gonflyin

this plane ways around 9 9.5 with no motor would the da 50 be too much are altitude is 4500 feet.?

deputydog

I would think this motor would rip off the front of your plane. The DA(not broken in!) takes my 19# 92" edge unlimited vert. Try a Brison 2.4(even thats a lot of power!).

BobH

My Feedback: (2)

You might consider the RCS 140.. thats more in the ballpark. BobH.

ptebbe

My Feedback: (27)

I agree, too much engine for that plane. I have a DA 50 on a DP extra @15.5 lbs (1250 sq inch wing area) and will accellerate vertically at 3/4 throttle. I'd recommend a FPE 2.4 with CH ignition==very light and should provide adequate power.
PT

Francis Fernand

My DA-50-R is coming next week and is going to be mounted on my SIG Extra 300 XS. Same as you. Just throtle management.

GeraldRosebery

My Feedback: (14)

Throttle managent (post # 7)

The DA would be great on theCAP with proper throttle management, but also be aware of ground clearance. For best efficiency, the DA may require a prop that may be cutting the grass on takeoff on that small CAP! You may be pushed into using a three bladed prop, which is not bad, but is expensive.

Gerry Rosebery


__________________
Gerry Rosebery
Melbourne, FL, U.S.A.

luv2flyrc

My Feedback: (6)

The DA is way too much engine for the Sig Cap! Throttle management included.

U will add significant weight to the airframe ( which is intended to support a 2lbs engine) the DA will add 4-4.5lbs , yes I know its just over 3lbs but, add the battery , switch , muffler and it will be at least 4 probable 4.5.

I like lots of power but, I can tell u after flying my 30% Carden Extra with a zdz 80 that too much power can be a problem when landing. In my case that big 26x10 menz would fly the airplane 1 click above idle, making no room for any error on landing , I had many flybys because idle was too high and many landings short of the runway because idle was too low and I went deadstick.

The DA 50 on the Sig cap would probably be even more overpowered than my combo, infact I should probably consider retrofitting the 89"span 18lbs Carden with a DA 50!

Just my thoughts on it

Sincerely,

Mike

azhar

My Feedback: (19)

Mike,

The DA with with everything you mentioned except batt, is about 3lbs and 6oz. With batt add another 3-4 ozs. I just weighed mine. But I agree, it is still way too much for the Sig.

Azhar

gonflyin

ok u all talked me out of the da but now what do i get a saito 180 or a yz 140? thx for all the replies....

luv2flyrc

My Feedback: (6)

Get yourself the Da 50 and a bigger airframe to go with it! You'll be much happier that way then spending your money on a messy,fuel guzzling glow engine. Your problem is just that that airframe is too small for the engine u want,

So, it's simple, Sell the Sig Cap and pick up the Hangar nine 80" one, or any other airframe that is suited to the 50cc engines.

Mike

ptebbe

My Feedback: (27)

I agree with Mike. Just a little bigger airframe and you're at the point where gas really makes sense. I have a 1/4 scale extra with the DA 50 and couldn't be happier. The wing loading approaches 30oz/sqft though, and I wouldn't want any less wing area for this setup (1250".)
I finally bit the bullet with gas, and now I'm going to switch all my airplanes to gas. Once you've tried gas, you won't go back to glow.
(I had a Saito 1.80 on the same plane previously and was unhappy with the power and the fact that a 12-15 minute flight cost me $3.50.) Now I can fly for a month for $3.50 !
PT

Slow Rollin'

In my opinion, the high altitude combined with the heavy engine and the tail weight you would have to add would make that plane fly like a brick. Sounds like you've already decided that though.

Now, here's the part where I add something constructive:

I have that plane, with an OS 160. Keep it light, and it will reward you. I've not flown in high altitude, but here, the 160 provides truely unlimited vertical.

If the 160 doesn't give you all you need at your altitude, use some of the $350 extra you would have spent on the DA, and get some carbon replacement parts. Such as landing gear and a spinnner. I got a carbon gear for a Goldberg Sukoi that weighed half what the stock gear did.

Do everything you can think to do to trim weight, and you will be VERY happy with that plane.

Good luck.

Francis Fernand

I have a SIG Extra 300 XS that used a OS 1.60 FX. Mine was tail heavy. I added 1 Lb. (16 oz.) for correct the balance. Final weight was 14.75 pounds and flew very well. This engine with Bisson Pitts Style muffler and GP motor mount was 3.15 Lb.

