SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
12-25-2009, 08:04 PM
#176
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ossining,
NY
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
ORIGINAL: MTK
I am not using the dual regulators just yet. I have only a single regulator set-up with a 2 cell Lipo.
But when I get there, then yes, that will be the set-up. Most of the top guys here in the NE and several top competitors through out the country are using the twin regs.
MattK
But when I get there, then yes, that will be the set-up. Most of the top guys here in the NE and several top competitors through out the country are using the twin regs.
MattK
Gonna be a long winter and nothing is written in stone, so Todd's IBEC will remain under consideration, for sure.
12-25-2009, 08:41 PM
#177
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ossining,
NY
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
First notes for the Focus II/Syssa 180/ES40G pipe combo
I don't know if it is more appropriate to put these observations here or to start a fresh thread, but here are my first discoveries concerning the Focus II/Syssa assembly.
First off, if you are going to use or make a soft mount, get the engine with the 6.250" stand-offs because with the shorter ones the rear end of the carb won't clear the engine mount. Naturally, I got the shorter ones so I will have to call Todd and exchange for the slightly longer ones. If you want the closest clearance possible, 6 inches flat will just barely clear the carb, but 6.25" is the stock one to get.
I loosely laid out all the components on the floor to get a rough idea where the measurements are, and it is clear that the engine box will have to be modified (material removed from the sides where it slots into the firewall) to accommodate the soft mount/engine so that it will fit in the 7-7/8" deep cowl (prop face to firewall). One could just leave out the engine box altogether and make some sort of pedestal to fill the gap between the firewall and the soft mount, but the front end needs the rigidity of the engine box, and it will make mounting the soft mount much easier.
Good news: the Macs header for OS 1.40R with 2-1/4" rise appears to be a perfect fit. As Ed pointed out, the mounting holes will have to be drilled out a bit to increase the diameter slightly, but the centering is dead on.
I carefully inserted a wood dowel into the ES pipe to find the baffle depth, then transferred the measurement to the outside of the pipe (blue tape with magic marker hash mark) so I could get a better idea how far back the pipe would need to extend to achieve the 27-1/4" plug-to-baffle distance specified by Matt. As I mentioned before, the supplied FG pipe tunnel is not going to work for this pipe, but the measurement showed that the tunnel will not have to be extended much farther back - probably significantly less than 2 inches - and I don't think it will bo too difficult to ream out the formers a bit and make my own channel with 1/16" balsa sheet. I've got the Ultracote "Deep Blue"color to match (HANU873 from Horizon) to cover it with, though it might be a skosh tricky to use heat-shrink on a concave surface...
So that's the blow-by-blow for now. I plan to offer observations on the engine/mount/pipe part of the assembly (and maybe later ignition/battery, since it relates to the propulsion system) but not the entire assembly process, as that's been done elsewhere - and better - before.
I don't know if it is more appropriate to put these observations here or to start a fresh thread, but here are my first discoveries concerning the Focus II/Syssa assembly.
First off, if you are going to use or make a soft mount, get the engine with the 6.250" stand-offs because with the shorter ones the rear end of the carb won't clear the engine mount. Naturally, I got the shorter ones so I will have to call Todd and exchange for the slightly longer ones. If you want the closest clearance possible, 6 inches flat will just barely clear the carb, but 6.25" is the stock one to get.
I loosely laid out all the components on the floor to get a rough idea where the measurements are, and it is clear that the engine box will have to be modified (material removed from the sides where it slots into the firewall) to accommodate the soft mount/engine so that it will fit in the 7-7/8" deep cowl (prop face to firewall). One could just leave out the engine box altogether and make some sort of pedestal to fill the gap between the firewall and the soft mount, but the front end needs the rigidity of the engine box, and it will make mounting the soft mount much easier.
Good news: the Macs header for OS 1.40R with 2-1/4" rise appears to be a perfect fit. As Ed pointed out, the mounting holes will have to be drilled out a bit to increase the diameter slightly, but the centering is dead on.
