I’m planning my next build in few months just trying to get some opinions.
it looks like im gonna get the OS 55 AX sooner or later and I’m kinda looking at the airplanes it matches.

I was thinking Sig somthin’ extra, TF Contender, tower uproar 40

Because the TF contender 60 advertised to be built in like 10-16 hours… of course its gonna take more time but if not that much more maybe I can do it in 2-3 days marathon…

Which motor will fit the contender best 55AX or tower 61?

How is the contender in flight compare to SSE?

Thanks
Alex

I vote for the SSE. I have a .55AX in my Four Star, and it is awesome. It should be perfect in the SSE.

I think the 55AX is too much engine for the Uproar. I am building it's sibling, the Dazzler, and it's much smaller and lighter. I think the .46AX is about the top end you would want in that airframe.

I am not familiar with the Contender. It is a nice looking plane, but I do not think it would be as much fun to fly as a Somethin' Extra with a .55AX.

Good luck

the SSE is laser cut, right?
i'm sure the SSE is one level better, but what bothers me the SSE is a full build airplane, it seems the contender builds faster.
i have plenty of time to decide it will appear some how.

Pretty sure the SSE is laser cut. I know the Four Stars are. I don't believe that the Contender builds faster than an SSE.

The Contender is late Sixties/early Seventies aerodynamics and building technology. If you're not an oldster that built one many years ago and who just wants one out of nostalgia, I'd forget about it. By today's standards the Contender is heavy and its rudder authority is atroscious and lacking force. What little force there is will yaw to the right, but will roll the model to the left when right rudder is given. That sucks. There are no fixes with that model.

It was revolutionary when it came out and taught a lot of us something new about flying and aerodynamics. Today it is just revolting.


Ed Cregger

I have a Contender with an OS 55AX. The Contender has the uptipped wing tip with working flaps. Of all the planes I have this is truly my best sport flying plane. It has not bad habits, with flaps extended the landing approach is steep with a very gentle roll out. I've heard others say the rudder does not have adequate authority but I can knife-edge my Contender as far as I want with very little coupling. The 55AX is perfect power as I've had Contenders in the past with everything from an OS40, OS61, OS70 FS (also very good), OS90 FS (too much weitht). The 55 has more than adequate power, good veritcal performance, excellent idle, and looks great. You won't be disappointed if you decide on the Contender/OS55 AX combination.

Delete

The .55 AX is a great sport flying engine in pretty much any ARF designed for a .60, it will not 3-D a 60 size plane. It is a little under powered for a kit built 60 size plane, kit's are heavy compared to an ARF of the same size, something do do with the weight of wood compared to air and covering?? Up-Roars!!!!!!! I have built 8 of them, two or three kits and the rest I used my own wood and cut my own kits from templates I made from one of the kits. I love that little plane and the better looking Dazzler, they fly the same but the Dazzler is a better looking bird. I never stuck in a bigger engine then the OS .46 LA in any of mine, except for some engine break in's. I have flown a few I built for other guys with the OS .46 FX. It's a fun fly plane and just doesn't call for a bigger engine. Sometimes I think rubber band power would work on them, that's a heck of a wing they have!!! I no longer have an Up-Roar but I do fly a 60 size Hots, same wing design and will fly the same.

thanks for the replies guys.

i have two used motors that just sitting doing nothing 46 Ax and 46 LA and i'm in need for 55 AX, i thought to sell them and get one 55 AX.

the contender looks good and i was planning to build it at some stage if its a quick build if not i'll build something else.

i see much more SSE fly around then contenders by some reason i guess.

Alex

If you like building and a quick build at that try a Swany Primo .40 profile. The AX 55 is a good engine for that 3D type model.

It is okay if our opinions are different. But anyone building and flying a Contender will have the adverse roll characteristic staring them square in the face when the model becomes airborne. That's not an opinion. It is a fact.

The issue of whether you find this Contender to be a terrific sport model is another matter entirely. That is subjective and it depends upon ones' flying style and opinion. I don't have a problem with that. 3D, fun fly and pattern types count on an effective rudder that does not contribute inputs into axes other than the one intended for the surface. When the Contender was introduced, it offered all pilots a different and new style of flying style. With a conventional .60 sized engine, the model was very high powered. With the extraordinarily thick wing, one could walk in the model nose high without fear of stalling during landing. The model would only snap-roll and spin when under power with lots of control throw. It was a great windy weather flyer and it was durable. Lots of folks enjoyed the jet-like looks of the model.


Ed Cregger

The resale price of two stroke engines is pretty low. You have two great engines in the .46LA and .46AX, but you probably won't get enough in selling them to come close to a .55AX. Plus, in the future you will probably have another use for one or both of these, and you'll end up buying a new one.

Unless you have no choice, I wouldn't sell them. Keep an eye out for sales. I got a .55AX last December from Tower, with free shipping, for $119. Hobby People has really good sales sometimes too, particularly on Magnum four strokes.

Good luck.

I do not own a Contender but I maidened one for a buddy last year. The plane tracked like it was on a rails and was a joy to fly. This was also the 1st plane I flew with flaps and the flaps really slowed the landing approach. I would go fo the Contender if I were you.
Anthony

Flaps were not part of the original Contender's design. It would be nice if the present owners/distributors of the Top Flite Contender specified which version they are selling.

Oddly, flaps are not really needed on the Contender. The ultra thick airfoil can be flown at extremely high AoA numbers that slow the model far quicker than conventional flaps. This doesn't mean that they shouldn't be added to the model just for the sheer joy of using them.

I always said (to myself), self, that if I were to build another Top Flite Contender (.60 size) again, I would build it using a two-stroke .60 to .91 (same physical size and about the same power output) that was mounted sideways, in the sidewinder position, and using a power boosting muffler. That would look really great and would go like stink.

Also, use a computer radio so that the left roll upon right rudder input tendency can be dialed out via the Tx's computer.


Ed Cregger