Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic
First Gas Airplane Recommendation Wanted >

First Gas Airplane Recommendation Wanted

Notices
Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic Discuss all your 3D & Aerobatic giant scale airplanes right here!

First Gas Airplane Recommendation Wanted

Old 12-31-2001, 05:28 PM
  #1  
Administrator
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (12)
 
Nathan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,228
Received 7 Likes on 2 Posts
Default First Gas Airplane Recommendation Wanted

I'm looking at the ZDZ 40 as my first gasser, and would like an airplane recommendation for that engine.

So, what aerobatic airplane in ARF format would be an ideal airplane for the ZDZ 40?
Old 12-31-2001, 06:45 PM
  #2  
Banned
My Feedback: (-2)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default First Gas Airplane Recommendation Wanted

I'm sure I'll get alot of differing opinions on this one,by I love my sig 300xs.I've got a FPE 2.4 in it and it flies like a charm.
Old 12-31-2001, 08:17 PM
  #3  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
3DRC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Spanish Fort, AL
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default ZDZ

What kind of flying do you want to do????

IMAC - Sequences and grace
3D - Big mods and attitude

Different planes to look at.

AeroWorks Edge 540 - kit
Dave Patrick Extra - ARF - hard to get right now
Lanier Edge - ARF all the motor it will handle. Good value
Sig Extra - No 3D - good ARF
Midwest CAP and Extra - kit - nice birds
SiG Sukoi - ARF - wings issue??
New Hangar 9 80" CAP - should be a good one. Not out yet.

THere are others but these are top of mind. AeroWorks is the best if you like to build. It is an easy build.

Bean
Old 12-31-2001, 08:20 PM
  #4  
Administrator
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (12)
 
Nathan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,228
Received 7 Likes on 2 Posts
Default First Gas Airplane Recommendation Wanted

I'm looking for the IMAC style of flying for this project. Nothing 3D yet. Are you saying all the airplanes you listed would be good for the ZDZ40?
Old 12-31-2001, 10:34 PM
  #5  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: hampden, ME
Posts: 1,058
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default First Gas Airplane Recommendation Wanted

All of the above planes would be fine with the ZDZ 40. Even better would be the BME 50...that and the Aeroworks 29% Edge 540..you'd have a SWEET flying IMAC plane! I've never heard anything negative about this plane. It is a relatively straight forward build, also.
Old 12-31-2001, 11:04 PM
  #6  
My Feedback: (6)
 
Steve_JR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Frisco, TX
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default First Gas Airplane Recommendation Wanted

Chris that combo is great! Can't wait till you try it out. BME (Baker Model Engines) are wonderful engine manufacturers. They produce the lightest engines in the world, for their size. A ZDZ 40 would also work in a DP extra 330L, though I wouldn't reccomend it. -Steve
Old 12-31-2001, 11:32 PM
  #7  
My Feedback: (45)
 
bpryor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Wilsonville, OR
Posts: 1,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default First Gas Airplane Recommendation Wanted

Steve_JR says:

"A ZDZ 40 would also work in a DP extra 330L, though I wouldn't reccomend it."

Steve, maybe you could elaborate on why you say that.

I agree with the others that the AW Edge would be the best....if you want to build. If you're set on an ARF as you stated, then I'd go with the DP Extra. The ZDZ will be a perfect motor for it and the plane performs great for IMAC style flying, but will also give you the option of going 3D if you decide to try it.

It is excellent quality and builds easily and quickly. Without mods it will come out about 15.5 - 15.75 lbs with the ZDZ. Don't let the weight scare you, it has over 1200 sq ins of wing and will have great vertical and still land at a crawl at that weight. It is a very precise flying plane and has excellent stall characteristics (no tendancy to tip stall). The CG will come out at about 6.25" with this engine, stock rear elevator servo location, and no added counter weight, which is about 1/2" behind the rearmost recommended CG....but don't let this bother you, it has been reported by virtually everyone that the recommended CG is very conservative and the plane flies great at this CG.

Bill
Old 12-31-2001, 11:39 PM
  #8  
Administrator
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (12)
 
Nathan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,228
Received 7 Likes on 2 Posts
Default First Gas Airplane Recommendation Wanted

Since it's not an airplane i'm in a hurry to get (was thinking next winter's project), the DP Extra sounds decent.