I carefully inserted a wood dowel into the ES pipe to find the baffle depth, then transferred the measurement to the outside of the pipe (blue tape with magic marker hash mark) so I could get a better idea how far back the pipe would need to extend to achieve the 27-1/4" plug-to-baffle distance specified by Matt. As I mentioned before, the supplied FG pipe tunnel is not going to work for this pipe, but the measurement showed that the tunnel will not have to be extended much farther back - probably significantly less than 2 inches - and I don't think it will bo too difficult to ream out the formers a bit and make my own channel with 1/16" balsa sheet. I've got the Ultracote "Deep Blue"color to match (HANU873 from Horizon) to cover it with, though it might be a skosh tricky to use heat-shrink on a concave surface...
So that's the blow-by-blow for now. I plan to offer observations on the engine/mount/pipe part of the assembly (and maybe later ignition/battery, since it relates to the propulsion system) but not the entire assembly process, as that's been done elsewhere - and better - before.
12-25-2009, 09:22 PM
#179
Senior Member
Thread Starter
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
ORIGINAL: RC11
Matt,
Have you run the Syssa enough that you would draw a comparison between it and the Webra 160 that you are so familiar with. I hear of many that don't have much luck with the Webra or they are not will to endure the learning curve. I have 2 Webras I got in a package deal and may be interested in giving the Syssa a go.
Thanks in advance,
Rick
Matt,
Have you run the Syssa enough that you would draw a comparison between it and the Webra 160 that you are so familiar with. I hear of many that don't have much luck with the Webra or they are not will to endure the learning curve. I have 2 Webras I got in a package deal and may be interested in giving the Syssa a go.
Thanks in advance,
Rick
Not that much experience with the SAP yet. The W160 is a very strong engine and when weather/environment conditions match the set-up of the engine, output is terrific. Arguably the strongest 2 stroke for pattern that we have and at least on par with the Mintor 170 (I have used this engine also). The main problem I encounter with mine is that often, when temperature changes 10 degrees here in the NE, set-up needs tweaking. I have not used the MC carb and I have heard from Dave Lockhart that the MC carb will at least move the tweaking to the tx.
Gasoline engines in general need far less tweaking and I expect the SAP to be no exception. So far we have only run the SAP at cool (50 deg) and cooler (35 degrees) and are still sorting out set-up with prop choices. It's too early to tell so if you already have webras on hand and have reasonable experience in their set-up. you might want to stay the course.
As for me, I went the route of the SAP mainly because I had my new design set-up for the ZDZ40 F3A already and although not a drop in fit, the SAP just needed a new mount to be set-up and that's about all. (Well, if you have to buy one from Merle everytime you want to make a change, that's expensive. It's no biggie for me since I make my own mounts). Anyway, My new plane was built very light to accommodate the 12 oz or so penalty of the ZDZ. But just because I can make weight with the gas engine doesn't mean that everyone can. It was no solution to the guys who wanted to play in gasoline. And spark ignition offers certain advantages over glow in regard to how and when the spark is generated.
When we first looked at the SAP 30 cc at Todd's shop, power output was so surprising that I simply cut the check right there and then with no mods to the engine. In the end I doubt the SAP 30 cc will equal the W160 but will be very close. The new design set-up with the SAP will come in at around 10# flat which will be an excellent power to weight ratio in the heat of the summer.
BTW- The SAP is currently turning an Xoar 19x10 electric wood prop modified and laminated with carbon for stiffness and strength. It turns this unique prop comfortably. I have zero doubt that the Webra 160 would turn the prop at similar or slightly better rpm. I also have the 20x10 I was using on the ZDZ for bench runs. I will try the prop on the SAP soon, but it won't be a direct comparison since I modified it and laminated it also
12-25-2009, 11:17 PM
#180
My Feedback: (7)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St.Clairsville,
OH
Posts: 536
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
Matt,
Thanks much for the input. I am fairly comfortable with the OS 2 strokes and will most likely give the Webra a try. The Brio was flown with the Webra and is totally set up even down to the mixture servo. The Syssa motor is very intriguing. My friend Dave Ruminski is next on Todd's list so I'll be able to see things first hand.
Thanks again,
RC
Thanks much for the input. I am fairly comfortable with the OS 2 strokes and will most likely give the Webra a try. The Brio was flown with the Webra and is totally set up even down to the mixture servo. The Syssa motor is very intriguing. My friend Dave Ruminski is next on Todd's list so I'll be able to see things first hand.
