budd engineering motor mount for 160dz
05-08-2006 | 10:39 AM
#3
Senior Member
My Feedback: (16)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: N. Charleston,
SC
RE: budd engineering motor mount for 160dz
Go with the Hyde. Nothing like it.
ORIGINAL: yepe
Is Budd engeering soft mount ok for 160dz. How is it compared to hyde mount.
Is Budd engeering soft mount ok for 160dz. How is it compared to hyde mount.
05-08-2006 | 12:15 PM
#4
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Oslo, NORWAY
RE: budd engineering motor mount for 160dz
I think it's important to make folks understand that the Bud and similar cheapo mounts are dramatically different from a Hyde. The confusing thing is that they appear, at first glance, rather similar.
A Bud is, in my opinion, nothing more than a solid rubber isolation mount. What make it different to other iso' mounts is it's Hyde appearance, but it is in reality, nothing other than a !QUOT!giant rubber grommet!QUOT!, one side bolted to the fire wall, the other to the engine via T bar. Sure it looks like Hyde but it doesn't function in anywhere near the same way.
What Mr Hyde discovered was that if you take one solid ring attached to the fire wall and another similar ring attached to the engine the connect both together using a thing rubber membrane, what would actually happen is that when the engines throttles up, the two parts would separate and the engine would literally be !QUOT!floating!QUOT!... only connected to the airframe by the thin rubber membrane, not only really isolating the engine from the plane... but also allowing in to vibrate and move unhindered in the rotational axis. Genius.
Make a note that I'm talking the real Hyde mounts here, the expensive ones and not the cheap versions he's now marketing to-wards the hobby pilot which are very similar to the Bud, as ironic as it sounds!
Obviously there's a market for mediocrity.
A Bud is, in my opinion, nothing more than a solid rubber isolation mount. What make it different to other iso' mounts is it's Hyde appearance, but it is in reality, nothing other than a !QUOT!giant rubber grommet!QUOT!, one side bolted to the fire wall, the other to the engine via T bar. Sure it looks like Hyde but it doesn't function in anywhere near the same way.
What Mr Hyde discovered was that if you take one solid ring attached to the fire wall and another similar ring attached to the engine the connect both together using a thing rubber membrane, what would actually happen is that when the engines throttles up, the two parts would separate and the engine would literally be !QUOT!floating!QUOT!... only connected to the airframe by the thin rubber membrane, not only really isolating the engine from the plane... but also allowing in to vibrate and move unhindered in the rotational axis. Genius.
Make a note that I'm talking the real Hyde mounts here, the expensive ones and not the cheap versions he's now marketing to-wards the hobby pilot which are very similar to the Bud, as ironic as it sounds!
Obviously there's a market for mediocrity.
05-09-2006 | 12:28 AM
#5
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Bacolod, PHILIPPINES
RE: budd engineering motor mount for 160dz
thanks for your advice. I got HCMYS160A hyde mount, but both T bar is broken due to a crash. Do you recommend to change the T bar with any brand available on the market and use this mount again. Can this still reduced vibration.
05-09-2006 | 10:36 AM
#7
My Feedback: (41)
RE: budd engineering motor mount for 160dz
The guys in my pattern club are running all Budd mounts (12 of them) on YS DZ's. We love them. They are 3 oz. lighter than the Hydes and a heck of alot cheaper. They work very well and I disagree that they are junk. Mike
05-10-2006 | 04:26 AM
#8
RE: budd engineering motor mount for 160dz
Hello
My friend use BuddEngi on his OTOP and he is very satisfied with it.
I don't understand why to pay more if the result is good.
Regards
My friend use BuddEngi on his OTOP and he is very satisfied with it.
I don't understand why to pay more if the result is good.
Regards
05-10-2006 | 02:34 PM
#11
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Oslo, NORWAY
RE: budd engineering motor mount for 160dz
I also have a Budd and very nice it is to... but it isn't a good a the Hyde. Thats an personal opinion of course.
Now, I like saving money as much as anyone but I just don't understand buying a Budd for $55... A saving that doesn't even buy you half a decent servo!
We spend a fortune on the airframe, the radio... the FRIGGIN´DZ has cost you $600 plus a couple more for the Header and pipe! Toss in another for the Spinner and prop... plus a heap load more for all the other goodies. Jez... i'd fell real good knowing I'd saved 50 bucks on the Budd... Hey honey, I've spent all our savings on a new ride but don't panic... we're still good for a $50! Yippee, we can sleep good tonight then.
Now if you take your saving seriously, you can make 5 perfect Hyde copies, easlily during a Saturday and still have change from $55.
In fact I know and fly with far more people running Hyde copies than I do owning the original!