Bpryor, you did a review with pics of this airplane didn't you? I know there were a few threads at rco going on the this airplane, and you were a big part of them. Where (without taking til next Christmas at rco to locate them) can I get that info?
Old 01-01-2002, 12:06 AM
  #9  
My Feedback: (6)
 
Steve_JR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Frisco, TX
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default First Gas Airplane Recommendation Wanted

yeah but you could fly much better slow aerobatics with a glow engine. That weight of 16 sounds a little high for a plane meant to be 12 pounds. Harriers would not be very pretty. Just my opinion but I would go with a Saito 1.80 on that plane. -Steve
Old 01-01-2002, 01:08 AM
  #10  
My Feedback: (40)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Waynetown, IN
Posts: 2,476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default ZDZ 40

I do not want to sound bias, but the ZDZ40 weighs the same as the BME50. Therefore, and obviously, unless you already have one on the way, the BME50 would be a much better choice of engines. I have the BME44 and I am thinking of trading it in for the BME50. The dimensions are the same as the 44 with the exception that from bottom to the top of the cylinder, it is 1/4" taller. The 50 weighs a mere 3 oz more than the 44 which means it indeed does weigh the same as the ZDZ40. This engine would allow a 1/4 scale plane to spin a good sized three blade prop, how about a 20 or 21" prop? BTW, I have the HANGAR9 1/4 scale cap and with the BME44 I got it to weigh 13.75lbs, not bad for a 1/4 scale gasser.
Old 01-01-2002, 01:36 AM
  #11  
Administrator
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (12)
 
Nathan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,228
Received 7 Likes on 2 Posts
Default First Gas Airplane Recommendation Wanted

BME, eh? Just checked out their website. I didn't see any information on the BME50, only the BME44. The BME44 and ZDZ40 are very similar in weight, and the BME is only $50 higher with a BME Muffler ($100 more if you get the other muffler).

Is the BME50 not available yet? I would be curious how that comes out in price compared to the ZDZ40. I like the ZDZ because of what I've read, how they look, and their price. I would have to do more reading to see if I could agree that BME rate as well as the ZDZ's. Theres a few people I'd just believe if they said BME was a great engine, I just don't know you that well... yet

I've been interested in the H9 Cap as a possible gasser. Did you make any mods to make it come out at that weight? Do you have any pics of it with the BME? I'd love to see em if you do.
Old 01-01-2002, 02:39 AM
  #12  
My Feedback: (45)
 
bpryor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Wilsonville, OR
Posts: 1,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default DP Extra Review + other stuff

Plane Insane,

You can see the full review at: http://www.rcaerosport.com in the review section.

>>I didn't see any information on the BME50, only the BME44.

There isn't any info on the Web site even though it has been out for months. I did a rant on this in another thread. Just typical(meaning lots of R/C manufacturer's are guilty of this) very poor marketing on BME's part.

Steve_JR,

>>That weight of 16 sounds a little high for a plane meant to be 12 pounds.

That just isn't the case. It was originally advertised to be at 12 lbs with a glow motor, which would be exceptional for a plane this big. Remember, this plane has 1220 sq in of wing area and is 74" long. It is very nearly the same size as the 29% AW Edge and has more wing area. The plane flies fantastically at 16lbs with a gas motor, and there are many more people that have flown it this way that share my opinion.

CAPtain232,

>>ZDZ40 weighs the same as the BME50....

Unfortunately that isn't the case. The 3 oz difference between the 44 and 50 is also incorrect information that started at BME. Actual numbers are 6.75 oz difference between the motors and the BME 50 comes out at about 4lbs 2oz with a 4 oz mount and pitts-style muffler while the ZDZ 40 is about 5 oz less. These are actual numbers including mount, muffler, ignition, plug.

Another plus of the ZDZ is that it is smoother, though this is more of an subjective opinion that something that is quantifiable, but I have read plenty of other people's opinions that agree.

...and let's not forget the price difference, which is significant...

Don't take this to mean I don't think the BME is a good motor, because I do (I had a 44 in a AW 29% Edge) but I believe the ZDZ40 and Taurus 2.6 are both ahead of the BME in design.

