17 Stearman Or the Kyosho Super Stearman? I am just starting to build the PT 17 Stearman and plan on putting a Saito 56 in it. I have seen the Super Stearman (which is a more aerobatic version) fly on an OS 52 and looked like it had plenty of power. I was thinking about putting an OS 70 surpass II, but I read in a post here that it would be way to much. I have always like to use more motor if it needs weight up front to balance (instead of using useless lead). Anybody tell me how thiers balance with a Saito 56 size engine up front? Was it tail heavy and if so how much lead did you have to add?
fossil

djlyon

I put a brass spinner nut on the front of the YS53 and it came out just right (a little tail heavy). Without the brass spinner nut it was a little to much work nursing it in on an empty tank.

fossil

My Feedback: (25)

djlyon how much does your YS53 weigh? My Saito 56 weighs 15.5 ounces. I was curious how it compared in weight to your YS53.
fossil

av8r4aa

My Feedback: (82)

I used a OS 52 and it worked great. I even won the event at the airshow with the plane! When the elevator clevis broke and went straight in, I won the best crash award.
Greg

djlyon

Fossil
The YS53 17.39 oz with the muffler. The muffler is 1.16 oz. So you may need some weight in the front. Mines a Super Stearman so it doesn't have the dummy engine but it does have a cowl and it's not flimsy.

E75

My Feedback: (1)

Ditto.

E75

My Feedback: (1)

Both the PT 17 and the Super stearman are identical in every way except for cosmetics. A saito .56 is more than enough power for high performance flying. After all this is not a 3D model.
Ours has a O.S. .52 and is excellent by all accounts.

SPT17

My Feedback: (1)

I have a Saito 72 on my Pt-17 version. I am running a 13 x 6 APC and I am flying at four-thousand foot elevation. This is by far my most favorite plane ever. With the Saito 72, it balanced perfectly with no added weight. This plane will do incredible inverted flat spins and awesome vertical and horizontal snaps. It does not have unlimited vertical but it will go straight up for quite a awhile. I probably have over a hundred flights on this plane. It is really neat looking in the air and it is definitely a keeper.

fossil

My Feedback: (25)

Thats the main reason I was thinking of going with the OS 70 was for balance purposes not power. I don't want to put a Saito 56 on it and then have to stick a 2 or 3 ounces of lead up front to balance.
SPT17 are there any bad Characteristics from having the larger motor and how much of the dummy engine & cowl did you have to cut to fit the bigger motor.
fossil

SPT17

My Feedback: (1)

Fossil- I believe that the OS 70 is about four onces heavier than the Saito 72 and the Saito 72 is about two onces heavier than the Saito 56. I used standard size servos, JR 649S pcm receiver, and a one thousand milliamp nicad pack. Yes, you do have to cut away quite a bit of the dummy radial engine because the 72 is longer than the smaller engines. Constructing the dummy radial and making your engine blend to it and the fiberglass cowl is by far the hardest part of assembling this ARF. But even though I had to cut more out of the radial and the cowl, it was well worth it. The performance with that 72 is phenomenal. We fly off of a grass sod farm and if you land a little hot, this plane does have a tendency to ground loop and flip over. But once you are aware of this, a pilot with normal skills can avoid it by controlling his touchdown speed. I have never flown it off of a hard surface, so I don't know if that would help or not. As mine is setup, it floats right in for landings and does not have a tendency to stall. I substituted aircraft type lock-nuts and socket head bolts for the wing struts and ca-bane.

This ARF was one of the highest quality ARFs I have seen. The only thing that was misleading was it claimed it came with a finished and painted fiberglass cowl so I thought all the assembly and painting of the cowl and dummy radial were done. Wrong.

Other than the amount of time it takes to assemble and paint the dummy radial, Kyosho has a winner with this one.

joeyM

I heard alot of good things about this plane but I did read somewhere that someone mentioned the horizontal fin was a weak point and should be braced--has anyone flying this plane done this--and who is flying it without any bracing on it?........joe

fossil

My Feedback: (25)

SPT17 thanks for the info, I thing I will try the Saito 56 first. I can always cut the cowl bigger later to fit the OS 70 if the 56 doesn't work out.
fossil

djlyon

OK here's previous stuff written by me and another guy.