Now, I like saving money as much as anyone but I just don't understand buying a Budd for $55... A saving that doesn't even buy you half a decent servo!
We spend a fortune on the airframe, the radio... the FRIGGIN´DZ has cost you $600 plus a couple more for the Header and pipe! Toss in another for the Spinner and prop... plus a heap load more for all the other goodies. Jez... i'd fell real good knowing I'd saved 50 bucks on the Budd... Hey honey, I've spent all our savings on a new ride but don't panic... we're still good for a $50! Yippee, we can sleep good tonight then.
Now if you take your saving seriously, you can make 5 perfect Hyde copies, easlily during a Saturday and still have change from $55.
In fact I know and fly with far more people running Hyde copies than I do owning the original!
05-10-2006 | 09:00 PM
#12
Senior Member
RE: budd engineering motor mount for 160dz
Never even heard of Hyde coming apart.
Budd Engineering on the other hand, witnessed one and saw the aftermath of another.
Are you able to afford the risk?
Jeez honey I saved us that $50, too bad I can't go flying this weekend with my $3000 plane. I have to glue the nose back on. Then I have to repaint the chin cowl and repair the cracks. Oh but Budd Engineering replaced my mount, so we are still good for that $50! I should have the new mount next week just in time for the paint to dry....
The choice is yours and as always we value your opinion.
Budd Engineering on the other hand, witnessed one and saw the aftermath of another.
Are you able to afford the risk?
Jeez honey I saved us that $50, too bad I can't go flying this weekend with my $3000 plane. I have to glue the nose back on. Then I have to repaint the chin cowl and repair the cracks. Oh but Budd Engineering replaced my mount, so we are still good for that $50! I should have the new mount next week just in time for the paint to dry....
The choice is yours and as always we value your opinion.
05-10-2006 | 09:46 PM
#13
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: CebuCebu, PHILIPPINES
RE: budd engineering motor mount for 160dz
Just curious, has anyone seen a Budd mount come apart recently, like in the last 3-4 months? They have admitted having a problem with their adhesives supplier at one time but say the problem is now solved. Also, is it as easy to make the noise limit with the Budd mount? Need to know because I ordered an Xtreme Composite Astral XX and it comes with the Budd mount.
05-10-2006 | 11:06 PM
#14
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: oakland,
CA
RE: budd engineering motor mount for 160dz
I'm using one on my XX, so far, so good, after 50 flights.
However, the mount is a bit on the noisy side, especially if you are using the supplied nose ring. I have just switched to a new nose ring with double rubber sent to me by Alex Lau - rep for X-Treme. I have noticed some difference, but not much.
If you want more info, PM me Jayjay.
Adrian
However, the mount is a bit on the noisy side, especially if you are using the supplied nose ring. I have just switched to a new nose ring with double rubber sent to me by Alex Lau - rep for X-Treme. I have noticed some difference, but not much.
If you want more info, PM me Jayjay.
Adrian
05-11-2006 | 01:38 AM
#15
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Quartz Hill,
CA
RE: budd engineering motor mount for 160dz
ORIGINAL: bla bla
I think it's important to make folks understand that the Bud and similar cheapo mounts are dramatically different from a Hyde. The confusing thing is that they appear, at first glance, rather similar.
A Bud is, in my opinion, nothing more than a solid rubber isolation mount. What make it different to other iso' mounts is it's Hyde appearance, but it is in reality, nothing other than a !QUOT!giant rubber grommet!QUOT!, one side bolted to the fire wall, the other to the engine via T bar. Sure it looks like Hyde but it doesn't function in anywhere near the same way.
What Mr Hyde discovered was that if you take one solid ring attached to the fire wall and another similar ring attached to the engine the connect both together using a thing rubber membrane, what would actually happen is that when the engines throttles up, the two parts would separate and the engine would literally be !QUOT!floating!QUOT!... only connected to the airframe by the thin rubber membrane, not only really isolating the engine from the plane... but also allowing in to vibrate and move unhindered in the rotational axis. Genius.
Make a note that I'm talking the real Hyde mounts here, the expensive ones and not the cheap versions he's now marketing to-wards the hobby pilot which are very similar to the Bud, as ironic as it sounds!
Obviously there's a market for mediocrity.
I think it's important to make folks understand that the Bud and similar cheapo mounts are dramatically different from a Hyde. The confusing thing is that they appear, at first glance, rather similar.
A Bud is, in my opinion, nothing more than a solid rubber isolation mount. What make it different to other iso' mounts is it's Hyde appearance, but it is in reality, nothing other than a !QUOT!giant rubber grommet!QUOT!, one side bolted to the fire wall, the other to the engine via T bar. Sure it looks like Hyde but it doesn't function in anywhere near the same way.
