SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
#476

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ossining,
NY
Well, the cost savings for the first one are not much of a consideration when the time spent and the mental energy are figured into the calculation. The real benefit will come on the second one, where there is a lot more understanding of the variables.
This tube cost $9 and I made a few boo-boos when cutting the first bands, but there is plenty of material left over for soft mount #2!!
I think I attached it before, but the PDF is an actual scan of the drill guide for the aircraft ply (1/8" 5-ply) that I used for my mount, and the stand-off bolt locations came out accurately when using it for figuring out the stand-off locations. If you want to use it, print with page scaling OFF of course!
This tube cost $9 and I made a few boo-boos when cutting the first bands, but there is plenty of material left over for soft mount #2!!
I think I attached it before, but the PDF is an actual scan of the drill guide for the aircraft ply (1/8" 5-ply) that I used for my mount, and the stand-off bolt locations came out accurately when using it for figuring out the stand-off locations. If you want to use it, print with page scaling OFF of course!
#477

My Feedback: (5)
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Tavares,
FL
Bob,
Thanks again for posting your info. It will help a bunch.
I was considering putting thin wing servos on the elevator halves. But since the stabs aren't going to be removeable, I might just go with 2 small digital servos mounted in the sides of the fuse's tail under the stabs. Do you or Matt see anything wrong with this. Most specifically do you think the balance can work with out the batteries and rudder servo on the firewall. Who would have that this would even be an issue with a gas engine on the focus. Regardless, light weight is good.
Thanks a bunch.
Thanks again for posting your info. It will help a bunch.
I was considering putting thin wing servos on the elevator halves. But since the stabs aren't going to be removeable, I might just go with 2 small digital servos mounted in the sides of the fuse's tail under the stabs. Do you or Matt see anything wrong with this. Most specifically do you think the balance can work with out the batteries and rudder servo on the firewall. Who would have that this would even be an issue with a gas engine on the focus. Regardless, light weight is good.
Thanks a bunch.
#478

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ossining,
NY
FlyEng,
I think you will still be able to achieve CG with the elevator servos in the tail as long as you use the "midi" size digitals. I don't have the ignition module and Rx batteries as far forward as possible. I don't like that hard-to-reach space between the firewall and the first former, but could have placed stuff there if necessary.
Definitely want to use pull-pull rudder, however.
I think you will still be able to achieve CG with the elevator servos in the tail as long as you use the "midi" size digitals. I don't have the ignition module and Rx batteries as far forward as possible. I don't like that hard-to-reach space between the firewall and the first former, but could have placed stuff there if necessary.
Definitely want to use pull-pull rudder, however.
#479
Thread Starter
Senior Member
ORIGINAL: FlyEng
Bob,
Thanks again for posting your info. It will help a bunch.
I was considering putting thin wing servos on the elevator halves. But since the stabs aren't going to be removeable, I might just go with 2 small digital servos mounted in the sides of the fuse's tail under the stabs. Do you or Matt see anything wrong with this. Most specifically do you think the balance can work with out the batteries and rudder servo on the firewall. Who would have that this would even be an issue with a gas engine on the focus. Regardless, light weight is good.
Thanks a bunch.
Bob,
Thanks again for posting your info. It will help a bunch.
I was considering putting thin wing servos on the elevator halves. But since the stabs aren't going to be removeable, I might just go with 2 small digital servos mounted in the sides of the fuse's tail under the stabs. Do you or Matt see anything wrong with this. Most specifically do you think the balance can work with out the batteries and rudder servo on the firewall. Who would have that this would even be an issue with a gas engine on the focus. Regardless, light weight is good.
Thanks a bunch.
With the ligthness of the SAP engine up front, it will work out just about perfect with no additional tail weight needed. Overall weight savings with the SAP versus the ZDZ is about 14 to 16 ozs, or a 10 lb airplane rather than 11 pounds.
But even at 11 pounds, the SAP has enough beans to take the plane through any maneuver in the book or outside the book. In other words, power is non-issue
MattK
#480