Thanks again,
RC
12-26-2009, 12:14 AM
#181
Senior Member
Thread Starter
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
ORIGINAL: cmoulder
First notes for the Focus II/Syssa 180/ES40G pipe combo
I don't know if it is more appropriate to put these observations here or to start a fresh thread, but here are my first discoveries concerning the Focus II/Syssa assembly.
First off, if you are going to use or make a soft mount, get the engine with the 6.250'' stand-offs because with the shorter ones the rear end of the carb won't clear the engine mount. Naturally, I got the shorter ones so I will have to call Todd and exchange for the slightly longer ones. If you want the closest clearance possible, 6 inches flat will just barely clear the carb, but 6.25'' is the stock one to get.
I loosely laid out all the components on the floor to get a rough idea where the measurements are, and it is clear that the engine box will have to be modified (material removed from the sides where it slots into the firewall) to accommodate the soft mount/engine so that it will fit in the 7-7/8'' deep cowl (prop face to firewall). One could just leave out the engine box altogether and make some sort of pedestal to fill the gap between the firewall and the soft mount, but the front end needs the rigidity of the engine box, and it will make mounting the soft mount much easier.
Good news: the Macs header for OS 1.40R with 2-1/4'' rise appears to be a perfect fit. As Ed pointed out, the mounting holes will have to be drilled out a bit to increase the diameter slightly, but the centering is dead on.
I carefully inserted a wood dowel into the ES pipe to find the baffle depth, then transferred the measurement to the outside of the pipe (blue tape with magic marker hash mark) so I could get a better idea how far back the pipe would need to extend to achieve the 27-1/4'' plug-to-baffle distance specified by Matt. As I mentioned before, the supplied FG pipe tunnel is not going to work for this pipe, but the measurement showed that the tunnel will not have to be extended much farther back - probably significantly less than 2 inches - and I don't think it will bo too difficult to ream out the formers a bit and make my own channel with 1/16'' balsa sheet. I've got the Ultracote ''Deep Blue''color to match (HANU873 from Horizon) to cover it with, though it might be a skosh tricky to use heat-shrink on a concave surface...
So that's the blow-by-blow for now. I plan to offer observations on the engine/mount/pipe part of the assembly (and maybe later ignition/battery, since it relates to the propulsion system) but not the entire assembly process, as that's been done elsewhere - and better - before.
First notes for the Focus II/Syssa 180/ES40G pipe combo
I don't know if it is more appropriate to put these observations here or to start a fresh thread, but here are my first discoveries concerning the Focus II/Syssa assembly.
First off, if you are going to use or make a soft mount, get the engine with the 6.250'' stand-offs because with the shorter ones the rear end of the carb won't clear the engine mount. Naturally, I got the shorter ones so I will have to call Todd and exchange for the slightly longer ones. If you want the closest clearance possible, 6 inches flat will just barely clear the carb, but 6.25'' is the stock one to get.
I loosely laid out all the components on the floor to get a rough idea where the measurements are, and it is clear that the engine box will have to be modified (material removed from the sides where it slots into the firewall) to accommodate the soft mount/engine so that it will fit in the 7-7/8'' deep cowl (prop face to firewall). One could just leave out the engine box altogether and make some sort of pedestal to fill the gap between the firewall and the soft mount, but the front end needs the rigidity of the engine box, and it will make mounting the soft mount much easier.
Good news: the Macs header for OS 1.40R with 2-1/4'' rise appears to be a perfect fit. As Ed pointed out, the mounting holes will have to be drilled out a bit to increase the diameter slightly, but the centering is dead on.
I carefully inserted a wood dowel into the ES pipe to find the baffle depth, then transferred the measurement to the outside of the pipe (blue tape with magic marker hash mark) so I could get a better idea how far back the pipe would need to extend to achieve the 27-1/4'' plug-to-baffle distance specified by Matt. As I mentioned before, the supplied FG pipe tunnel is not going to work for this pipe, but the measurement showed that the tunnel will not have to be extended much farther back - probably significantly less than 2 inches - and I don't think it will bo too difficult to ream out the formers a bit and make my own channel with 1/16'' balsa sheet. I've got the Ultracote ''Deep Blue''color to match (HANU873 from Horizon) to cover it with, though it might be a skosh tricky to use heat-shrink on a concave surface...
