I installed my YS110 on the stock Venus mounts. There is a lot of discussion about vibration. Hyde mounts has a big blurb on Central's site. They talk about battery current with different types of mounts. I thought I would see what mine was doing. My current draw is 43 mA with six servos and the engine not running. With the YS110 running, I was getting readings between 50 and 90 mA. The higher readings were at idle. I don't really know that this means anything. There is some vibration but it doesn't seem to have a big impact on my setup.

I don't know the current draw on mine, but I do know that I can easily get 8 flights out of my 2000-mah Li-Po Rx battery. I check before the first flight and then start checking every flight with the voltmeter after about the 5th flight and I think I could get 10 or more. And if that's not enough, I could recharge the battery and go on indefinitely.

So like you, my experience is that this is not an issue, at least not for the Venus II with stock mounts.

My OS 120 is mounted on a Dubro vibration mount. I have 2 digitals on the elevators and everything else are HT JR coreless and I get 10 - 10 min. flights on a 1100 - 4 cell battery and still have 400 - 500 mah left when I cycle at home.

Pappy35 - don't be so hard on the OS 120FS. I have a number of Saito's and YS's also and yes the YS's are more powerful but my OS 120 is flat out the most realiable, best working engine I have used in well over 20 years of doing this foolishness. The Saito's, that's another story. The only real good one I've had is a 25 year old 270 twin.

Has anyone tried flying the venus II on the new OS 75AX, would it have enough power or just be marginal. I need to get a new plane/engine that I can absolutely count on all of my other engines dead stick too much, so I want to go OS.

No way a 75 would work. A 2-stroke 90 would be OK for casual sport flying. With a 75 you'd be at full throttle all the time and still probaly flop out of loop. When I built this plane the club gave me an OS FS91 Surpass. I succesfully lobbied (good thing too ) to upgrade to the FS-120.

I decided to keep the motor. I have ZERO money right now and I'm sure it'll be fine in the end what with the season coming to a close and all. Maybe, if I like the way it flies, I'll put the YS in it for the summer to get a bunch of weight out. I'll get the motor and move the tank over the CG, etc... For now it's just a free sportplane to buzz around with. I'm so greatful for my incredibly good luck in winning it. It's a really nice plane.

Hey, so about the motor...the last 4-stroke I had was a YS 1.20AC that I would start on a back flip. You know, prime it, heat up the plug, and bounce it off compression on the back side. What's it take to coax this bugger into starting. I don't have a starter (I've never really had a need), am I going ot have to get one?

I was thinking of using a super tiger 91 or SK 90, but not sure if these motors are totally reliable or not. Also it looks like the 75AX almost matches them for power and by their recommendations you can run bigger props.

Depends on what you want and what kind of runway you fly from.

If you look at the GP specs it says ".61-.91 2-stroke engine". A .61 will get it airborne (see caveat below) but won't fly it with anywhere near the edges of the flight envelope of this airplane. Put simply, it ain't as fun!

This is a very capable airplane and deserves an engine to match. Yes, a .75 will be a little better, and a .91 better than that, and the 1.20 4-stroke (which is what I have) significantly better and the YS 1.10 probably the ideal engine for this model, and a 1.20 2-stroke slightly overpowered (if there is such a thing). Where you settle on the spectrum is up to you. But just ask yourself, when is the last time that the RPM figures you got matched those claimed by the manufacturer?

Caveat: And if you fly off grass... depending on the condition of the grass you may need wheelbarrow tires to get up enough speed to lift off.

The O.S. 4-strokes are designed for an electric starter. Follow the instructions in the manual and there should be no problems.

If you still want to sell the engine I will give you $250 for it which you can apply toward a good engine.

I started it today on the first flip (Using a chiken stick of course). Ran a tank through it slobbering rich the refilled, leaned it out (but still very rich), and started on the backflip. No starter needed, so far.

Maidened it and think that the 120 is so far working really great. Set just lean enough for reliable idle-power transition and running an APC 15-8, it was turning 8800 and idling at around 2200. The idle was fast but it's as low as I could get it to reliably. Since it only had one tank of fuel through it I'm worried about that now.

The plane flies great. I definately like it more than the Showtime 90 I had. Only flew it once so I'll wring it out some more tomorrow. I found the factory settings OK but the low rate was a little too low. High rate aileron and rudder were good per specs but the elevator needs a little more authority. I'll increase the throw tomorrow and some more expo to soften it up around neutral.

are most of you putting the servos in the rear or up front, wondering about balance of the 4 stroke, I have a saito 120 for mine but havent got the plane yet. I have gone over the online manual and notice they show both ways. The saito is little lighter than the os 120...thanks

That's a good question. With the OS120 they HAVE to go in the tail plus 2oz of ballast mounted right ahead of the rudder hinge line. The Saito is something like 6oz lighter. Given the much longer moment arm of the weight in the tail, I'd be willing to bet that it would balance perfectly with 3 sevos in the tail and no added weight.

Look what my Venus II did for me this week-end. This was my third contest and my first Win. Very sweet....What a great little airplane!!! Power is YS 110 with Spektrum radio. Love it, Love it, Love it!!! RS

Yellerchamp,
I'm using a Saito 125 on my Venus and have the servos in the rear and a JR 1650 NIMH battery up against the fuel tank. CG is dead on at 61/2 inches.

Way to go, Russ!! [sm=thumbup.gif]

I did my first contest about a month ago and finished second. Maybe we should start a trophy page for Venus fliers.

hello rfan , Elvir from Croatia I am also interested in picking up a Venus II this winter if I get a chance to come to the states because I only heard good thing about this plans for F3A , I am still waiting to see if anyone decides to put a gas in the plane a 20ei or a 26 Zenoah , I saw that you put labels on the ailerons . Try next time to use deans 3 pin connectors on them and turn one around and you cannot make a mistake and to is simple. I did it on my cap, i connect it with the nose on the ground and tail in the air with out looking.

There would be no way in heck that you could put a gas engine in this plane. It is nose heavy with an OS 120FS and either of those gas engines would outweigh the OS by almost a pound. Not to mention the added vibration you would contend with and the fact that you would need to butcher the cowl all to pieces. The wing loading would be deplorable, it would fly like C _ _ _ !

ok just asking , i am looking for gas , quality nito like cool power is to expensive and hard to get here in croatia.

I understand that. But I don't think the Venus II is the plane for a gasser.

Elvir,

I concur with Don. THe plane is already nose-heavy with the recommended OS engine. Putting any kind of gas motor with ruin the plane's flight characteristics.

Unless you flying a tailheavy warbird / scale plane gas engines don't make any sense untill you get into at least 40cc size. IMHO

the 20ei i have in a cmp 120 corsair , it flys nice with the 20 in it.

As I said "a tailheavy warplane"

is there any benifit in flying a 4 stroke over a 2 stroke in this plane becides the fule consumption?

A 4-stroke will generally be lighter than a comparably sized 2-stroke. With a YS 4-stroke, you can put the tank on the CG if you desire, which is what I did. I have two friends with Venuses and they are both using OS 1.20 AXs and they both fly very well. Generally a 2-stroke will be able to use cheaper fuel.