My Feedback: (5)
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Tavares,
FL
MTK,
I can't wait. The power the Syssa puts out is awesome as you've determined and reported. I really like where you challenged someone to buy it and test it after they said there was no way to get the results you got. That's awesome. I think we met once many years ago down here in District 3. Probably at Ocala but maybe at one of the other meets. I was doing sportsman at the time and was asking lots of questions. I haven't competed for quite awhile but will again soon.
I just need the engine and accessories. I'm sure Todd still has his hands full getting caught up so I'm okay with it. It's only been since Christmas on the engine order. He spoke at length to my wife when she placed the order. It's hard to get her talking to anyone in the hobby let alone an RC manufacturer. Sounds like his likability and product will take him a long way.
I can't wait. The power the Syssa puts out is awesome as you've determined and reported. I really like where you challenged someone to buy it and test it after they said there was no way to get the results you got. That's awesome. I think we met once many years ago down here in District 3. Probably at Ocala but maybe at one of the other meets. I was doing sportsman at the time and was asking lots of questions. I haven't competed for quite awhile but will again soon.
I just need the engine and accessories. I'm sure Todd still has his hands full getting caught up so I'm okay with it. It's only been since Christmas on the engine order. He spoke at length to my wife when she placed the order. It's hard to get her talking to anyone in the hobby let alone an RC manufacturer. Sounds like his likability and product will take him a long way.
#481
Thread Starter
Senior Member
ORIGINAL: FlyEng
MTK,
I can't wait. The power the Syssa puts out is awesome as you've determined and reported. I really like where you challenged someone to buy it and test it after they said there was no way to get the results you got. That's awesome. I think we met once many years ago down here in District 3. Probably at Ocala but maybe at one of the other meets. I was doing sportsman at the time and was asking lots of questions. I haven't competed for quite awhile but will again soon.
I just need the engine and accessories. I'm sure Todd still has his hands full getting caught up so I'm okay with it. It's only been since Christmas on the engine order. He spoke at length to my wife when she placed the order. It's hard to get her talking to anyone in the hobby let alone an RC manufacturer. Sounds like his likability and product will take him a long way.
MTK,
I can't wait. The power the Syssa puts out is awesome as you've determined and reported. I really like where you challenged someone to buy it and test it after they said there was no way to get the results you got. That's awesome. I think we met once many years ago down here in District 3. Probably at Ocala but maybe at one of the other meets. I was doing sportsman at the time and was asking lots of questions. I haven't competed for quite awhile but will again soon.
I just need the engine and accessories. I'm sure Todd still has his hands full getting caught up so I'm okay with it. It's only been since Christmas on the engine order. He spoke at length to my wife when she placed the order. It's hard to get her talking to anyone in the hobby let alone an RC manufacturer. Sounds like his likability and product will take him a long way.
Make no mistake though, the engine performs great for pattern needs as is. Propping it to around 8K will let the engine work well. True, I am running it at around 7500 with larger props but the engine is intended to run higher rpm than that. Let me wring mine out at 7500 for a frame of reference.
The last remaining item it needs for pattern is the adapter for a nose ring. This item has been designed and will be a simple add-on item on an existing engine.
MattK
#482