So that's the blow-by-blow for now. I plan to offer observations on the engine/mount/pipe part of the assembly (and maybe later ignition/battery, since it relates to the propulsion system) but not the entire assembly process, as that's been done elsewhere - and better - before.
You have lots of room up front. The isolators are built at just about 7/8" thick. It looks like you can go as thick as 1" and still have room to move the box
Matt
12-26-2009, 06:13 AM
#182
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ossining,
NY
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
Matt, no doubt there will be plenty of room.
The biggest consideration is to make sure the engine position is absolutely correct before securing the engine box because once it is glued in permanently it will be quite difficult to access the blind nuts for the soft mount without doing major retro-carpentry.
The biggest consideration is to make sure the engine position is absolutely correct before securing the engine box because once it is glued in permanently it will be quite difficult to access the blind nuts for the soft mount without doing major retro-carpentry.
12-26-2009, 08:18 AM
#183
My Feedback: (11)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Scarsdale,
NY
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
Bob, Rather than hacking out a pipe tunnel extension, have you thought about swapping that ESC40G pipe for an ESC26G (smaller, lighter)? I do appreciate you may want to stay with what's proved effective so far, the 40 has delivered good sound and good performance through the whole band without peakiness. But remember, in posts 47-52, Matt and Ed said they used the 40 simply because Matt happened to have it on hand.
_________________________
Rob
P.S.
What's your current thinking about using/not using a nose ring? MTK said he planned to use one, but I don't see the apparatus in his most recent photo post.
_________________________
Rob
P.S.
What's your current thinking about using/not using a nose ring? MTK said he planned to use one, but I don't see the apparatus in his most recent photo post.
12-26-2009, 08:51 AM
#185
Senior Member
Thread Starter
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
ORIGINAL: fheppenheimer
Bob, Rather than hacking out a pipe tunnel extension, have you thought about swapping that ESC40G pipe for an ESC26G (smaller, lighter)? I do appreciate you may want to stay with what's proved effective so far, the 40 has delivered good sound and good performance through the whole band without peakiness. But remember, in posts 47-52, Matt and Ed said they used the 40 simply because Matt happened to have it on hand.
_________________________
Rob
P.S.
What's your current thinking about using/not using a nose ring? MTK said he planned to use one, but I don't see the apparatus in his most recent photo post.
Bob, Rather than hacking out a pipe tunnel extension, have you thought about swapping that ESC40G pipe for an ESC26G (smaller, lighter)? I do appreciate you may want to stay with what's proved effective so far, the 40 has delivered good sound and good performance through the whole band without peakiness. But remember, in posts 47-52, Matt and Ed said they used the 40 simply because Matt happened to have it on hand.
_________________________
Rob
P.S.
What's your current thinking about using/not using a nose ring? MTK said he planned to use one, but I don't see the apparatus in his most recent photo post.
Bob and Ed Alt both received the new version of the pipe which Ed Skorepa calls the 30G.
Ed S also shared with me that he is getting an SAP 30 cc to do his own experiments. That's great news...Ed certainly knows what he is doing
I will install a nose ring when the apparatus Todd Syssa is working on gets done. That installation on the fuse is simple. But like I said before the engine is a smooth runner...about the only maneuver that may get hampered is the snap roll.
Matt
12-26-2009, 08:57 AM
#186
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ossining,
NY
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
ORIGINAL: fheppenheimer
Bob, Rather than hacking out a pipe tunnel extension, have you thought about swapping that ESC40G pipe for an ESC26G (smaller, lighter)? I do appreciate you may want to stay with what's proved effective so far, the 40 has delivered good sound and good performance through the whole band without peakiness. But remember, in posts 47-52, Matt and Ed said they used the 40 simply because Matt happened to have it on hand.
_________________________
Rob
P.S.
What's your current thinking about using/not using a nose ring? MTK said he planned to use one, but I don't see the apparatus in his most recent photo post.
