Diablo, you need to do some flow tests to determine the optimum configuration without comprimising the top end power too much. Since the crankcase flow characteristics and transfer/boost port timing and flow have to compliment eachother, you could really botch the job in a big hurry if you did not maintain proper flow balance among the many parameters involved in the final design.

As for which one to do NOW??

YES!

I also have the hangar 9 sukhoi with the 3W 106 up front,I moved the rudder servos up just behind the CG and both my reciever battery and my Isolator battery directly in back of that,with the 106 up front the plane balanced perfectly with no added weight,If you do decide to go with the BME most likely you will have to add weight to the nose! taking in the fact that the CG is sooooo far forward there isn't much room to put any thing else up there. I always put my fuel tank on the CG since it is usually the heaviest single item (when full) that you put in your airframe it takes a whole lot of room to keep it there, so shifting weight ahead of the CG in this particular airframe really isn't an option.

Randy, are you pretty happy with the da/sukhoi?

I sure am John,, be alot happier when my own club field drys up enough to get my chair on it to fly even more

I was realy surprised flying inverted with it also.. did alot of inverted flight with it durring differents times of fuel usage and it was basicaly almost 100% hands off on inverted flight with the fuel tank upfront
Power to weight LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

That about sums that one up<G>

Also with the DA or 3W you will have to open the sides of the cowl up for the plug caps,

You will be happy with whatever engine you wish to use, I just cannot see a lighter engine if you have to add weight thats all.

Randy

Sounds like a plan to me, John VH.

Over the strident (nagging and whining) inputs of FryFly, I'd say the DA100 is the better choice out of the group, for your application.

I KNOW that you will find the service from DA to be top notch, and their engine is a good one. Given Randy's positive input on this combination, I just don't see how you could go wrong after following his sage and wise advice. (LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. .gotcha Randy. . )

wow. Kris, nice to see you getting along finally.

Hey, I gotta throw in another vote for the DA. I havent seen the 3W 106, but I have a feeling its a quality piece as well. As for the weight difference argument in favor of the BME, Sorry Kris, but I have to disagree with just about everything you said. The DA for the same price is a much better engine overall, and well worth any <unnoticable> <small> amount of weight needed to balance. The idle, transition, midrange, and top end are far superior to the BME, and it is much smoother.
Maybe BME will have a contender down the road with the 110, but right now, its not there, and for the same money, I would go with the DA - but I havent seen the 3W, it might be as good.

Here is a example

Today I went verticle, did one snap, followed by a 4point roll opposite direction then a full roll.

Oh yes.. the carb barrel was not even half way open

Someday I like to learn how to land it though.. never seen a airplane like this that rather hover then land comming in

Randy

Learn how to land it?

Stall speed.... Zero

LOL

Randy

DesertRat. . maybe its just me. . but you've never seen my BME's run. . not quite the top end power of the DA (okay 100 rpm or so, , ,sheesh), but butter smooth and great idle, and this is on canisters, which are notorious for messing up a fuel delivery curve.

Seems all my BME's have run this way. . I doubt that all 4 were "ringers". But, then again, I redid the ports on a twinspark 3W150 (old style) for more power and did a few "mods" (no I won't tell how) and it ran very nicely too, with good midrange and transition, though nowhere near as nice as my DA150 or BME's, but I got the burble to disappear and it was not overly lean on the bottom end.

I still won't recommend 3W over DA or BME, though . . .learned that lesson the hard way.

Honestly, I havent seen your BME's run. Only my own and about 4 others. I've seen about as many DA's run, and I just have to say, that my overall impression of the DA is its a better built machine. Never seen any BME's pull nearly as well as a DA. Dollar for dollar, the DA delivers better bang for the buck, and you dont have to be a small engine expert to get the needles set so it doesnt shake. I think my impression is the general consensus.

I never said anything either way about the 3W Kris. I dont have any hands on with them.