BTW, to open this up further, I have made it clear that I believe the Taurus is the best motor in this size range, though it is the least known. It is the smoothest, has the best designed bottom end, the longest warranty(at 3 years) and the most power. Power is equivilant to the BME 50 and Brison 3.2....and yes I have actual data to confirm this. The weight is 4lbs 1 oz with pitts-style muffler. It is not cheap at $529, but in this case you get what you pay for. IMHO, it is a truly great motor. www.taurus-engines.net ...and guess what they're as guilty as BME at not keeping their site up-to-date and the 2.6 isn't even shown on it. Sigh. :-(

Bill
Old 01-01-2002, 01:17 PM
  #13  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: hampden, ME
Posts: 1,058
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: ZDZ 40

Originally posted by CAPtain232
This engine would allow a 1/4 scale plane to spin a good sized three blade prop, how about a 20 or 21" prop? BTW, I have the HANGAR9 1/4 scale cap and with the BME44 I got it to weigh 13.75lbs, not bad for a 1/4 scale gasser.

I will be spinning a Fuchs 20X10 3 blade on my BME 50. Will also be running the J+A Peacekeeper muffler on it. I will let you all know how it does in the spring.

Thats a LOT of engine for a 1/4 cap, man!!
Old 01-01-2002, 01:21 PM
  #14  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: hampden, ME
Posts: 1,058
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: DP Extra Review + other stuff

Originally posted by bpryor
. Power is equivilant to the BME 50 and Brison 3.2....and yes I have actual data to confirm this.
Bill
Could you post the numbers, please?
Old 01-01-2002, 05:49 PM
  #15  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Hammond, IN
Posts: 3,262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default First Gas Airplane Recommendation Wanted

My buddy has a 29% Aeroworks Edge with a ZDZ-40. It is about 14lbs, built stock, no special effort for weight reduction. The plane flies like a rocket. The engine is powerful, smooth, and has excellent throttle response. I just don't see what possible advantage there could be in using either a BME (44 or 50) or any Taurus engine. You guys like carbs sticking out the side and spending more money? q;}

Another buddy, EJB, has a 29% Edge with a Brison 3.2. It is about 15 lbs. Like the ZDZ-40, it has more than enough power. It isn't as smooth though, and costs significantly more. EJB built both planes.
Old 01-01-2002, 06:15 PM
  #16  
My Feedback: (45)
 
bpryor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Wilsonville, OR
Posts: 1,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default No reason to run other motor than ZDZ?

Chris 540:

Here are my numbers and also from Michael Glavin. Ben Diss has also reported equivilent numbers on his Taurus with the Zinger Pro 22X8.

My numbers are with about a quart of gas through the motor. These were taken on a 55 degree day at about 300ft. My numbers will go up 1-400 RPM when the engine breaks in. I think Michael's motor was broken in.

Zinger Pro
20X10 - 7340
22X8 - 7200
22X10 - 6480

Menz Ultra
21X12 - 6440

Michael Glavin:

Mejzlik 20X10 - 8200 (OOOPS. that's 20X10 not 22X10. That would be impressive on a 22X10)

I think you'll find these numbers are very equivilent to the BME 50 and Brison 3.2. Numbers are posted in various forums on RCO and the SA list for these engines, plus RCFaq. Make sure you are comparing apples to apples if you find numbers....the same prop being the most important factor.


Diablo:

>>I just don't see what possible advantage there could be in using either a BME (44 or 50) or any Taurus engine.

First I will qualify my following statements by agreeing with Diablo that the ZDZ40 is a great deal, a really good motor, and definitely enough for the AW 29% Edge. There's no reason you'd have to put more in....but with that said here's the reason to run the Taurus:

Significantly more power with about a 4-5 oz weight penalty.

The Taurus turns about 400-500RPM more than the ZDZ 40 on a Zinger Pro 22X8. This is not a small amount. It more than makes up for the 4-5 oz difference in weight. If you can have more power with virtually no drawbacks, why not? Of course that assumes price is not an issue. If you consider price then you need to weigh (no pun intended) more issues...and here they are:

The Taurus is smoother(this is subjective, but has been the opinion of several people that have run both engines), and comes with a 3 year warranty...and although the Taurus company is not fast, they are very honest and dilligent.