Bob, Rather than hacking out a pipe tunnel extension, have you thought about swapping that ESC40G pipe for an ESC26G (smaller, lighter)? I do appreciate you may want to stay with what's proved effective so far, the 40 has delivered good sound and good performance through the whole band without peakiness. But remember, in posts 47-52, Matt and Ed said they used the 40 simply because Matt happened to have it on hand.
_________________________
Rob
P.S.
What's your current thinking about using/not using a nose ring? MTK said he planned to use one, but I don't see the apparatus in his most recent photo post.
Unless somebody does some testing with the 26G (diameter 1.57") to the extent that Ed and Matt did with the 40G (2" diameter), you are correct that I plan to stay with the "tried and true". Seems to me that the 26G might well offer some performance difference given the dramatic difference in pipe diameter, but at this point we don't know whether it would be better or worse. Ed and Matt said that the present characteristics are quite desirable, so that's good enough for me. Believe me, I'm nobody's expert on this stuff! I must trust others to tell me if the top end, midrange torque, throttle response, etc, are good.
Also interesting to note that with the new 30G the diameter is the same as the 40G and it is only 1 inch shorter, so even with that pipe the channel would have to be modified.
About the nose ring, I don't know yet. Could be a bit of a PITA to make since it must have clearance for the Hall sensor. But I can see how it might be necessary if the thrust line is affected, or if the spinner is jumping all over the place. Another thing to think about is how its absence might affect the pipe coupler. Stuff to ponder.
12-26-2009, 08:59 AM
#187
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ossining,
NY
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
ORIGINAL: MTK
[b]Talking with Ed Skorepa recently, he explained that this particular change that I asked him to make in my 40G pipe is now being offered as the 30G pipe. The business side of the pipe is no different than the 40G....the aft section has been shortened 1 inch from the standard 40 G pipe
Bob and Ed Alt both received the new version of the pipe which Ed Skorepa calls the 30G.
Ed S also shared with me that he is getting an SAP 30 cc to do his own experiments. That's great news...Ed certainly knows what he is doing
I will install a nose ring when the apparatus Todd Syssa is working on gets done. That installation on the fuse is simple. But like I said before the engine is a smooth runner...about the only maneuver that may get hampered is the snap roll.
Matt
ORIGINAL: fheppenheimer
Bob, Rather than hacking out a pipe tunnel extension, have you thought about swapping that ESC40G pipe for an ESC26G (smaller, lighter)? I do appreciate you may want to stay with what's proved effective so far, the 40 has delivered good sound and good performance through the whole band without peakiness. But remember, in posts 47-52, Matt and Ed said they used the 40 simply because Matt happened to have it on hand.
_________________________
Rob
P.S.
What's your current thinking about using/not using a nose ring? MTK said he planned to use one, but I don't see the apparatus in his most recent photo post.
Bob, Rather than hacking out a pipe tunnel extension, have you thought about swapping that ESC40G pipe for an ESC26G (smaller, lighter)? I do appreciate you may want to stay with what's proved effective so far, the 40 has delivered good sound and good performance through the whole band without peakiness. But remember, in posts 47-52, Matt and Ed said they used the 40 simply because Matt happened to have it on hand.
_________________________
Rob
P.S.
What's your current thinking about using/not using a nose ring? MTK said he planned to use one, but I don't see the apparatus in his most recent photo post.
Bob and Ed Alt both received the new version of the pipe which Ed Skorepa calls the 30G.
Ed S also shared with me that he is getting an SAP 30 cc to do his own experiments. That's great news...Ed certainly knows what he is doing
I will install a nose ring when the apparatus Todd Syssa is working on gets done. That installation on the fuse is simple. But like I said before the engine is a smooth runner...about the only maneuver that may get hampered is the snap roll.
Matt
I thought it looked awfully familiar.