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ossining,
NY
Matt,
Is the 7500 rpm number with your CF-lam Xoar 18-5/8 x 13?
I don't think mine needs a nose ring, but if it adds to the quietness and efficiency I will give it a shot. Although this plane is the quietest gasser I've seen, there are still a few bumping and knocking things I have to track down, and the 18x10PN prop is pretty noisy when the tips start ripping over 8k rpm.
There is also something I noted the other day, the engine permormance dropped significantly when doing an outside loop. I don't believe it was a fuel delivery issue (i.e. fuel clunk not following fuel), but rather the change in air pressure on the little static plate (or whatever it is you call it... the plate on the carb with the small hole in it). I know this is sometimes solved by soldering a nipple on that plate and running a piece of fuel tube back into the fuse. But first I will make absolutely sure it isn't a problem with the clunk. It was cold, and Tygon does stiffen up quite a bit.
Is the 7500 rpm number with your CF-lam Xoar 18-5/8 x 13?
I don't think mine needs a nose ring, but if it adds to the quietness and efficiency I will give it a shot. Although this plane is the quietest gasser I've seen, there are still a few bumping and knocking things I have to track down, and the 18x10PN prop is pretty noisy when the tips start ripping over 8k rpm.
There is also something I noted the other day, the engine permormance dropped significantly when doing an outside loop. I don't believe it was a fuel delivery issue (i.e. fuel clunk not following fuel), but rather the change in air pressure on the little static plate (or whatever it is you call it... the plate on the carb with the small hole in it). I know this is sometimes solved by soldering a nipple on that plate and running a piece of fuel tube back into the fuse. But first I will make absolutely sure it isn't a problem with the clunk. It was cold, and Tygon does stiffen up quite a bit.
#483
Thread Starter
Senior Member
ORIGINAL: cmoulder
Matt,
Is the 7500 rpm number with your CF-lam Xoar 18-5/8 x 13?
I don't think mine needs a nose ring, but if it adds to the quietness and efficiency I will give it a shot. Although this plane is the quietest gasser I've seen, there are still a few bumping and knocking things I have to track down, and the 18x10PN prop is pretty noisy when the tips start ripping over 8k rpm.
There is also something I noted the other day, the engine permormance dropped significantly when doing an outside loop. I don't believe it was a fuel delivery issue (i.e. fuel clunk not following fuel), but rather the change in air pressure on the little static plate (or whatever it is you call it... the plate on the carb with the small hole in it). I know this is sometimes solved by soldering a nipple on that plate and running a piece of fuel tube back into the fuse. But first I will make absolutely sure it isn't a problem with the clunk. It was cold, and Tygon does stiffen up quite a bit.
Matt,
Is the 7500 rpm number with your CF-lam Xoar 18-5/8 x 13?
I don't think mine needs a nose ring, but if it adds to the quietness and efficiency I will give it a shot. Although this plane is the quietest gasser I've seen, there are still a few bumping and knocking things I have to track down, and the 18x10PN prop is pretty noisy when the tips start ripping over 8k rpm.
There is also something I noted the other day, the engine permormance dropped significantly when doing an outside loop. I don't believe it was a fuel delivery issue (i.e. fuel clunk not following fuel), but rather the change in air pressure on the little static plate (or whatever it is you call it... the plate on the carb with the small hole in it). I know this is sometimes solved by soldering a nipple on that plate and running a piece of fuel tube back into the fuse. But first I will make absolutely sure it isn't a problem with the clunk. It was cold, and Tygon does stiffen up quite a bit.
Not that prop....that prop turns around 7200 give or take. I will probably chop it down to around 17 3/4 to get the prop in a happier zone. The 17x13 turn around 7500 which is about as low as I want to run. The 18x12 will be the prop I use in comps most likely and I expect it to turn around 7500 give or take. We have to see how the engine does in the summer.
I had noticed some dropped off in output at certain times too, when the engine only had a few runs on it, maybe a dozen or so. That has seemed to go away after some running. I think it's a matter of lack of break in but not certain. I do know that now that engine has a gallon through it, it doesn't sag at those same locations in flight as it once did. I suspect this will get even better after a few more gallons.
We are still steep on the learning curve with this engine
Matt
#485
Thread Starter
Senior Member
ORIGINAL: ghoffman
What oil and ratio are you using?
What oil and ratio are you using?
Matt
#486

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ossining,
NY
We are still steep on the learning curve with this engine
I am addressing the reg issue today. One of the regs did indeed need a 6" extension between the Rx and the reg, so I am charging up the batteries fresh and then will see what the current draw is when both regs have that same extension and therefore the same resistance. If that doesn't work out, I will change out the reg that wasn't delivering current and see what happens then.
#487

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ossining,
NY
Quick update on the regs... apparently there was a little glitch in one of the 4 that I have. It works fine solo, but for some reason is not sharing power in a balanced reg set-up. Even so, that particular regulator was still working fine when the other was completely turned off, so there never was any danger of the Rx losing power. If anything, a good illustration of the dual redundancy idea in action.
Installed the 2 new regs today and both are tracking voltage drops in the Lipos to an extremely tight tolerance, always +/- 0.01V.
Installed the 2 new regs today and both are tracking voltage drops in the Lipos to an extremely tight tolerance, always +/- 0.01V.
#488