To me, between the extra power, long warranty, and definitely the smoothness, way more than make up for the extra $100, and definitely is a reason to seriously consider the Taurus over any other 40-50 size motor.

Bill
Old 01-01-2002, 06:56 PM
  #17  
My Feedback: (6)
 
Steve_JR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Frisco, TX
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default First Gas Airplane Recommendation Wanted

I think what this thread is amounting to is pick the engine that best suits your wallet! BME, Taurus, and ZDZ are all good, just pick your choice, choose your pick! -Steve
Old 01-01-2002, 06:57 PM
  #18  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
3DRC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Spanish Fort, AL
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default BME

I too am a BIG fan of BME. Keith has done a great job with the 44 and he has even improved it with the 50. If you have not bought a motor yet, get the BME 50. As far as kits go, the Aeroworks is great. I have had 2 of them and they were fantastic. Though, the first one was not as much fun as the second one.... don't ask, it wasn't pretty....
Old 01-01-2002, 08:20 PM
  #19  
My Feedback: (45)
 
bpryor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Wilsonville, OR
Posts: 1,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default BME fan

Hi Bean,

Have you ever run a Taurus yourself, or seen one run? I too have had BMEs(one 44) and was very happy with it, but I've become a total convert after owning a Taurus. There really is a significant difference in the two motor's design and operation. Maybe we can get Michael Glavin to throw in his two cents worth since he has many times more experience than me with many BMEs and Taurus'. Michael's the convert that talked me into trying one and turned me into a convert. I'm happy he did.

Steve_JR:

You're absolutely right Steve. All of them are really good motors and any of them will serve well in the AW 29% Edge, and of course many other planes.

Bill
Old 01-01-2002, 08:25 PM
  #20  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: hampden, ME
Posts: 1,058
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default First Gas Airplane Recommendation Wanted

Thanks for the info, Bill. I will compare when I get my 50 running.

I never knew Taurus had such a large lineup of motors! I never hear anything about them though. Are they a new company? Or just not well known?

Chris
Old 01-01-2002, 08:31 PM
  #21  
My Feedback: (45)
 
bpryor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Wilsonville, OR
Posts: 1,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default BME 50 numbers and Taurus company

Hi Chris 540,

I would also like to know your numbers on your 50 when you get it running. The more data the better. Make sure and post your numbers on RCFaq.com too.

Taurus has been around a while, but they are small and have done virtually no marketing to promote their motors. I didn't know anything about them either until Michael Glavin turned me on to them a few months ago. I'll tell you what, it's lucky they aren't any better known because they can't handle the business they have now. There's typically a 3-4 week wait to get a motor from them. I don't know what they'd do if people found out about them.

Bill

PS - In the above post on RPM numbers I goofed and typoed the Mejzlik prop size from Michael Glavin's numbers. It was a 20X10, not a 22X10. That would be pretty impressive. It would mean the Taurus had about 8 HP...not likely.
Old 01-01-2002, 10:05 PM
  #22  
My Feedback: (31)
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Elverta, CA
Posts: 5,295
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default Gassers, there all usable...

With so many engine choices available its hard to ascertain which is best and furthermore by whose standards. Most of all the engines presently offered are good engines, some are better than other’s.

Modelers with a specific engine are generally very passionate about their engine. Human nature suggests that most of us think what we own and use is the best, regardless of how it’s viewed by others. That being said it’s hard to evaluate real/cyber world comparisons. There are many variables such as user interface, altitude, prop size and manufacturer, fuel mix and oils, accumulated time on engine, exhaust system, tachometers, drawing a comparison against other engines with or without specific hands on experience.

I like the Taurus Engines. I realize above average performance, smooth instantaneous transition, incredibly smooth nearly vibration free idle, easy user friendly starting, mounting flexibility with the beam or radial engine mount availability.