12-27-2009, 05:15 PM
#188
Senior Member
Thread Starter
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
ORIGINAL: MTK
BTW- The SAP is currently turning an Xoar 19x10 electric wood prop modified and laminated with carbon for stiffness and strength. It turns this unique prop comfortably. I have zero doubt that the Webra 160 would turn the prop at similar or slightly better rpm. I also have the 20x10 I was using on the ZDZ for bench runs. I will try the prop on the SAP soon, but it won't be a direct comparison since I modified it and laminated it also
BTW- The SAP is currently turning an Xoar 19x10 electric wood prop modified and laminated with carbon for stiffness and strength. It turns this unique prop comfortably. I have zero doubt that the Webra 160 would turn the prop at similar or slightly better rpm. I also have the 20x10 I was using on the ZDZ for bench runs. I will try the prop on the SAP soon, but it won't be a direct comparison since I modified it and laminated it also
First off, the prop is so much lighter than the 18.1x10 APC that it made the plane tail heavy. I didn't expect it to be a problem and it really wasn't but I probably should have adjusted the CG.
Second, running the engine at the field, we realized that the engine was a bit lean so I brought the main needle out 1/4 turn (it is more than 2 turns open now; I will get the exact amount later tonight). The prop-engine-pipe combination is such that the engine just wants to rev up. To do that, it needs fuel. Ed tached around 8K on the ground but as soon as the prop unloaded, we put the in the air rpm at closer to 8500. That's a tremendous amount of output from such small displacement. A 19 inch prop turning that fast in the air means considerable air ripping and noise. It sounded like a 3D plane spinning a very low pitch prop. That's not desirable in pattern so we have work to do there.
The assumption is that I have a good tank and plumbing is sound. I can't see any problems with fuel delivery but it doesn't mean that the carb may not have a slight leak somewhere. I will check this all out to be certain all gaskets are seated properly. It is a bit surprising that the main needle is as open as it is but it simply may be that the engine on pipe just needs that much more fuel than expected. Pipes definitely cause a rise in fuel consumption. Remember the days when we ran screaming 60s on pipe? 16 ozs of fuel didn't last long with good reason. There is no free lunch.
Point is that we still don't have the right mixture for the loads we are running.
We both have run MOKI 180s in the past turning 18x10s which was the recommended prop for that engine. We both believe the SAP out turns the Moki.... Surprises galore today.
If we have more decent weather before the spring, I will be trying an Xoar 19x13 electric wood prop laminated in carbon. I will try stretching the pipe a bit to tone the beast down some. I need to turn a 19" prop at around 75-7600 to get the sound quality I want.
We also ran a movie camera to capture some of today's events. If I can figure out how to download the movie, you will see it here
Matt
12-27-2009, 06:02 PM
#190
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ossining,
NY
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
Very impressive numbers from such a compact unit! How did mid-range torque feel in verticals?
It will be interesting to see how you tame it, both with your custom props and also with "off-the-rack" APC's for us duffers.
1/4 turn is a LOT for a gasser, so it must've been running pretty lean. I hope it is not a leaking seal or O-ring.
I have never run a pipe before so I did not know how it affected fuel consumption. Since gasser tanks are not pressurized, I am going to get one of those very lightweight, translucent Sullivan tanks, so do you think 14-16 oz would be about right?
It will be interesting to see how you tame it, both with your custom props and also with "off-the-rack" APC's for us duffers.
1/4 turn is a LOT for a gasser, so it must've been running pretty lean. I hope it is not a leaking seal or O-ring.
I have never run a pipe before so I did not know how it affected fuel consumption. Since gasser tanks are not pressurized, I am going to get one of those very lightweight, translucent Sullivan tanks, so do you think 14-16 oz would be about right?
12-27-2009, 06:06 PM
#191
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ossining,
NY
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
ORIGINAL: Gungadin
Man, you guys must have froze ! But thank you very much for your info.
Man, you guys must have froze ! But thank you very much for your info.
Supposed to be brutal the couple of days, though.[&o]
So tomorrow I will start working on the soft mount.
12-27-2009, 07:42 PM
#192
Senior Member
Thread Starter
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
ORIGINAL: cmoulder
Very impressive numbers from such a compact unit! How did mid-range torque feel in verticals?
It will be interesting to see how you tame it, both with your custom props and also with ''off-the-rack'' APC's for us duffers.
1/4 turn is a LOT for a gasser, so it must've been running pretty lean. I hope it is not a leaking seal or O-ring.