Well, hey, DR. . only a couple of people on this forum have been trashing the DA (wonder who I am talking about. . ), and considering the limited porting and "weedie" jugs of the BME it's startling what they can do.. . . okay, I admit to rooting for the underdog here. What's gonna happen when that chihuahua turns into a Great Dane, though?

You know, you can look at a persons plane and tell a lot about them as a builder and modeller. After looking at Fryfly's H9 Su-31, I now know why he so persistently supports Cactus Aviation.

GO DA!!!

GO BME!!!!!!!

Is there any doubt

and another

Cannot forget the tail

I bet yours flies better, Randy. . . .Prettier planes fly better, right???

<bonk> this thing broken? kris, am I hallucinating or did you just agree with me? I'm with you, BME's technical acheivement with an Echo jug is impressive. The 110 has potential to be a leader in the market. He just has to get the thing out there, its hard to lead the market with advertising and promises. The other place BME is slow is in the 150cc arena. Would be nice to see what Keith could come up with in this size, where IMO, the market could <really> use a lighter engine.

Randy: sweet airplane. The prettier airplanes fly better because the looks arent the only place the builder paid attention to detail.

Take a 110, double it, make it weigh the same as a 150. . . no reason for a 150, DesertRat.

That's the projected future plans for a "large' engine from BME. . 4-bangers run smoother, and just sound SOOO good. Projected weight for the "220" is about 8-8.5 lbs, the same as the DA150, and a good 2-3 lbs lighter than anything else in that size range. . .More power, less weight, smoother running . .sounds like a plan to me.

One thing you have to remember, though. . 90% of the Gasser market is 110 cc's and down. I'm working on a 40% project to be powered by the BME Xtreme. . to prove the viability of the combination. I'll be using either a Fiberclassics 40% Extra 330l or my own Scratch Built 40% Extra 260. If an ultralightweight 110cc motor on canisters can properly power and balance a plane of that size, it will open the market between 35-40% for similar combinations. Personally, I think the 40% stuff is way overpowered, AND overweight. with 35% planes coming in around 22-23 lbs these days, there's no reason for a 14% larger aircraft to weigh 60% more (at least)

Guess we won't know for sure till some IDIOT (like ME) gives it a shot.

After trying the 2003 Unlimited diamond loop at 3000' you might reconsider your position on the overpowered state of current 40% aircraft.

Two words. . .ENERGY MANAGEMENT

The FULL scale guys, with about a .7:1 thrust:weight ratio can do it at 6000'+. . .and with a 1.5:1 or better T:W ratio WE complain???

PUHLEASE. . . .

We even go outside THEIR "box" when doing rollers and IMAC sequences. . sounds like some people need to knuckle down, accept the limitations of their planes, and FLY.

I've done every Advanced sequence I have ever tried at half-throttle settings or less. . . just to see if it could be done (maybe not in the middle of a contest, but at least at my home field) In fact, I'm going to go out and practice today. . with my poor lil' ole BME on my Fiberclassics. It's fun to do, and teaches you a lot about your flying and the planes limitations.

Energy Management. . . .
Energy management. . . .
Energy management. . . .

That's the full-scale pilots credo. . we could learn a lot from them.

My dad fly's full scale aerobatics in advanced. It has alot to do about energy management but you have to compare the sequences that they are flying.
The Intermediate (IMAC) is almost the same as advanced (IAC).
The advanced (IMAC) is almost the same as unlimited (IAC).
The unlimited (IMAC) is way harder than the (IAC) unlimited.
(IAC- is the full scale aerobatic club.)

Some of the maneuvers would put too much strain on the pilot and the airplanes would stall and fall out of the maneuver.

They have made the sequences hard because almost everyone is flying a "overpowered" airplane.

Thanks

You don;t see the bottom of the wings but I put 3 big white stars on each pannel like the red one you see on my fin.. still trying to figure out what to put in the empty space on the rudder. Also thought about removing the H9 also off the wings and fuse.. but then changed my mine at this time

Randy