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ossining,
NY
ORIGINAL: MTK
This shot is of the wood prop laminated in carbon. The technique is quite simple really. You simply place the assembly in a vacuum sealer and draw the vacuum
This shot is of the wood prop laminated in carbon. The technique is quite simple really. You simply place the assembly in a vacuum sealer and draw the vacuum
I weighed both the APC 18x10PN and 17x13 and they are pretty hefty at 4.2 oz!![X(]
#489
Thread Starter
Senior Member
ORIGINAL: cmoulder
Matt, any chance you might do a mini-tutorial on your Xoar e-prop modification, with CF cloth sources, adhesives and technique involved?
I weighed both the APC 18x10PN and 17x13 and they are pretty hefty at 4.2 oz!![X(]
ORIGINAL: MTK
This shot is of the wood prop laminated in carbon. The technique is quite simple really. You simply place the assembly in a vacuum sealer and draw the vacuum
This shot is of the wood prop laminated in carbon. The technique is quite simple really. You simply place the assembly in a vacuum sealer and draw the vacuum
I weighed both the APC 18x10PN and 17x13 and they are pretty hefty at 4.2 oz!![X(]
I am preparing an article for publication in one of the RC magazines, preferably MA, but anyone of them that will pay, will do. Soon as I get commitment from a magazine that they are interested, I will send you the article.
There is significant weight savings that can be had. The 18x12 I just completed weighs in at 50 grams, about 80 grams less than the APCs. It is very stiff and strong as you'd expect.
There are a couple very important benefits, one of which is lower nose weight. But even more important is the significantly lower RMOI the smaller mass generates. The larger mass of the apc causes unwanted forces to the airplane which vary continuously throughout rpm changes. Lower rotating mass reduces these forces substantially and even guys with less flying experience (relatively speaking, probably not rank beginners) can tell the difference. Spool up and down become easier, crisper. True, flywheel effect at idle suffers but it matters very little in an ignition set-up.
That's why I have been most excited by this development. And the Xoar props make the transition to hybrid, true composite props easier because there is little carving involved by the user. These props were not available even as late as spring last year, to the best of my knowledge. I received my first ones around October last year.
Matt
#491
Thread Starter
Senior Member
The first of these I did was a ZDZ 20x10 woodie that was stock wood for the ZDZ40 cc. I shaved and shaved the wood thickness down to about half the original. Shaved off something like 55 grams off a prop that weighed around 120 grams stock. I became quite skeptical because the blades became very flimsy at 50% the original thickness. Once I added the carbon tube sock, my skepticism abated. Extremely stiff and mighty strong outcome at at slightly over half the thickness on the blades. This hybrid prop weighs in at 80 grams
I think the SAP180 will turn this prop but I haven't tried it. When I do, I will report the results here.
Of course one may carve his own wood as I have. I also have a 21x12 I carved from a known blank like a 22x12.....but that's a lot of work, checking and re-checking to make sure the angle per blade station is constant and area distribution is constant. It becomes even more work intensive if you want to increase the angle during the carving process at any station. I bought the aero perfect inclinometer partially for this purpose. One can never be too fussy about the angles' accuracy. A prop works best when it is statically and dynamically balanced.
Doing a prop from a known Xoar electric makes life far easier since the heavy lifting is mostly done. Not that these are perfect (mine were perfect to within a couple mils only at some stations but not in all stations; a couple stations were off by 15 mils)....it is simply easier to sand off 20 mils rather than shave 1/8 inch or more.
BTW the carbon tube sock adds around 15 mils to the thickness when you vacuum bag the assembly. It would be much thicker if not bagged. I would not do one this way without vacuum bagging
Bob, when i start breaking it down there is quite a bit going on in this endeavor. Perhaps even more than building your own soft mount. But it's a good skill to learn just like building your own mounts
matt
I think the SAP180 will turn this prop but I haven't tried it. When I do, I will report the results here.
Of course one may carve his own wood as I have. I also have a 21x12 I carved from a known blank like a 22x12.....but that's a lot of work, checking and re-checking to make sure the angle per blade station is constant and area distribution is constant. It becomes even more work intensive if you want to increase the angle during the carving process at any station. I bought the aero perfect inclinometer partially for this purpose. One can never be too fussy about the angles' accuracy. A prop works best when it is statically and dynamically balanced.
Doing a prop from a known Xoar electric makes life far easier since the heavy lifting is mostly done. Not that these are perfect (mine were perfect to within a couple mils only at some stations but not in all stations; a couple stations were off by 15 mils)....it is simply easier to sand off 20 mils rather than shave 1/8 inch or more.
BTW the carbon tube sock adds around 15 mils to the thickness when you vacuum bag the assembly. It would be much thicker if not bagged. I would not do one this way without vacuum bagging
Bob, when i start breaking it down there is quite a bit going on in this endeavor. Perhaps even more than building your own soft mount. But it's a good skill to learn just like building your own mounts
matt
#492