What Mr Hyde discovered was that if you take one solid ring attached to the fire wall and another similar ring attached to the engine the connect both together using a thing rubber membrane, what would actually happen is that when the engines throttles up, the two parts would separate and the engine would literally be !QUOT!floating!QUOT!... only connected to the airframe by the thin rubber membrane, not only really isolating the engine from the plane... but also allowing in to vibrate and move unhindered in the rotational axis. Genius.
Make a note that I'm talking the real Hyde mounts here, the expensive ones and not the cheap versions he's now marketing to-wards the hobby pilot which are very similar to the Bud, as ironic as it sounds!
Obviously there's a market for mediocrity.
1. There is no functional difference between the soft mount I produce and market and the Hyde soft mount*, either in the way they are designed, the way they function, or in their performance.
(* - the original ~$125 Hyde soft mount, not the $60 low-efficiency Hyde mount recently announced).
2. The mount is not comprised of a "large rubber grommet" as described above, but from two symmetric disks made from injection molded, glass-filled nylon, and two pieces of thin rubber tubing bonded to the outer perimeter of the edges of the disks. The nylon disks serve as the attach mechanism between the airframe and the motor, and also to support the rubber tubes radially under torsional loading.
3. My last name is spelled "Budd".
Thx, Jerry
05-11-2006 | 02:04 AM
#16
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Quartz Hill,
CA
RE: budd engineering motor mount for 160dz
ORIGINAL: AAM1024
Never even heard of Hyde coming apart.
Never even heard of Hyde coming apart.
Budd Engineering on the other hand, witnessed one and saw the aftermath of another.
Could you please provide some details like who, when, and where this occured?
Jeez honey I saved us that $50, too bad I can't go flying this weekend with my $3000 plane. I have to glue the nose back on. Then I have to repaint the chin cowl and repair the cracks. Oh but Budd Engineering replaced my mount, so we are still good for that $50! I should have the new mount next week just in time for the paint to dry....
05-11-2006 | 02:12 AM
#17
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Quartz Hill,
CA
RE: budd engineering motor mount for 160dz
ORIGINAL: jayjayneri
Just curious, has anyone seen a Budd mount come apart recently, like in the last 3-4 months? They have admitted having a problem with their adhesives supplier at one time but say the problem is now solved. Also, is it as easy to make the noise limit with the Budd mount? Need to know because I ordered an Xtreme Composite Astral XX and it comes with the Budd mount.
Just curious, has anyone seen a Budd mount come apart recently, like in the last 3-4 months? They have admitted having a problem with their adhesives supplier at one time but say the problem is now solved. Also, is it as easy to make the noise limit with the Budd mount? Need to know because I ordered an Xtreme Composite Astral XX and it comes with the Budd mount.
Thx, Jerry
05-11-2006 | 07:18 AM
#18
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Anywhere,
FL
RE: budd engineering motor mount for 160dz
Them Budd E-Mounts are the way to go!! UNDER $40 Bucks to boot!
( Now I did talk to Merle Hyde & he wanted $400.00 & did not have a picture or website or any I could look at!)
Jerry Budd offers GREAT service to boot!
I like so many have used Hyde mounts for years. They were the only game on the PLANET since the Dinosaur. The thing I like best about the Budd Glow mounts is COMPETITION in the Market place! Just look what it forced Merle to do.
Personally I like both guys. I have talked to both. Both have helped me thru builds & problems.
I think Jerry Budd gets too much bad press lately because he has taken a large bite into the Glow Engine mount world. Use what you like.
Just remember NOW you don't have to pay $200 PLUS for a Glow/E mount.
I choose to say: Thanks Jerry!!
05-11-2006 | 01:11 PM
#19
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Fenton,
MI
RE: budd engineering motor mount for 160dz
Hi Jerry,
I had never heard of your electric mount products until I stumbled on this thread. Your Hacker C50 mounting system looks great! I'd like to recomend another product. Make those C50 mounting plates and rear rings such that the end user can bolt his C50 right up to a traditional glow engine beam mount. A lot of planes have beams mounts built right into them. Another product would an entire C50 mount that would bolt up to a plane just like a beam mount.
Wiz
I had never heard of your electric mount products until I stumbled on this thread. Your Hacker C50 mounting system looks great! I'd like to recomend another product. Make those C50 mounting plates and rear rings such that the end user can bolt his C50 right up to a traditional glow engine beam mount. A lot of planes have beams mounts built right into them. Another product would an entire C50 mount that would bolt up to a plane just like a beam mount.
Wiz
