Notices

New Somenized (TM) 69", Yak-54

 
Old 06-22-2007, 12:21 AM
  #51  
chatorivera
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: RIOVERDE, MEXICO
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54


ORIGINAL: Rezagh

I would think OS will give you marginal power. You may need a little bigger engine if you need 3D power. 1Oz difference is very acceptable.

Reza
Reza: Does anyone have tried a gas engine in this plane, like evolution 26 o 3W 28, I want to buy my first gasser and think in the 86" yak, but the size is to big to carry in my car, so I think this would be a nice plane to own. I'm pretty sure that with a glow engine this is a fantastic plane, but I'm worried about the price of the glow fuel. Thank for your response.

José Antonio Rivera
chatorivera is offline  
Old 06-22-2007, 09:59 AM
  #52  
GeorgeAgs
Junior Member
 
GeorgeAgs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Aguascalientes, MEXICO
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

Jose Antonio,

A friend of mine has a Saito 180 in a FuntanaX 100, and it has an awesome performance. The glow fuel consumption is not as 120 AX (much less) and the vertical performance is amazing. I think this engine would be excellent for this plane. I'm thinking about getting this combination.

I haven't tryed gas engines but I don't know if they are more problematic.

Regards

Jorge Medina
GeorgeAgs is offline  
Old 06-23-2007, 12:33 AM
  #53  
Rezagh
Senior Member
My Feedback: (73)
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Rancho Santa MargaritaCA
Posts: 1,915
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

Hi Jose,

This plane can't take a gas engine. Vibration will kill the plane Sorry.

Reza
Rezagh is offline  
Old 06-23-2007, 10:38 PM
  #54  
chatorivera
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: RIOVERDE, MEXICO
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

ORIGINAL: Rezagh

Hi Jose,

This plane can't take a gas engine. Vibration will kill the plane Sorry.

Reza
Thanks Rezagh, so in this case, which would be the best 4 stroke glow engine for this plane, my flying site is 980 meters above sea level. Thanks for your response again.

José Antonio Rivera.
chatorivera is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 02:53 AM
  #55  
Rezagh
Senior Member
My Feedback: (73)
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Rancho Santa MargaritaCA
Posts: 1,915
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

Hi Jose,

Yes a two or four stroke either one would do the job. If you are only flying the plane for 3D, I would recommend a 4 stroke otherwise, an OS1.20AX is also very 3D capable engine and once it's broken in, it will give you a great torque and punch.

At your altitude, you should be fine with either OS 1.20 (rwo stroke) or Saito 1.25 or YS 1.10.

Thank you,
Reza
Rezagh is offline  
Old 06-24-2007, 11:13 PM
  #56  
chatorivera
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: RIOVERDE, MEXICO
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

O.K. Reza, thanks for your response. Do you have any idea when the plane would be available?, I check QQ website and it only say late june. Also, what type of servos will be the best for this size of plane in particular, I fly with futaba and prefer this brand and finally, for the saito 1.25 wich would be the most adequate propeller. Thanks again.

José Antonio Rivera.
chatorivera is offline  
Old 06-25-2007, 10:46 PM
  #57  
JR3D
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Boonville, IN
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

I have a YS 1.10 and it rips saito 125's to bits it will spin a 17x4 with authority, any of the 125's I've seen even on 30% heli crack, they still are kinda sad.
JR3D is offline  
Old 07-04-2007, 10:08 AM
  #58  
JR3D
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Boonville, IN
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

Hey Reza, I may have plans for my YS110, would it be too heavy if I put a YS 140 or one of the new 170s on there? It would only end up being 3 ounces heavier than the 120 AX. Would this extra weight kill the performance of this aircraft?
JR3D is offline  
Old 07-05-2007, 01:37 PM
  #59  
jeffbyrd66
Junior Member
 
jeffbyrd66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Bend, IN
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

Reza,

The manual dose not list the overall length of this aircraft can you post lenght for me.

Thanks and can't wait til this out for us to buy....
jeffbyrd66 is offline  
Old 07-05-2007, 04:02 PM
  #60  
EduardoC
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: MetepecEstado de Mexico, MEXICO
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

two mexican buddies... hahaha

This airplane will become a best seller, probably killing the market of the 73... who knows :P
EduardoC is offline  
Old 07-06-2007, 11:34 AM
  #61  
JR3D
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Boonville, IN
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

seeing how this thing performs with a heavier engine than mine it should kick some serious @$$, Ill be using 5955s in the tail and 5925s on the ailerons considering that the rons don't need as much holding power, if they do I will get two more 5955s. That YS is a real stump puller on 30% so it should be fine.
JR3D is offline  
Old 07-20-2007, 06:38 AM
  #62  
Jonathan.Lam
Senior Member
 
Jonathan.Lam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: london, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

Will a saito 125 give this plane good 3D performance?