I have never run a pipe before so I did not know how it affected fuel consumption. Since gasser tanks are not pressurized, I am going to get one of those very lightweight, translucent Sullivan tanks, so do you think 14-16 oz would be about right?
Very impressive numbers from such a compact unit! How did mid-range torque feel in verticals?
It will be interesting to see how you tame it, both with your custom props and also with ''off-the-rack'' APC's for us duffers.
1/4 turn is a LOT for a gasser, so it must've been running pretty lean. I hope it is not a leaking seal or O-ring.
I have never run a pipe before so I did not know how it affected fuel consumption. Since gasser tanks are not pressurized, I am going to get one of those very lightweight, translucent Sullivan tanks, so do you think 14-16 oz would be about right?
Midrange torque is pretty low right now. Just don't have the mix and pipe set where it will be happiest yet. I want to turn 19" props so I think we need to stretch the pipe about 1/2" and go a little richer still on mix, both high and low needles.
I still saw the jumpiness on pipe that I reported a couple weeks ago, using the 19x8 and 19X10. When I went past 2/3 open throat, rpm picked up much too fast for my liking. Strangely enough, the jumpiness was not evident when running the APC props. It may be the fact that the electric props are so thin that they represent significantly lower drag where the APCs' are thicker and may suppress the jump
Matt
12-27-2009, 08:29 PM
#193
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ossining,
NY
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
It seemed to do well with the 18.1x10 std in your and Ed's initial tests.
APC 17x12 Std blade: 8200 RPM 19.5 lbs static thrust
APC 18.1x10 Std blade: 7700 RPM 20.5 lbs static thrust
APC 18.1x10 wide: 7400 RPM 20.4 lbs static thrust
APC 19x11 Std blade: 6400 RPM 19 lbs static thrust (Proved what we expected -way too much prop!)
APC 15.75x10 3 blade 8200 RPM 21 lbs static thrust (Prop is a re-pitched "Lockhart special")
APC 17x10 Std blade 8900 RPM 22.3 lbs static thrust (Not enough prop, obviously)
Vess 18x6 wood prop 9300 RPM 26 lbs static thrust (Yep, not a pattern prop)
Perhaps a prop with a thicker airfoil and more rotating mass is better? I am clueless, just asking... What props performed best with the Moki's? Any relevance here?
APC 17x12 Std blade: 8200 RPM 19.5 lbs static thrust
APC 18.1x10 Std blade: 7700 RPM 20.5 lbs static thrust
APC 18.1x10 wide: 7400 RPM 20.4 lbs static thrust
APC 19x11 Std blade: 6400 RPM 19 lbs static thrust (Proved what we expected -way too much prop!)
APC 15.75x10 3 blade 8200 RPM 21 lbs static thrust (Prop is a re-pitched "Lockhart special")
APC 17x10 Std blade 8900 RPM 22.3 lbs static thrust (Not enough prop, obviously)
Vess 18x6 wood prop 9300 RPM 26 lbs static thrust (Yep, not a pattern prop)
Perhaps a prop with a thicker airfoil and more rotating mass is better? I am clueless, just asking... What props performed best with the Moki's? Any relevance here?
12-27-2009, 09:07 PM
#195
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Madison,
OH
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
I wonder how it would do on a Mejzlik 19x8 or 19x10 ? If you cash in your 401K you could buy a few sizes in the Mejzlik line up. No one wants to spend $40-$50 ea. prop to see "if they are the ones". It's easy to end up with pretty conversation pieces that may not be the equal to the APC, but there is always that nagging doubt that maybe I should have tried them. At least that is how I think anyway. When I get my engine I may try one or two, if I can get a good feel for which sizes I should try. But first I have to cash in my 401K !
12-27-2009, 10:11 PM
#196
My Feedback: (42)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Randolph,
NJ
Posts: 878
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
I wonder how it would do on a Mejzlik 19x8 or 19x10 ?
There's nothing to stop you from using what APC offers on this engine. We're looking at alternatives for the sake of understanding what this engine will do as we change the loading. Today we saw how much the load reduction can be with a thin & stiff wood/CF laminate prop. The pulling authority in the air was very impressive, but it's not the right setup.