I have used and owned most of all the engines offered in the 2.6-3.0 displacement range. My opinion is based on the care and feeding of these engines individually. I have found that an out of the box Taurus 2.6 is superior in many ways to all the other engines I have used thus far… Yes, they’re expensive, however it is a good value. Taurus Engines includes a 3-year warranty, a CNC aluminum radial engine mount, fully automatic C&H Ignition system, light weight design, superiorly engineered lower end or reciprocating assembly which includes single-row pre-loaded bearings supported on either end of the fully counter-balanced double cheek single throw forged crankshaft.

I would also use other’s. I usually purchase an engine which best fits my present need, I own many different engine brands accordingly.

Most of the deciding factor’s have already been covered by others, i.e. initial cost, warranty, performance, weight, Ignition type, included accessories, service and repair concerns, and others…

Taurus Engines has been in business for over twenty years as Southgate Aero, Inc., primarily they have been involved with larger scale “drone” engines and have offered repairs, conversions and engines on a small scale basis. Around 3 years ago Taurus Engines was conceived and marketed as an associate to Southgate Aero, Inc. Taurus can and will repair, convert, modify, any of our engines.

I have a review of my DPM Extra and links to Taurus Engines website as well as a link to some information I provided on the Taurus 2.6 gasser at my website.

http://mglavin.com/Extra330lreview.html
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	502_22.jpg
Views:	26
Size:	10.9 KB
ID:	1141  
Old 01-02-2002, 03:06 PM
  #23  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Hammond, IN
Posts: 3,262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default First Gas Airplane Recommendation Wanted

Hello Bpryor:
What I meant to say about the ZDZ-40 and 29% Edge combo is that it is well matched and by adding power or weight, you're not going to improve the way the plane flies. Sure, there are larger displacement engines that will have more power, but you're increasing the wing loading - that's the downside. More power is always good if it adds no weight. The ZDZ-40 already provides the maximum amount of power the plane could use for precision aerobatics - plenty of speed in the vertical for roll authority. You mention the Taurus 2.6 (adds 6 oz weight and more power). OK, would the ZDZ-60 be better still (adds another 10 oz weight and still more power)? I say it wouldn't because the 40 already provides enough power (for the Edge).

Now, if you choose a different plane with more wing area (and total weight), then either the Taurus 2.6 or the BME 50 would be better choices than the ZDZ-40 (assuming that these engines make more "real world" horsepower).

Last winter, three guys were building 29% Edges in my area. They chose the ZDZ-40, the Brison 3.2, and the ZDZ-60. I didn't think the ZDZ-40 would be enough engine for Imac aerobatics. I was wrong. Seeing them fly is the proof. I like "big power" too.
Old 01-02-2002, 04:58 PM
  #24  
My Feedback: (45)
 
bpryor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Wilsonville, OR
Posts: 1,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default No argument

Hi Diablo,

We are pretty much in agreement. Everything you say regarding wing loading and power is right on. I too know the power of the ZDZ 40 is plenty for the Edge for doing anything you want.

I think I still would go with the Taurus. Part personal bias, and also I don't think the difference in the weight would even be noticeable, but I do think the smoothness is very important, and a little extra power wouldn't hurt anything. Anyway we're down to splitting hairs and like I said, any of the suggested motors will work great in this plane. BTW, how did you friend's plane fly with the Brison 3.2? It weighs an ounce more than the Taurus and has about the same power.

BTW, the actual weight of the ZDZ60 is about a pound more than the ZDZ40. That is a significant difference....and you're right the power would be ridiculous overkill. How did your friend's fly with it? Do you know what the weight came out? I know someone that thinks that motor is appropriate for the DP Extra 330L. Crazy.

Bill
Old 01-02-2002, 06:02 PM
  #25  
EJB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Brison 3.2 ,AW Edge

Hi Bill,
I have the AW Edge (15 lb.)with the Brison 3.2 & it's a great flying plane.The Brison can accelerate my Edge slightly faster vertically at full throttle then my friends' with the the ZDZ 40 but it's no big deal.Yes,the Taurus has similar power to my newer Brison 3.2(Pro Zinger,22x8 @ 7200) but not to my older,broken-in 3.2 that I have on a 18lb.Lanier Cap.It turns a Mejzlik 22x10 @ 7200( hits 7300 on some days).With the Pro Zinger 22x8(7800) it's under propped & just makes alot of noise.The Cap actually accelerates faster vertically then the Edge.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.