Thanks
Jonathan
Jonathan.Lam is offline  
Old 07-20-2007, 10:35 PM
  #63  
Rezagh
Senior Member
My Feedback: (73)
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Rancho Santa MargaritaCA
Posts: 1,915
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

Jonathan,
Saito 125 is a an awesome engine for this plane

JR3D,
5955 is way over kill, 5945 should be the perfect match I guess you will be fine with 5925, as a matter of fact, no guessing you will be fine with 5925

Thank you,
Reza
Rezagh is offline  
Old 07-26-2007, 11:44 PM
  #64  
kochj
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Victoria, MN
Posts: 3,933
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

THis plane is about the same price as the 73" but you can get by with a much cheaper power supply. Wonder how the flight performances will differ between the two?

I had a Funtana 100X and did not like the way the tail feathers where built, or lack there of.... I am intersted in how this plane flies....
ANyone flown this yet? Is there any pulling or are the rolls very axial?

I had a 120Ax in the Funtana100X and thought it had lacked pulling power, especially out of hovers..... Others said the the 125 saito was not very good either.... But then it was stated by another person that he had a saito 125 and sold it for a 120AX and he loved it...

I had some damage to my plane and then repairs, so it is possible that it was these repairs that caused it to have more wieght and therefore it didn't have good excess power....

I think most would want a saito 180 in this plane, so that you could get out of troublle when you needed to ....

Just my thoughts

Justin

kochj is offline  
Old 07-27-2007, 12:38 AM
  #65  
mxcop114
My Feedback: (5)
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Tuckerton, NJ
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

A 180 would be overkill. Guys will start putting heavy motors in the plane, then complain that it doesn't fly well because they have over loaded it just like has happened with so many other planes. If you stick with the recommended engines you will be treated with a light, properly loaded wonderful flying plane as it was designed to be. The Saito 125, O.S. 120 and YS 1.10 should all be perfect matches for this plane, I see people ruin the good flying characteristics of planes by doing this and it's upsetting considering the time that has been spent with the designing of these planes. Watch the video of Reza flying the plane, that motor is new and still breaking in and has what I would consider more than enough power.

Lee
mxcop114 is offline  
Old 07-27-2007, 10:56 PM
  #66  
kochj
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Victoria, MN
Posts: 3,933
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

A Saito 180 is the same wieght as the Recomended OS 1.20? Not sure where this would be considered OVERloading the WIng area in this plane?
If you read about the next copetitor of this plane, you will have mixed opions.... The Funtana 100X
It is almost the same plane, as far as weight is concerned! Perhaps the QQ 69" is more weight!..
I had the Funtana 100x.. and a 1.20 AX in it.... and It needed more power for what I do with a plane....
The QQ Video shows mainly high speed flight... and the hovering shows to have marginal performance.... If you mess up then Look forward to trying to place the egnie back on the plane! It will separate!.....
I am not saying that is poor quility (in no way would I say that) but you need to understand that the current trend in arobatic planes is to make them very very light! and when it takes a crushing blow, it will need some repair..... I will say, that my funtana held up quite well! it did a carwheel and had very minor damage ( I had poured thin ca down the wings) and that kept alll the little pieces from falling out...

This plane is built light, just like the funtana 100X when you tip it over due to a gust of wind, and becasue of the marginal power pull out, it will take a dive!...
You may claim to be the best pilot out there but when you get in trouble, it is good to have that extra muscle to get you out!...

For pattern and mild arobatics and mild hovering a 1.20 may work fine...
If you fly mainly Hucking 3D, a 1254 or 1.29 2-stroke will leave you wanting....

GO for what ever you want, I don't really care,,, I just wanted to share my experience with a very simular plane and a power source....
I just wanted to try and warn those so they don't get that same setup and then wish they hadn't gone that direction for what they needed and intended to use this plane for...

