Spacewalker II power?
07-29-2007, 06:13 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: El Dorado, CA
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spacewalker II power?
Why I ask: I am a real world GA pilot and prefer my models to fly a lot more scale like than most kits which always seem over powered (at least to me).
The Spacewalker lists as an 11 to 13 pounder and the engines recommended are .90 to 1.20 two stroke or 1.20 to 1.60 four stroke. I have a new Saito .82 four stroke sitting on the shelf and have been considering mounting it. Suicidal? (:-)
(My idea of aerobatics is a roll or loop)
Hopefully someone else out there has tried the under powered approach.
The Spacewalker lists as an 11 to 13 pounder and the engines recommended are .90 to 1.20 two stroke or 1.20 to 1.60 four stroke. I have a new Saito .82 four stroke sitting on the shelf and have been considering mounting it. Suicidal? (:-)
(My idea of aerobatics is a roll or loop)
Hopefully someone else out there has tried the under powered approach.
07-29-2007, 06:42 PM
#2
My Feedback: (2)
RE: Spacewalker II power?
ORIGINAL: Don41
Why I ask: I am a real world GA pilot and prefer my models to fly a lot more scale like than most kits which always seem over powered (at least to me).
The Spacewalker lists as an 11 to 13 pounder and the engines recommended are .90 to 1.20 two stroke or 1.20 to 1.60 four stroke. I have a new Saito .82 four stroke sitting on the shelf and have been considering mounting it. Suicidal? (:-)
(My idea of aerobatics is a roll or loop)
Hopefully someone else out there has tried the under powered approach.
Why I ask: I am a real world GA pilot and prefer my models to fly a lot more scale like than most kits which always seem over powered (at least to me).
The Spacewalker lists as an 11 to 13 pounder and the engines recommended are .90 to 1.20 two stroke or 1.20 to 1.60 four stroke. I have a new Saito .82 four stroke sitting on the shelf and have been considering mounting it. Suicidal? (:-)
(My idea of aerobatics is a roll or loop)
Hopefully someone else out there has tried the under powered approach.
07-30-2007, 05:13 AM
#3
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 4,865
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spacewalker II power?
why not put on the smallest reccommended engine, then for a more scale like takeoff don't use full throttle. better to have the power avialable and not use it, than need full power and not have it.
07-30-2007, 12:12 PM
#4
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: El Dorado, CA
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spacewalker II power?
One big reason is that I have a .82 but the 1.20 will cost 320.00 (:-). Seriously though, I believe you fellows are probably correct but I was hoping to hear that someone out there is successfully flying the Spacewalker on less than recommended power.
I had considered a gas engine but I suspect that the ignition system frequently causes radio interference problems.
I had considered a gas engine but I suspect that the ignition system frequently causes radio interference problems.
07-30-2007, 12:34 PM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: winnipeg,
MB, CANADA
Posts: 950
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Spacewalker II power?
If you can get your 82 to turn a 14x6 at 9000 RPM, and it should, you will have over 7 lbs of static thrust; should fly well at 10 lbs, will be getting iffy at 13. Google "Aero design propeller selector". Safe download accurate program, a good starting placefor your question.