I really enjoy my Kyosho Stearman. It's a lot of fun to fly and is quite aerobatic. It is easy to assemble. The decals were easy to apply and they have stayed on through 100+ flights. It is not a beginners plane to fly. It's not squirrelly but it demands your full attention. When people ask me how it flies I tell them it flies like a biplane. It has no bad stall characteristics like snapping and is easy to land. It will float in like a trainer, which is unusual for a bipe with a radial front end. It also handles well in wind or cross wind. This is probably because it is so light. Mine weights 5.25 lbs. The construction is very very good and strong except for the tail feathers. The covering on mine was good but a little loose. This was easily corrected with a heat gun.
I use a YS53 for power and an 11/7 APC prop.. It's a bit much and I normally fly at half to 2/3rds power. It balanced right at the aft balance point recommended in the addendum, with no weight required. The first flights were quite tail heavy but manageable. I put a brass spinner nut on it and that got it where I like it, still a little tail heavy.
Ground handling is real handful with mine unlike the experience of others that posted on the rivanna thread. And I haven't flown anything but tail draggers in years. It takes a fine touch on takeoff to keep it from swerving and a fine touch after landing to keep it from ground looping. maybe I got something in the landing gear screwed up. With a little concentration though it will go straight down the middle.
I didn't like a lot of the hardware (low quality) although I used most of it and haven't had any problems in a 100+ flights. I did throw away the threaded bolts for the landing gear and put in Dubro axels. I used their bolt and nuts for the struts and eventually replaced them with 4-alen screws and lock nuts. The wood screws holding the cabane struts to the fuselage kept coming loose so I replaced them with threaded 4/40 brass inserts in the fuselage and 4/40 alen screws. Putting hardwood blocks in the fuselage to accept the brass inserts was kind of a pain because of the double wall fuselage. I didn't use the heat shrink for the control rods, instead I bound and glued them, like I always do.
Make sure you get the "N" struts in the right way.
Follow the addendum for CG and control throws. I did wind up putting in more aileron throw on high rates and the recommended on low rates. The high rates turned out about right. I increased the rudder throw after a few flights and this was a mistake. Too much rudder throw causes sever pitching toward the gear and rotation in the opposite direction. It's called rudder stall.
My wheel pants were fiber glass. Don't put them on until you've made enough flights to be comfortable you will make a smooth landing every time.
On your flight questions. It will knife edge nicely with only moderate rudder input. It snap rolls easily either inside or outside. I have only been able to get a flat spin to the left and it's pretty but not real flat. I haven't been able to get it to flat spin to the right or inverted. I suspect that's because I haven't got the application of power and aileron quite right, (timing and coordination). Stall turns are good. Loop tracking is a little iffy. This is far from a pattern or IMAC plane. It's not a precession aerobat.
Now for the bad. The horizontal stab broke twice during flight. I thought is kind of weak when I built the plane but I didn't do anything about it. I only do snaps at low speed and I have avoided any other high speed violent maneuvers but it broke anyway. Both times I managed to land the plane smoothly and taxi back to the pits. God is my co-pilot. The first time the break was about 2 inches out from the fuselage and through both the leading and trailing edges on the left stab. I fixed it with carbon fiber sheet through the leading and trailing spars, both sides naturally. The second time it broke at the fuselage and took nearly full down elevator to land. Again I think the good lord was driving and I made smooth landing and taxed back in. More carbon fiber and I haven't had a problem since. I strongly recommend wire braces if you build one.
Denis

I sent another individual a response to a similar question regarding this Bipe.
Please see below on my experience:
The Kyosho Super Stearman is a very Quality kit. I was very amazed with the
Hardware that was included and the construction of all of the plywood and
balsa parts. I read a review in the Airplane Model News prior to buying mine
which helped in the decision making. I agreed with alot of their comments.
The manual is a little cryptic and they provide a supplement to the manual.
Make sure you read the supplement a couple of times over to make sure you
understand everything. I made notes in the manual from the insert. I guess
the Japanese translation didn't come out to clear. The assembly I would say
is Easy, not real easy but anyone that has experience building ARF's can
build this model.
The covering is a bit wrinkled and loose in many areas. I used a sealing iron
on all the covered parts prior to starting any assembly. I think they used
Ultracote on this model. The covering on it is very Professional and Scale
like.
The decals are pretty much a stick on, very nice easy to apply. The STARS are
the iron on type. The don't give you enough of the Big Stars to apply as
illustrated in the picture. I made some additional stars out of Missile Red
self adhesive type covering.
The kind you would use to patch your planes with.
As far as hardware with the kit. Although all the parts were good quality I
did replace some of them. they are as follows:
1. Cabane and wing struts screws and nuts - These would probably come lose
during flight - I replaced them with 3mm hex screws and locking nuts.
2. Tail wheel - I don't like wire tail wheel, I replaced it with a spring
rudder control tail wheel assembly.
3.Engine Mount Bolts - Again, would vibrate loose, I used locking nuts and
hex bolts.
4. Foam Tires, some people replace these, they can become warped from sitting
long periods of time.
Other than that I used all the other parts.

