OS 46 AX readings?
#3
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Melbourne, AUSTRALIA
10% nitro, standard muffler
11x5 MAS does 14000rpm (too small, sounds great with the prop screaming though)
11x6 MAS does 12000rpm
11x7 MAS does high 11000's (can't recall exactly but it likes this prop)
11x5 MAS does 14000rpm (too small, sounds great with the prop screaming though)
11x6 MAS does 12000rpm
11x7 MAS does high 11000's (can't recall exactly but it likes this prop)
#4
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Tooele, UT
Be aware that all my readings are at 4,900 feet elevation. Your mileage will vary. Stock muffler. I back the needle off around 300 RPM from peak on the ground, but as the props vary in their "sweet spots", there's a variance of 100-300 RPM from that planned off-peak reading.
9x7 APC: 15,000 (15,500 with a Tower muffler with no baffle, but man, is it ever noisy!)
10x7 Top Flite PowerPoint: 13,000
10x8 APC: 12,100
11x6 Top Flite PowerPoint: 11,800
I fly a 7lb Great Planes Patriot 40 with this motor. The 11x6 works really well at keeping the vertical going fairly strong (not unlimited due to altitude), but the 10x7 hauls the plane around with authority, yet gives a nice pitch speed too for speed planes. The APCs are way quieter than the Top Flites, too.
9x7 APC: 15,000 (15,500 with a Tower muffler with no baffle, but man, is it ever noisy!)
10x7 Top Flite PowerPoint: 13,000
10x8 APC: 12,100
11x6 Top Flite PowerPoint: 11,800
I fly a 7lb Great Planes Patriot 40 with this motor. The 11x6 works really well at keeping the vertical going fairly strong (not unlimited due to altitude), but the 10x7 hauls the plane around with authority, yet gives a nice pitch speed too for speed planes. The APCs are way quieter than the Top Flites, too.
#8
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: LODI,
CA
Using APC 9.5 X 6 15% nitro toping out at 17300 richen to 16550 to pilon race. Some people are doing better then this, I know because they can pass me on the straight away, not sure which prop they are using
#11

My Feedback: (20)
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: East Islip,
NY
ORIGINAL: daven
APC 10x7
Peaks out 14,300 - 14,500
Runs great at about 500 rpm off peak.
APC 10x7
Peaks out 14,300 - 14,500
Runs great at about 500 rpm off peak.
Here at sea level on 10% <20% Castor> I'm getting 13,400 on a 10x7 APC.
Oh, it has a Macs "do nothing" black muffler vs the stock powerbox.
Sounds like I'm down on power.
#12

My Feedback: (66)
why does everyone still run master airscrew props lol. a 10x6 MAS is not the same pitch as a APC 10x6. compare your self put the two props hub to hub and look at the AOA of each prop.
IF you have a 10x6 MAS its closer to a 10x4.
on APC 9x8 i get 17,400 on jett muffler
IF you have a 10x6 MAS its closer to a 10x4.
on APC 9x8 i get 17,400 on jett muffler
#14

My Feedback: (20)
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: East Islip,
NY
Added Macs EX-Long (2592) Header to replace the standard one on the #1943 Pre tuned system. <removed better then 1">
Same setup on fuel and prop that yielded 13,400 static <10% and 10x7 APC>
Now makes 14,500. Good throttle response, nice idle.
Same setup on fuel and prop that yielded 13,400 static <10% and 10x7 APC>
Now makes 14,500. Good throttle response, nice idle.
#15
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
I have three of them, all with APC 10x6 props. Two use a macs one piece muffler. Those two turn 14,500 on 10%, and run a really long time on 8 oz of fuel. One's in a Shrike, the other in a Mikulasko Arrow. Performance on both is astonishing. The third one is on a trainer and I haven't tached it. I have found through experience that the macs mufflers take about 500 rpm off the top end. The OS Ugly Box is pretty efficient, but I don't like it because of it weighs so much and makes balancing the airplanes more difficult.
#16
I'm getting right at 15,000 with an APC 10x7 or an APC 12x4 using a Macs header and pipe. There's more in it but it runs great and the transition is very smooth with no lean/rich hesitation.
#19
ORIGINAL: TimBle
anyone try a 12x6 on this engine?
anyone try a 12x6 on this engine?
#20