If I have time before pulling out the 140 RX in my Prestige, I may try Matt's 19x10 modified Xoar on it, just for another data point.
As for Mezjlik props in this size range, they seem a bit on the thick side, a little too much of a club perhaps. I would probably look at an 18x10 or 18x11 Mezjlik and see if that works, but I suspect that it will waste power beating the air into submission. They really seem to be better suited for larger engines from what I've seen from my own limited use. If anyone has data to share, that would be great.
12-27-2009, 11:46 PM
#197
Senior Member
Thread Starter
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
ORIGINAL: cmoulder
Very impressive numbers from such a compact unit! How did mid-range torque feel in verticals?
It will be interesting to see how you tame it, both with your custom props and also with ''off-the-rack'' APC's for us duffers.
1/4 turn is a LOT for a gasser, so it must've been running pretty lean. I hope it is not a leaking seal or O-ring.
I have never run a pipe before so I did not know how it affected fuel consumption. Since gasser tanks are not pressurized, I am going to get one of those very lightweight, translucent Sullivan tanks, so do you think 14-16 oz would be about right?
Very impressive numbers from such a compact unit! How did mid-range torque feel in verticals?
It will be interesting to see how you tame it, both with your custom props and also with ''off-the-rack'' APC's for us duffers.
1/4 turn is a LOT for a gasser, so it must've been running pretty lean. I hope it is not a leaking seal or O-ring.
I have never run a pipe before so I did not know how it affected fuel consumption. Since gasser tanks are not pressurized, I am going to get one of those very lightweight, translucent Sullivan tanks, so do you think 14-16 oz would be about right?
I may have missed mentioning that I currently have a 320 cc tank in the test bed....the equivalent of about 11 oz tank. That runs the engine just about 10-11 minutes. A 14 to 16 oz tank will easily get you 15 min.
Running the engine as fast as it runs requires lots of fuel. When we get it running in the mid 7Ks, I am certain fuel consumption will drop.
Ed may be coming over the house tomorrow so if he does, we will probably take a moment and run the 19x13 with a stretched pipe. I am in process of cloning the landing gear and wheel pants from his Prestige so he is an interested party for the gear and pants as well.
Matt
12-28-2009, 05:21 AM
#198
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ossining,
NY
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
Ok, Matt, that's plenty of flight time for me, so I could get a 12 oz and still have a nice cushion. I know that with a 50cc and 22 oz I get 12 minutes with a ton of fuel left over. Usually I am ready to land after about 10 minutes anyway.
That'll be something if the 19x13 works out. Sounds like too much prop, but I'm just an interested spectator at this point.
That'll be something if the 19x13 works out. Sounds like too much prop, but I'm just an interested spectator at this point.
12-28-2009, 05:28 AM
#199
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Perth, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
I tells ya, if the 180 can swing a 19x13 at good revs, by jove, one may wet one's pants!
Bob, I used to run an mvvs 26 ifs on a 10 ounce tank and never once ran the tank dry. That was enough to get me two shedules and a bit of mucking around at the end, and still have a quarter of a tank (probably 13 minutes? maybe more? ). I think 12 will be more than adequate for the 180.
Bob, I used to run an mvvs 26 ifs on a 10 ounce tank and never once ran the tank dry. That was enough to get me two shedules and a bit of mucking around at the end, and still have a quarter of a tank (probably 13 minutes? maybe more? ). I think 12 will be more than adequate for the 180.
12-28-2009, 10:40 AM
#200
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ossining,
NY
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SAP 180 (Syssa Performance)
12 oz it is. Going to look a bit unusual seeing such a small tank in a pattern plane, about 1/2 "normal" capacity.
Got to looking at the tanks, and the Sullivan translucent Flex-tanks are not gasoline compatible. There must be a 12 oz tank in my collection, and I have gas stoppers.
I also have one of the Walbro felt clunks that I will use.
Got to looking at the tanks, and the Sullivan translucent Flex-tanks are not gasoline compatible. There must be a 12 oz tank in my collection, and I have gas stoppers.
I also have one of the Walbro felt clunks that I will use.