LarryQ

My Feedback: (1)

I was planning on breaking into Gas with a 50CC bird.

I really am impressed with the quality ane reliability of the DA-50, and was planning my next plane around that particular engine.

Well...sometimes plans change.

I'm starting to look at the Ultra-RC 29% Giles, and it would be massive overkill to try and mount up a DA-50 on that airframe.

So...Now I need something in the 2.4 range...and I never even shopped or looked at any engines in that catagory..

Asking for a little help here...is there one engine in the 2.4 class that shines above the rest??

THanks..and wish me luck selling this project on the Wife!

Larry

brown4729

I have two DA’s one in a 78" Extra 260 and the other in a 85" Edge 540 they are great engines just remember you can always throttle back!!!! Go for the DA!

Birddog-RCU

My Feedback: (62)

Brison makes a great 2.4 engine. http://www.brisonrcengines.com/
RC Showcase has the ZDZ 40 http://www.rcshowcase.com/html/engines.html

There are many others like Tarus and 3W and I'm sure others will chime in with their favorites. Plently of data on threads here in the forums that you can find with not too much trouble.

rmh

keep the weight down - the lightest -most power is the EVO 1.6 on a pipe total weight inc pipe is 50 ozs.
On under 11 lbs it should do what you want - at ten lbs (which I am flying in a Showtime )-it is very quick -straight up
Next up is any engine close to same weight (the EVO is 32 ozs -a Roto 25 is 8 ozs heavier but has about same performance - piped
No in cowl stuff please--unless you go to a 40 n in cowl muffler -- then up goes the noise
Brison is 3/4 lbs heavier than bare EVO - ZDZ40 a bit less
The main thing - keep-the -weight- down.

3dbob37n

I've been flying an FPE 2.4 for several years now in a Sig Extra (the purple one) and it flies great with that engine.
I am very happy with the FPE 2.4.
Not enough engine to hover but it almost does it, but not quite.

3dbob

ShawnM

My Feedback: (6)

I would use a 3w-28 on a can. You may want to look at the 3w Extra Fun thread in Giant scale. He has posted some thrust #'s on the last page there which look good. (somewhere in the 17lb range i think) And I'd bet it will come on up a little more after it gets broke-in. 2.67lbs with ign. and I would bet considerably stronger than the Evo or Roto engines.

JoeAirPort

My Feedback: (41)

I was going to get the Giles too. Two things stopped me: 1) It was not looking good to get the Giles anytime soon 2) There are not a lot of ARF's that can handle the weight of a 40cc gas engine. So for that reason I listened to what many people said here and just got a DA50 and a 50cc ARF. There are TONS of aerobatic ARF's that can use a DA50 out there.

Joe

rmh

yes but only a few which are any good

olstoney

My Feedback: (19)

O.K. Dick, so which planes are the best?

rc bugman

My Feedback: (30)

Hi,

I have worked the heck out of my 2-3W-42s without a hitch. One of the engines ran 70 hrs at full throttle tied to a fixed object with the head temperature forced around 200 degrees F for the oil test I ran last winter/spring. In that test, I used a 24 x 10 prop which the engine turned at 6000 rpms. The engine is typical 3W and is a tad on the heavy side but I never have the cooling/component failure problems that I had with the ZDZ-40s.

I also prefer the 3W-50 to the DA-50 and I found the extra 10 ozs of wt is from the engine being built more robustly. The 3W-50 never had the connecting rod problems of the DA-50.

Elson

rmh

well -if it is for 3D-or any aerobatic stuff which requires instant recovery - the answer is easy.
look for light weight and low wing loading -
Nothing else matters .
For real rocket performance - on any under 30cc setup - total weight -UNDER 11 lbs.
So no overweight engines and really wach out for the plethora of so called aerobatic scale types which abound.
Look at the posting of the 202Giles from Ultra-look at the construction
read the weights . Those "sturdy" types with slab construction will grow an extra 2-3 lbs in a heartbeat-and that kills any real performance.
If you elect to use an engine with a bare weight of over 2.5 lbs -be really careful
and if you elect to use a non piped setup - drop th3 all up weight to 9-10 lbs max -
There are lots of fine setups which will loop n roll and are excellent relaxed flyers using heavy engines etc. but if you want performance - forget em

olstoney

My Feedback: (19)

Dick,
DA 50/Slimline on the Precision Aerobatics Edge 540T. Aerobatic sport flying and Imac basic practice only. Can't use a can as there is no room, so what do you think?