Justin
kochj is offline  
Old 07-28-2007, 08:39 PM
  #67  
mxcop114
My Feedback: (5)
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Tuckerton, NJ
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

Hey Justin,
People will do what they want anyway. You wrote in your post, "You may claim to be the best pilot out there but when you get in trouble, it is good to have that extra muscle to get you out!...". I hope that is not directed at me because I have never claimed such a thing and am far from the best. I have flown the Funtana 100X with a YS 1.10 and it has more than enough power depending on your elevation. When I said about overloading this plane I wasn't speaking about the 180 specifically, it was just in general. I should have never posted that because I have been around for a long time and know what will come out of it, a million different opinions which everyone is entitled to. I would wait for people to get this plane in the air, maybe fly it yourself, then post your opinions on the performance. Every plane has different flying characteristics, this one may not take a dive like others. Lets keep this forum positive and on line for what it was intended for, passing on information regarding the QQ line of aircraft.

Thanks,
Lee
mxcop114 is offline  
Old 07-29-2007, 11:04 PM
  #68  
kochj
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Victoria, MN
Posts: 3,933
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

mxcop114,
You are correct about that... It is a can or worms ready to be opend (as far as the engien preferences)
And the part about the best pilot thing was merly a generlization... Please know that I do not want to go out and upset someone...
In all reality this not the Funtana 100x, but the weight and size of this plane is almost identicle to it.... I just wanted to possibly save people some frustration when setting up there plane...
There are many variences in the wood, glue ect between manufactures ect .... So hey, this is a totally different plane right?


Idealy I hope the OS 1.20 AX 2-stroke works perfect for this aircraft! It is a half the price of a Saito 180 and no one wants to inverst more in something than nessecary....
I was dissapointed in the motor performance of the 1.20AX in funtana100X I realy wished that My setup had a possitive outcome... I wracked my brain trying to figure out why some liked it and I didn't! I tried many diffent props pitch, manufact., and even tried going up the 30% nitro to get some 500rpm's more out of the engine and still no go! I also broke the engine in to exact specks in the MAN article on how to do it.... I also checked my rpms to what others were geting out of this engine and mine were right on with what others were getting out of os 1.20 AX so I know that it was not a bum engine or prop ect....So it was a very educated and researched comment.... This is why I thought that I had some hard facts to back up my prior statement! I was not pulling this out of the air!

Who knows? I could have had just a very heavy plane! I never weighted it ready to fly! IT is very possible that I had some crapy balsa, or plywood (which is what all the light planes are mainly composed of now, very little balsa) and that is why it didn't have much pulll out?

Also, the plane in the video is a prototype QQ 69" Yak 54 right? Are they not hand selected wood when these are made? usually much lighter that what will come out of the China factory? So it is plausible that this protype will fly much better than the ones that come out of the factory because the wood is not hand selected!?
This was a big upset with the Lanier 87" Yak... WIth claims of a 16.5-17.5 Flying wieght when the actuall weight was up in the 20+ pound range....

I think that my experience cannot be transposed to this plane.... QQ has fantastic aircrfts and He himself has said that this plane is one of his fav's!!
He will take this plane out and practice his routines with this one before he takes out the 100" or the not so small 120" So You can expect this plane to bring in the performance that he has talked about.....

Hey, perhaps QQ would send my out one of these to test out and then he could make me a believer out of me? I would then give a very Un-bias test result about this plane!!
Now that would be putting the money where the mouth is !! (JK)

mxcop114,
You have good insight though, and I guess I went over the top... as this is a QQ support furom... Not a build forum.... I forgot this..
I do look forward to the testing of this plane... I hope that everyone loves the plaen as much as QQ... He must be quite excited with all of his recent Yaks that have come out recently..... I envy him and all that work with him... He has a dream job and that we should all be lucky enough to have at least for one day out of our lives!




Justin



kochj is offline  
Old 07-29-2007, 11:41 PM
  #69  
Rezagh
Senior Member
My Feedback: (73)
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Rancho Santa MargaritaCA
Posts: 1,915
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

Hi Guys,

When I did the video, engine had hardly two tanks through it. In fact the video is of my second or third flight and never did break it in either. At that time I flew the plane with an APC 16x8. Top speed was awesome but pull out of the hover and thrust wasn't quite there! After about a gallon and half, suddenly I had a new motor, I am not exaggerating if I told you I gained about 25-30% more power. I finally got an APC 17x6 and WOLLA, it was a whole different plane. Thrust was awesome and pull outs were FAST and with Authority. I need to do another video to show you this. Give me sometime and I will do it.