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ossining,
NY
By my rough conversion (1 oz = 28 gr), 4.2 oz is about 120 grams, so the weight-savings is quite significant!
I will be looking forward to making one of these.
I will be looking forward to making one of these.
#493
Slightly off topic -
Has anyone used the Syssa CF spinners? I'm interested in knowing the backplate thickness and weight of the backplate + cone for the 2.5 and 3" spinners?
Thanks,
Dave
Has anyone used the Syssa CF spinners? I'm interested in knowing the backplate thickness and weight of the backplate + cone for the 2.5 and 3" spinners?
Thanks,
Dave
#494
Thread Starter
Senior Member
ORIGINAL: DaveL322
Slightly off topic -
Has anyone used the Syssa CF spinners? I'm interested in knowing the backplate thickness and weight of the backplate + cone for the 2.5 and 3'' spinners?
Thanks,
Dave
Slightly off topic -
Has anyone used the Syssa CF spinners? I'm interested in knowing the backplate thickness and weight of the backplate + cone for the 2.5 and 3'' spinners?
Thanks,
Dave
#496

My Feedback: (5)
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Tavares,
FL
ORIGINAL: MTK
Bob,
I am preparing an article for publication in one of the RC magazines, preferably MA, but anyone of them that will pay, will do. Soon as I get commitment from a magazine that they are interested, I will send you the article.
There is significant weight savings that can be had. The 18x12 I just completed weighs in at 50 grams, about 80 grams less than the APCs. It is very stiff and strong as you'd expect.
There are a couple very important benefits, one of which is lower nose weight. But even more important is the significantly lower RMOI the smaller mass generates. The larger mass of the apc causes unwanted forces to the airplane which vary continuously throughout rpm changes. Lower rotating mass reduces these forces substantially and even guys with less flying experience (relatively speaking, probably not rank beginners) can tell the difference. Spool up and down become easier, crisper. True, flywheel effect at idle suffers but it matters very little in an ignition set-up.
That's why I have been most excited by this development. And the Xoar props make the transition to hybrid, true composite props easier because there is little carving involved by the user. These props were not available even as late as spring last year, to the best of my knowledge. I received my first ones around October last year.
Matt
Matt,
The reduction in spinning mass outfront does make for a surprising change in handling as you say. Remeber Dynamics that course in school right after Statics. If folks don't believe the effects they can try it themselves. Try holding the plane securley while its running at a fair RPM and sharply repoint the nose into a different position. You'll feel the forces trying to deflect the movement of the nose from the straight path you're wanting it to go. An exageration of this is the spinning bicycle wheel or the rotor on helicopters. When the wheel or blades are rotating, it is quite hard to rotate the frame or center out of plane with the rotating disk without getting unwanted results. Most people get this i'm sure. Trade the rpm of the spinning prop for the mass of the tire and wheel and there you go. Makes one wonder why the front end our planes don't rip off more often than they do. This is especially true when considering guys do repeated walls and other high G maneuvers.
I'm glad this came up because I've been wondering for quite sometime as to why pattern flyers don't use lighter weight props. I figured that our planes with long tail moments meant most would end up tail heavy. Consequently, i guess there was no reason to develop light weight props for pattern use. If you had trouble with weight you went for a light weight spinner. I like the idea of light weight props...... Makes a bigger Syssa engine even more practical.
ORIGINAL: cmoulder
Matt, any chance you might do a mini-tutorial on your Xoar e-prop modification, with CF cloth sources, adhesives and technique involved?
I weighed both the APC 18x10PN and 17x13 and they are pretty hefty at 4.2 oz!![X(]
ORIGINAL: MTK
This shot is of the wood prop laminated in carbon. The technique is quite simple really. You simply place the assembly in a vacuum sealer and draw the vacuum
This shot is of the wood prop laminated in carbon. The technique is quite simple really. You simply place the assembly in a vacuum sealer and draw the vacuum
I weighed both the APC 18x10PN and 17x13 and they are pretty hefty at 4.2 oz!![X(]
I am preparing an article for publication in one of the RC magazines, preferably MA, but anyone of them that will pay, will do. Soon as I get commitment from a magazine that they are interested, I will send you the article.
There is significant weight savings that can be had. The 18x12 I just completed weighs in at 50 grams, about 80 grams less than the APCs. It is very stiff and strong as you'd expect.
There are a couple very important benefits, one of which is lower nose weight. But even more important is the significantly lower RMOI the smaller mass generates. The larger mass of the apc causes unwanted forces to the airplane which vary continuously throughout rpm changes. Lower rotating mass reduces these forces substantially and even guys with less flying experience (relatively speaking, probably not rank beginners) can tell the difference. Spool up and down become easier, crisper. True, flywheel effect at idle suffers but it matters very little in an ignition set-up.
That's why I have been most excited by this development. And the Xoar props make the transition to hybrid, true composite props easier because there is little carving involved by the user. These props were not available even as late as spring last year, to the best of my knowledge. I received my first ones around October last year.
Matt
Matt,
The reduction in spinning mass outfront does make for a surprising change in handling as you say. Remeber Dynamics that course in school right after Statics. If folks don't believe the effects they can try it themselves. Try holding the plane securley while its running at a fair RPM and sharply repoint the nose into a different position. You'll feel the forces trying to deflect the movement of the nose from the straight path you're wanting it to go. An exageration of this is the spinning bicycle wheel or the rotor on helicopters. When the wheel or blades are rotating, it is quite hard to rotate the frame or center out of plane with the rotating disk without getting unwanted results. Most people get this i'm sure. Trade the rpm of the spinning prop for the mass of the tire and wheel and there you go. Makes one wonder why the front end our planes don't rip off more often than they do. This is especially true when considering guys do repeated walls and other high G maneuvers.
I'm glad this came up because I've been wondering for quite sometime as to why pattern flyers don't use lighter weight props. I figured that our planes with long tail moments meant most would end up tail heavy. Consequently, i guess there was no reason to develop light weight props for pattern use. If you had trouble with weight you went for a light weight spinner. I like the idea of light weight props...... Makes a bigger Syssa engine even more practical.
#497

