RCU Forums

RCU Forums (https://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/)
-   Golden Age, Vintage & Antique RC (https://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/golden-age-vintage-antique-rc-196/)
-   -   Old Orlinre Fairchild kit recommends a Quadra. What would you use? (https://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/golden-age-vintage-antique-rc-196/11629292-old-orlinre-fairchild-kit-recommends-quadra-what-would-you-use.html)

LTJeeper 05-08-2016 07:12 PM

Old Orlinre Fairchild kit recommends a Quadra. What would you use?
Hi All,

I'm getting ready to start building an old Orline Fairchild kit from the 1970's. The kit recommends a Quadra. If I remember right, the original Quadra was a 2 Cu in 2 stroke. I'm thinking the power should be in the same range as a modern 20cc four stroke gas (Saito or Evolution). Some of these other large kits from the 1970's seemed to barely have enough power which makes me think a 30cc might be better (OS and Saito both make a 30cc gas).

What does everyone think?

dingo9882 05-09-2016 02:33 AM


I am not an expert in this field, but what I can say is that the new engines are pretty damn powerful!!. You could be overpowering it with the larger sized engine. With that said I LOVE!! to overpower my planes. So I am a little biased. In my opinion with a larger engine you can always power back. Also, since this is a kit you can reinforce in the areas of the firewall and the surrounding areas to accommodate the larger engine. I say put the bigger engine in to play it safe. You will also need to make sure you will have adequate prop clearance as well. But, from the looks of it you probably have already thought of that!

TomCrump 05-09-2016 06:23 AM

This model was designed with a Quadra in mind. There is more to consider, than just power.

the Quadra will weigh more than a similar sized, more modern, engine. I would assume that the firewall would be designed to carry that weight

If using a modern engine, I would be concerned that nose weight may be required.

My choice for power would be a G-38 , from Zenoah. .I had a G-38 in a similar sized IKON N'West Fairchild.. It had plenty of power.

LTJeeper 05-09-2016 08:18 AM

Agree on ground clearance (especially since this is a tail dragger). The Quadra was big and heavy which is why I'm thinking a smaller engine may still have more power. I'm starting to think the bigger issue may be added nose weight to get the CG right!

LTJeeper 05-09-2016 08:19 AM

G-26 and G-38 were both in the mix. You don't think the G-26 would be more than enough?

TomCrump 05-09-2016 02:31 PM

Originally Posted by LTJeeper (Post 12211578)
G-26 and G-38 were both in the mix. You don't think the G-26 would be more than enough?

A G-26 may have enough power, but you may want the added weight of a G-38.

You could try either, after the model is covered and painted. Choose the one that most easily aids in balance.

LTJeeper 05-09-2016 05:21 PM

That's what i did with my 4-Star 120. It has a ST2300 in the nose.. Zoom. Zoom.

RagwingFan 05-10-2016 06:51 AM

Just stumbled across this post.

I would agree with Tom. The older kits built in the early era of large gas engines were very obviously designed around the weight of those common gas engines. The weight would have been necessary to achieve proper CG. I am building an old Robin Hood 99 kit right now designed back in the 80's or era of Zenoahs and Quadras, US Engines etc. For me, no question, I picked up a NIB magneto Zenoah G-38. I would rather have the mass in the engine vs attaching a lot of weight to a firewall. just personal preference. Even the plans show an old quadra/zenoah engine mounted. That's how the designers created. Stick with what is proven and save some potential headaches. again, just my opinion.

the new era ARFs are built extremely light and they work out well with the new light weight gas engines.

LTJeeper 05-10-2016 08:10 AM

Hard to believe that a bunch of RC fliers can agree on anything but it looks like "add power" instead of "add useless weight" is the winner. I'll see how light I can do the build and let you know in a few months which engine balances her in the right spot.

dennis 05-10-2016 12:17 PM

If that is the Fairchild 22 I'd be more interested in making sure that you don't lose the wings when you fly it. That wing attachment and rigging was under engineered and there were a few failures. It was a great flying model with a Quadra 38 and a Zenoah 38 is also a viable replacement. shame that you can't get any of those $89.00 Quadra's that we all knew and loved.



LTJeeper 05-10-2016 01:32 PM

It is the Fairchild. And I thought the wing attachment looked like it could use a little strengthening. I've never seen an Orline kit before. They weren't very common in the mountains of NC where I learned to fly (in little fields). The Veco .19 and Fox .25s were the rule. 40 size planes were considered large.

jeffo 05-10-2016 01:43 PM

Dennis is spot on.I have the kit,and from what I've read,the wings were known to fold.The G38 is a good fit,just build accordingly.I was going to sheet the wing from spar to leading edge,and center,since it has an open wing.jeffo

dennis 05-10-2016 02:13 PM

I would also check your wood in the kit. we found lots of pulpy wood where it was load bearing. Do not be afraid to replace substandard wood immediately. There is plenty of wing area and it can handle a little more weight when the alternative is picking up the pieces and going home.
Orline had a few interesting kits but I'll bet wood selection was probably a part in the demise of the kit line. Strictly my opinion and not to be considered as fact.

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:02 PM.

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.