That's why I sold the OS 1.60 FX and purchased a new DA-50-R, because at the end, I'm gonna have the same weight. I can go to 14 pounds with CF landing gear and spinner.

Hope this help.

Francis Fernand

Guys,

Last sunday was the maiden flight of the SIG Extra 300 XS with the DA-50-R. The plane flew great and landed easy. The new 3"taller landing gear is fantastic with this 22" propeller.

As I said: "Throttle management and no more than 6000 RPM".

Hope this helps.

Aero330LX

My Feedback: (-1)

I'm a power nut, but geeeeeeeeez!!! All of these planes would be ripped apart in no time with a DA 50. That engine is designed around 80" planes that weigh 15 pounds and up. Putting one on a 9 pound model would be suicide! LOL That engine swings 22-24" props. Even if you did manage to pull this off the DA would probably rip the firewall off and kill anybody that was in front of it. I saw that post about the RCS 140...that is resonable power there...A 50?!?!? Especially a DA? NO WAY! LOL I'd say go with the 50 yeah, but get a Kangke Laser or a Patty Extra or something designed for that size engine. On those planes the 50 is beyond extreme...on the planes above no way, don't do it man...you'll get hurt or somebody else will.

Stargazer

My Feedback: (3)

Aero330 is absolutly right - if you need proof look at the thread called "New Engine" (wish I knew how to post it) there is a guy in that thread that had a G-38 rip the firewall off the Sig 300S and eat his hand.... and that was a G- 38.....

Aero330LX

My Feedback: (-1)

Here ya go ASAT...

http://www.rcuniverse.com/showthread...t=G38+firewall

Guys,
This can happen...pay careful attention to what happened to Jim. There is a pic in graphic detail. If this scares you... GOOD! I hope it scares you enough to not do this and save yourself a trip to the hospital. It's NOT worth it. The money it costs for just one ER visit could easily buy the plane and equipment that it takes for a DA 50. I saw where the throttle would be limited on one...that ain't good enough! The plane is too lightly built to absord the"hanging weight" of the engine, the torque it puts out (which BTW is a rotational element), or the sheer brute pulling power this engine has. I'm in no way knocking what you are trying to do...I understand completely believe me, I just don't want to see anyone get hurt. There is nothing wrong with a DA engine or wanting to own one either, but it must be installed in an airframe that is designed for this kind of power. With gas engines that swing large propellers you MUST take extra care when operating them...this is in no way saying that small engines are any less dangerous, but the forces or greatly magnified with these. They are alot of fun, but if something goes majorly wrong, it could be the last time you fly a model...it could be the last time you do anything for that matter. I fly the bigger brother to the DA 50...I have a DA 100, and I know what these engines do. Installed on the proper airframe they are a pleasure to run and fly...overpower too small an aiplane and you WILL get hurt. It might not be right away, or week from now, but it will happen. Please don't do it guys...I'm not telling ya, I'm not even asking ya, I'm begging ya!!

azhar

My Feedback: (19)

There seems to be a rising tendency to overpower (by a fat margin) a plane. 3d may have something to do with it. In some cases, the power requirement is necessary but precaution have to be taken to strengthen the aircraft to accept the power. I am all for power but I also try to be realistic (hopefully).

There is a guy in another thread that placed a 1.4 RCS on a UCD . That, to me, is another accident waiting to happen. I am sure that most folks out here are reasonably safety conscious but there are also a number of fools out there. It just takes one fool to ruin your day. Just my opinion.


Azhar

deputydog

Yep, I agree there is NO room for any error when dealing with these large engines.
I have a buddy that built a GP Patty with a BME 50. He wanted to run the motor. #1 he's never started a gas, #2 all the checks to the plane was'nt performed. I told him to bring it to the field sat. Sat he showed up with 30 stitches and a broken finger!
He had his son hold it, started it at 50% throttle and it scared the boy. Luckily it was a wooded prop. A CF prop would'nt have stopped at the hand........

BobH

My Feedback: (2)

Something else that every one NEEDS TO CONSIDER . If you power your plane with an engine that is outside the Mfgs recommendation YOU maybe liable for damages should your plane cause injury or damages. I work in the field of product safety and I can assure you that law suits are very common for consumer products. What can happen is that AMA will not provide your insurance protection (because you have violated their safety code) and your own insurance Company may not pay because of your negligence. That leaves YOU to pay all those $$$ which can become considerable! Next time you want to OverPower your plane with that FireBreather.. think again. The money you save may be your own!.. Not to mention the Safety and Welfare of your fellow fliers! BobH.