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ossining,
NY
You'll feel the forces trying to deflect the movement of the nose from the straight path you're wanting it to go. An exageration of this is the spinning bicycle wheel or the rotor on helicopters. When the wheel or blades are rotating, it is quite hard to rotate the frame or center out of plane with the rotating disk without getting unwanted results.
At the kind of rpm's we're talking about with gas engines, having a prop that weighs less than half as much as these 120-gram APC's has got to be a good thing.
#498
ORIGINAL: cmoulder
having a prop that weighs less than half as much as these 120-gram APC's has got to be a good thing.
having a prop that weighs less than half as much as these 120-gram APC's has got to be a good thing.
Thrust
Pitchspeed
Quiet
Efficient (low input power needed for relatively high thrust)
Consistency
Cost
APC absolutely revolutionized model airplane propellers in the late 1980s because they were able to make props that with very few exceptions outperformed anything else available at the time, and did this for a very reasonable cost and with 100% consistency. 20 years later, some of the other options out there are finally able to compete with APC in some applications. The downside to APCs is that in the larger sizes, the mass is relatively high - but - it is very rare (and likely very costly, either in terms of time or money) to find a lighter prop that will outperform the APC. If you have power to spare, and prioritize reduced gyroscopics (and the associated loads on the engine/motor and trim of the airplane), then it makes sense to experiment/test lighter props. I'd also note that many of the lightweight CF props available to day that work well are blatantly molded from APCs.
Regards,
Dave
#499
Todd / Matt,
Thanks for some of the requested info. I'm looking for weight and backplate thickness of the 2.5 and 3" spinners to see if they will work on some existing planes where I want to fine tune CG (save some weight on the nose), and the prop shafts are a bit short.
Regards,
Dave
Thanks for some of the requested info. I'm looking for weight and backplate thickness of the 2.5 and 3" spinners to see if they will work on some existing planes where I want to fine tune CG (save some weight on the nose), and the prop shafts are a bit short.
Regards,
Dave
ORIGINAL: tsyssa
3'' spinner cone and backplate weigh 1.4 oz or 40 grams
3'' spinner cone and backplate weigh 1.4 oz or 40 grams
#500

My Feedback: (7)
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 536
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: St.Clairsville,
OH
Dave,
Is the gyroscopic effect of little importance?APC has some props they list as pattern and narrow. Some of them are lighter. Might they be viable options? I was looking at the 17.5x12.
Being a little green, I'm sure its a no no for a good reason that eludes me but why can't we use electric props on IC engines?
Thanks in advance,
Rick
Is the gyroscopic effect of little importance?APC has some props they list as pattern and narrow. Some of them are lighter. Might they be viable options? I was looking at the 17.5x12.
Being a little green, I'm sure its a no no for a good reason that eludes me but why can't we use electric props on IC engines?
Thanks in advance,
Rick