Construction, I recall having a problem with the Joining wire that connect
the two elevators. Because I cannot drill straight enough to make sure they
are even. If I could have done this over again I would have, laid the
elevators of a flat table, put the joiner wire on top and made a mark. Cut a
notch in each of the elevators then, inserted the joiner wire into the notch
and filled the slots with epoxy.
The Aileron Servo Bays in the wings are a tight fit for Standard size Servos.
I did use Standard Futaba S3003 servos, but it was a very close fit. I would
have used mini servos for the wing Bays for the Ailerons.
The wheel pants are made of an ABS plastic, they are not fiberglass, at least
in my Kit. As far as the cowl. I thought the cowl was pretty easy to work
with. Big cowl, easy to make marks for the engine head and needle Valve. The
engine I am using is a Thunder Tiger Pro .46 with a Pitts Muffler. Good fit
in this plane. I did start with a OS FX .46 but for some reason I could not
get this motor to run stable enough in this plane. I think it had something
to do with how the fuel tank was positioned in relationship to the needle
valve of this OS FX Motor. I have read a OS .52 FS Surpass works really well
in this plane.
Overall the model fit together like a puzzle. Everything fit really well.
Even the struts are pre bent and perfectly fit. Pilot holes are already
drilled in the wings and fuse for this alignment as well.
The Balancing question. I thought this was pretty straight forward. The
INSERT again makes a correction from the manual 4 inches from the leading
edge on the Upper wing. I balanced it according to this and I thought it was
on the money. My plane was very tail heavy and had to add quite a bit of nose
weight, like 3 ounces...
Flying the model, Ground handling is very nice for this Bipe. Very stable not
squirly at all. The take offs were really nice. Gently breaking the ground
and no surprises going airborne. Landings have a bounce to this plane. The
manual also indicates this. Its mainly just getting used to the landing on
this plane because its approach is fast like a sport model with very little
drag.
On turns and rolls and loops the plane tracks very nicely. Its fun to fly. I
have not done any hammer heads with this plane yet. On inverted flights the
plane wants to climb a bit. I didn't make any adjustments, but did read that
the upper wing needed to be shimmed with a washer to increase the incidence
to correct this. To me it not that big of deal...
As I said before, this is a great model. Its constructed very well and very
light but Sturdy. Really Sturdy... Its a pricey ARF but well worth the money.
If this one dies I will certainly buy another!
Good Luck
Frank
------------------

SPT17

My Feedback: (1)

JoeyM - I am using the stock stabilizer with no extra bracing on my PT-17 version and even with a lot of flight time on it, I have had no problems.

joeyM

thanks for all the info.....joeyM

av8er50

My Feedback: (6)

I am working on putting my PT-17 together. I gotta say it is all well built and goes together easy, but the dummy radial and engine instalation is a pain in the tail end!!
I know, a little off subject, but I'm working on it now so it's on my mind now. Just took a break for a few. I'll be glad when it's done!!
Jeff

flapbreaker

My Feedback: (1)

I have a saito FA-65 would this be too heavy for the Super Stearman? I weighed it with the muffler and it came out to 1 pound 4.7 ounces.

BackAfter20

My Feedback: (5)

Maral,

I've got the Super Stearman with a Magnum 61 RFS. It seems to be a good combination as far as power goes. I agree with djlyon that even more wouldn't hurt but that, of course, depends on your flying style.

I've only flown it 7 times, and the engine mixture has needed a lot of babysitting. After setting the high-speed mixture on the ground for 300-400 RPM rich from peak, about 1/2 way through the flight it would stop coming up to full RPM when I advanced the throttle. I'd have to land, lean the mixture a bit, and take back off again. Each flight has required leaning the high speed needle a bit more. This has gotten a bit better with each flight, but almost cost me the plane on two occasions. I hope these are break-in pains, and will go away after the first gallon of fuel.

I bought a flat battery pack and put it under the fuel tank, and the plane balanced great with no additional weight needed. I did start with a brass "heavy hub" also, but removed it because it wasn't needed.

The plane rolls very slowly - too slowly for my tastes. I saw a modification somewhere in this forum that added ailerons to the top wing. I would love to do that if I could ever find the time.