For guys that like to see a solid mid-range torque I recommend a YS 1.10. With the OS you still need to carry the throttle around half but no problems to bail out unless you are in high altitude. I really like the combo and I think a YS 1.10 is also a great match.

BTW, stay tuned an electric conversion of this plane will be coming soon as well.

Cheers,
Reza
Rezagh is offline  
Old 07-30-2007, 11:21 PM
  #70  
m.t.p
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: mcallen, TX
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

hey reza, will an o.s. 160...give the 69" yak good performance with out making it a big time over kill?
m.t.p is offline  
Old 07-31-2007, 07:54 AM
  #71  
kochj
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Victoria, MN
Posts: 3,933
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

Rezagh,
I just looked at the exteneded video of the 69" on RCAviator.com and the OS 120 AX and it looked to be a good match...
There was even a part where you pulled out very nicely out of a hover...
It appears to be a great flying plane...
I can undeerstand why QQ likes to play around with that one... Light and nimble...

Also I read some previoous plost that the 120AX had given you a slight nose heavy setup....\
I had not read this prior to prev statements about a 180 Saito.... being a good choice
I am sure that some may beable to correct this with a servo located in the back for a rudder instead of the pull-pull.
Weight is weight though, and this may change the good flying setup that the stock gives you.... Center location of the weight..

If the 1.20 AX would give me the same flying plane that you had in the videos, I am sold..
Heck, a tunded pipe and header would even out the weight dispersion in giving a less nose heavy plane and be just right, with a few 500rpms!... But perhaps you didn't even need them...



Justin
kochj is offline  
Old 07-31-2007, 12:01 PM
  #72  
Rezagh
Senior Member
My Feedback: (73)
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Rancho Santa MargaritaCA
Posts: 1,915
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

Hi M.t.p:

OS 1.60 is not an option! I think OS 1.20AX or YS 1.10 is plenty of power.

Hi Justin,

You don't need a tuned pipe. Also I'd like to make a comment about wood selection. OEM doesn not really hand select the wood to build the Prototypes for us. I really doubt that you can find even 1/2 lbs difference weighing 50-100 of these out of the box. It's a small plane and really light mostly because of the way it was designed and constructed.

If you watched the videos on my website and you liked the power, keep in mind those videos were with a brand new engine. I truly like the power NOW. It almost rockets out of hover.

Balance is fine without spinner. I am using a 2 cell Li-Ion battery. If you use regular NIMH, most likely you will have a more tail heavy model but after getting 30 flights or so I think I like the balance where it is.

Thank you,
Reza
Rezagh is offline  
Old 08-09-2007, 11:52 AM
  #73  
Jonathan.Lam
Senior Member
 
Jonathan.Lam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: london, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

Would the saito 125 give me good verticle performance? How about prop hanging?
I kow rezagh answered my question on if it would be a good choice for it, but i really dont want to waste money on getting a plane which woudnt have enough power for good verticle performance, and wont be able to do prop hangs, torque rolls ect.

Thanks in advance
Jonathan
Jonathan.Lam is offline  
Old 08-10-2007, 11:26 AM
  #74  
cje0114
My Feedback: (27)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: carteret, NJ
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

I wound up putting the Saito 1.25 on mine. I'll let you know how it is after I put the maiden flight on tomorrow. As far as I can tell though, this engine is going to be plenty of power on this plane. I'm a touch above 8 1/4 pounds RTF, and I'm using an APC 16.5 x 5w prop spinning 93-9400 rpm's.

Now, I have an issue that maybe Reza can help me out with. It seems that my landing gear might have sneaked past QC. it seems to be over bent so to say. the wheels are pointing in since the curve in the gear goes too far. It really looks stupid like this, and it probably takes about 3 inches off the width of the gear. I can post pictures later.

Chris
cje0114 is offline  
Old 08-10-2007, 09:31 PM
  #75  
marlin847
My Feedback: (23)
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: pelion, SC
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 69" QQ Yak-54

I have purchased one of these 69 yaks. I plan on putting on a OS 120 surpass 4 stroke. My question is can i put a spinner on the front, a true turn? If so what size would fit and look good. Would it make this plane to nose heavy? Thanks for your help. Marlin

120 surpass II 4 stroke
Fromco 2700 7.4
Fromco regulator
Badger pin flag switch
Hitec 5645 160 oz. programable digital x 4, 1 digital on throttle 537 jr
17x4 wide
hanger 9 fuel dot
marlin847 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

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