Ed Sabini

Hello,
I have been reading posting from this group for a while and it is great. I have been flying a Sig Kobra with a K&B 6.5 FIRE and it goes great, close to 125 on my friends radar gun. I am looking to step up and am open to suggestions. I like scale looking planes like Shoestrings, Minnows , Mustangs and such.

I found a beautiful pylon plane going cheap on that auction site I might try to snipe, but does anyone know what engine I would use? I took a ride up today to see it in person and boy that thing is slick. It looks fast just sitting there. It is a quarter midget 40 class plane. The guy selling it told me it was set up for a Nelson now, I was thinking about the Jett 46 I have.

OK guys chime in

Ed

evan-RCU

Nelson is THE engine, then the Jetts....

Sounds like a song, Nelson and the Jetts....

bob27s

My Feedback: (19)

When it comes to the racing engines - there are a growing many who will disagree on that

And nelson doesn't make sport engines[&:]

evan-RCU

I understand you are a Jett rep and it is your position to push those motors. I also value your knowledge in many brands of motors. I don't think there are many who would disagree that a Nelson is faster than a Jett. As far as what is or is not a sport engine that is relative. To me they are all sport engines if you are not using them in competition.

bob27s

My Feedback: (19)

True, everything is a sport engine at one time in its life

But don't let the fact that more people fly the Nelson convince you that the engines perform better. They run very differently than the jett QM40 and Q500 engines. In fact that is the downfall of most who try to (any quite a few have this year) switch from Nelson to Jett .... they require different props and proceedures. Those who learn how to operate them as instructed have been very successful.

Not a matter of pushing the engines really. I don't get anything for it, and Dub is definately not making any money selling racing engines. Just noting facts. Clearly both brands are good engines. But look up what engine won the NMPRA championships over the past 7-8 years, and what won at the NATS. Also look at race times. Then there is a basis of discussion.

The new Jett QM-2 and QJ-2 engines are really works of art. They run smooth. And they speak for themselves on the race course when it comes to speed. Not one has thrown a blade or shaken itself out of a mount either. Not winning the big races mainly came down to dumb-thumbs, midairs, and a cut here and there.

No idea how things shook out at the NATS so far. I know Gino won Q-500. DaveN did well himeself and finished 3rd !

So yeah, if you look at whos on the leader board, you can argue the Nelson is faster. But winning the event is more the pilot. Not the engine.

diggs_74

I would agree with you Bob.. I fly nelson's and have been beat by more than one Jett, Dub included.

rmenke

My Feedback: (13)

Ed:

Me thinks you are in conflicting poo-poo here. If you want to race talk about race engines and race airplanes. Proof of the pudding is who wins in the overall long run. Inbetween, its a ford-chevy thing. I would not feel at a disadvantage with a Jett engine. Down to it!!! The only semi-scale airframes that scoot are racers, the formula types. They go like heck, somewhere in the 200 mph range for the best setups. I would go Nelson to start with just to copy what the realy go faster guys are doing, and there is always always go faster guys. If you want a Shoestring or such, gotta go to e-bay and hope to find a old Goldburg kit from the 70's designed for 40 engines and will give you some honest scoot. Still 30-40 years behind the times. For making a semi-scale Shoestring, Little Tonie or other similar arf's scoot, your Nelson probably would not get the dog off the ground, a Jett 90 LX can and would make it scoot, but not much more than the 125 (yawn) where you are at. There is no conventional way to get these draggy heavy beasts to truly scoot short of redesign and turbine power. If you want to scoot and enjoy normal flying, there is no substitute or anything that will come close to the Sport Jett engines. For the 40 sized airframes, the Jett 60LX is king in my view. About the same size AND WEIGHT as a sport 40 engine that will start and idle with the best of them. Then you open that thing up to around 20,000 and have some speed. Too fast, just come back on the throttle to where you are cumfortable. For all out fun, find a undamaged Q-500 wing, cut it down to 40", scratch build a fuse followning the Q-500 moments except cowell in the engne and provide a little larger tank area. Now you have a plane you can start on the bench, taxi out and take off as you would any sport airplane, and scare the gang with around 175-200 mph passes, idle back and land at close to normal speeds. Got some Q-500 hot dogs around? Go ahead and fly with them. If you don't get past them with speed, something is not right. Fly with care, otherwise you will discourage some otherwise go fasters. Will it turn without sliding out, yes, will it land at reasonable speeds, yea about the same a a full wing Q-500. When my proto-type #1 died a glitchy death, I built #2 with a full 52" wing and fattened the fuse for a 12oz tank. #1 was just way to fast for cumfort even for this crazy old man!! Is it a all out super duper cheater, sorry, yes, but loads of fun. Get used to flying alone ENJOY

Ed Sabini

Hi Guys,
OK we are getting off the track here a little bit. I was wondering if I am lucky engough to win the plane, what would be a good engine for it. I saw Bob had the same type plane posted on here with a Jett 50. I have a Sport Jett 46 would that be enough or do I need the Jett 50? I also have an OS 46SF ABC with a Nelson muffler that goes great. Just need some input on what I should think about as far as set up goes.

Thanks
Ed

LGM Graphix

My Feedback: (22)

My experience with JETT vs Nelson QM40 engines is that the Jett is a stronger motor, but much more finicky. I've run both, and the thing I liked best about the Nelson was I could "set it and forget it". The JETT I was always tweaking the needle which was frustrating. There are probably guys out there that have never had to do that, and I wasn't competing, just going fast, but for me the Nelson was more user friendly and consistent. A couple friends of mine that fly QM40 have said the same thing, if they could get the ease of operation that the Nelson has with the power of the JETT that would be the ultimate engine.

evan-RCU

We chimed in, sorry if what we chimed was wrong...

Ed Sabini

Thank you anyway, the other thread Bob answered my questions. Now I just have to hope I can win it.

ED

evan-RCU

Out of curiosity what are you going with? here you are talking Jett and OS, in the other thread Nelson... You ask for opinions and we give them and then you say we're off track. What are you doing?

Ed Sabini

Hello,
Well I have decided for this plane, if I get it, I am going to go with the Jett 46 that I have. If I get brave enough after a while, the guy also has an almost new Nelson SS QM40 engine he will sell me and install an airvalve it it so it will come down to half power and I can shut it down. I can put that in later.

To get my feet wet he sold me an AMA 428 Q-500 I am test flying in about an hour and I am using the OS 46 SF ABC with a Nelson muffler and an 8.8 x 8.5 prop. He said it should be in the 150 range.


Wish me luck, off to the field,

Ed