85bipe

My Feedback: (16)

I have two Da-50's One on a Wild Hare 540 Edge and the other on a Wild Hare Ultimate. A freind has two on Wild Hare planes and all will do 3D and IMAC with no problem. They may not be the best ARF ,but there not the most exspensive.For the money I would buy them again.

rmh

As long as the power level and performance fit your flying - your setup is right.
If you are really keen on getting max power and minimum wing loading combined --then the choices rapidly diminish
No two stroke produces anywhere near max power on in cowl muffler .
The smaller the engine -the more this applies.
The best of the new ARFS allow good power setups and still stay in the mid-low twenties on wing loadings .
Anything under 1200 squares really takes a hit if the wing loading goes over 25-toward 30 ozs ft.
Sure -it's my opinion-and your taste may be much different.
But -look at good competitive pattern models -the wing loadings they use (or less) are what we need for best performance in same size planes.

bpryor

My Feedback: (45)

In this class personal favorites are the Taurus TS-42 and MVVS 45. I owned the TS-42 a couple of years ago and it was my favorite engine, in this class, that I have owned. Besides the ones mentioned above, in this size range, I have owned 2 - Brison 2.4's, a BME 44 and a couple of FPE 2.4's. All of them have good points, and all of them are good motors, but the Taurus stands out among those. I have a MVVS 45 (same as Evo 45) that I only have an hour and a half on and so far I'm very impressed. I only have this engine instead of a Taurus because I'm an experimenter by nature and I switch engines a lot(if you hadn't figured that out from above ).

So, that's my opinion on engines, but with that said, if it were me, I'd be buying a 50. The weight difference is negligable, they have throttles, and you then have the option to switch it into a bigger plane if you decide to move up a bit. If it were me, I'd start with a light 50cc plane, and be done with it.

If you were going with a 50, my choices are similar to above. I'd still buy a Taurus TS-52 first. There are a couple of threads active on them now if you want some owner opinions. I think all the other engines mentioned would work great too, but believe it or not, the engine you named as your number one choice, would be my last choice. It's not because I don't think the DA-50 is potentially a really good engine(and is for many people right now), but in my mind the verdict is still out as to whether they have their design issues all worked out yet. It appears they may, but with all the other great engines out there available in this class that don't, and haven't had, these major reliability issues, why risk it. It would take another year for me to trust that DA has their 50 up to the quality of their bigger engines.

...and guys I didn't post this to start an argument, it's just that from Larry's comment it sounded like he may not be aware of the DA-50's history. Maybe he is confident the issues are all fixed. I know that everyone doesn't feel the same way I do, and I respect that. This is just my opinion.

rmh

Not everyone wants to "move up".
Having built stuff up to 50% -Iam presently trying to make the best setup I can get with a plane UNDER 80" span.
Can you really get top performance in this size on gas -
You bet your asp you can .
Can you do it buying stuff right out of the box and just sticking the pieces together?
Yes-providing you are above the new US Army minimum requirements (15-30 percentile group --where is a good draft program when you REALLY need it?)
The new gassers 25 Roto- Mvvs EVO in 26 cc all run like gangbusters on a bolt on tuned pipe . They are smooth running, start easily and run hard in any position with the tank mounted just about anywhere in the model.
If you can't handle that installation -it's time to enlist---

Peter Burgess

You could consider the MVVS 45 MG which has a weight of around 43oz

bpryor

My Feedback: (45)

Very true Dick, and likewise I would imagine everyone does not want to move down. I believe I said it was just what I would do, but if someone does want to move down(I could easily see doing a small gasser at some point), I should mention that Taurus is soon coming out with a TS-25 that should be a very nice addition to the smaller-size gas market. I would expect it to maintain their typical quality, reliability, high power, smoothness and light weight, though that is pure speculation at this point....and no, I have no idea when it is coming out. From the past it seems Taurus does not officially announce new engines until they're available, but if you're interested you might write them and let them know....oh, and I would suspect it will not need a tuned pipe to have good power, though of course it would have more with one(more speculation, but based on their other offerings).

rmh

When speculating - power can be anything
But the cold hard fact about two stroke engines is that unless you pipe em - you will be an also ran -
I constantly get asked " but won't the power still be good without the pipe?"
The answer remains - nowhere near as good. The engine can be a fine running sport setup but powerwise - no cigar.
This is the prime reason the market is not flooded with this size engine.
The power to weight on gasoline is way below a glow (nitro/alky setup).
The pipe is what makes it all work.

bpryor

My Feedback: (45)

I personally like pipes and cans, but they are not for everyone, nor every plane. Your points are well taken, but it does not mean that it is impossible to build a lightweight engine in this category that will perform well (enough) without a pipe. Whether that is the Taurus or not, I have no idea.

rmh

Having tried (over n over) ,The results are the same --
you can get an earsplitting noise level-and good power-or quiet nice sport power - or real performance at a fairly quiet sound level
First setup -a straight stack
second setup- in cowl muffler The Roto is the best I have seen to date.
third -pipe with integrated muffler.
Stick a good 18x6 on each setup The Skorepa is excellent .
the rpm will switch down about 2000 rpm. 10000-8000
How much power do you think is lost by giving up 2000rpm?
Just for shucks -look at the HP charts -- in typical comparison-- 4.5 hp vs 2.3 hp.
I am not stuck on the HP/Thrust charts -but as a hp comparison chart - the ratios are about right

T-one

Since Taurus has been mentioned in these posts I guess it would be legal to stick our nose in here. First off Taurus makes a 2.6 which weighs in at 3lbs 3oz with everthing but a muffler.The 3.2 weighs in at 3lbs 5 oz. In this case whether you move up or down it is only a mater of 2 ozs. And that won't make a difference in any model. The 2.4, 2.6 gap between a 3.2 in my opinion is not a consideration. Throttle management is the answer.