Hi!
Don't say that!
I was also thinking so, but a newbie came along a few years ago with his ASP .40 (Same as a Kyosho .40 GX) in a Kyosho "Calmato ,high winged trainer, and low and behold, he had a 12x6 APC on. I was very reluctant to help him fly his plane with that big prop, telling him that for .40 engines 11x6 props were a better choice.
But when I started the engine and saw with my own eyes that the engine could in fact turn that big prop with outhority I was convinced. He used 16% nitro and 15 % all synthetic oil.
That's why I today race succesfully with the same kind of engine in Q-500 pylon. My Kyosho GX.40prop turns a 10x6 RAM (which is the best prop together with the new Graupner 10x6 "Cam prop" with up swept tips)at 14600-14800 rpm using FAI fuel.
We use 10x6 props here in Sweden in Q-500 racing and FAI fuel.
Don't say that!
I was also thinking so, but a newbie came along a few years ago with his ASP .40 (Same as a Kyosho .40 GX) in a Kyosho "Calmato ,high winged trainer, and low and behold, he had a 12x6 APC on. I was very reluctant to help him fly his plane with that big prop, telling him that for .40 engines 11x6 props were a better choice.
But when I started the engine and saw with my own eyes that the engine could in fact turn that big prop with outhority I was convinced. He used 16% nitro and 15 % all synthetic oil.
That's why I today race succesfully with the same kind of engine in Q-500 pylon. My Kyosho GX.40prop turns a 10x6 RAM (which is the best prop together with the new Graupner 10x6 "Cam prop" with up swept tips)at 14600-14800 rpm using FAI fuel.
We use 10x6 props here in Sweden in Q-500 racing and FAI fuel.
#21
ORIGINAL: jaka
Hi!
Don't say that!
I was also thinking so, but a newbie came along a few years ago with his ASP .40 (Same as a Kyosho .40 GX) in a Kyosho ''Calmato ,high winged trainer, and low and behold, he had a 12x6 APC on. I was very reluctant to help him fly his plane with that big prop, telling him that for .40 engines 11x6 props were a better choice.
But when I started the engine and saw with my own eyes that the engine could in fact turn that big prop with outhority I was convinced. He used 16% nitro and 15 % all synthetic oil.
That's why I today race succesfully with the same kind of engine in Q-500 pylon. My Kyosho GX.40prop turns a 10x6 RAM (which is the best prop together with the new Graupner 10x6 ''Cam prop'' with up swept tips)at 14600-14800 rpm using FAI fuel.
We use 10x6 props here in Sweden in Q-500 racing and FAI fuel.
Hi!
Don't say that!
I was also thinking so, but a newbie came along a few years ago with his ASP .40 (Same as a Kyosho .40 GX) in a Kyosho ''Calmato ,high winged trainer, and low and behold, he had a 12x6 APC on. I was very reluctant to help him fly his plane with that big prop, telling him that for .40 engines 11x6 props were a better choice.
But when I started the engine and saw with my own eyes that the engine could in fact turn that big prop with outhority I was convinced. He used 16% nitro and 15 % all synthetic oil.
That's why I today race succesfully with the same kind of engine in Q-500 pylon. My Kyosho GX.40prop turns a 10x6 RAM (which is the best prop together with the new Graupner 10x6 ''Cam prop'' with up swept tips)at 14600-14800 rpm using FAI fuel.
We use 10x6 props here in Sweden in Q-500 racing and FAI fuel.
#22

HI
GO WITH AN OS 55AX- any plane you could put a 46AX in will take a 55AX so why not go for the added performance you will gain remember -performance is always a power to weight ratio i do think a 55 is a board out 46 so the engine weights are about the same and the power of the 55 is greater- in fact the power of all the AX series of engines is awesome- my 75 AX is turning a 14/6 apc @ 11,300 RPMS my 91 FX turns a 13/6 apc - a full one inch bigger prop- all AX series engines are putting out more power for there size than any other series of OS engines in the past and that is a real good thing
A 55 SIZE engine is as big as i would go in a 40 size airframe-or the wing loading starts to be an issue especially on landingwere you need to look you best always
GO WITH AN OS 55AX- any plane you could put a 46AX in will take a 55AX so why not go for the added performance you will gain remember -performance is always a power to weight ratio i do think a 55 is a board out 46 so the engine weights are about the same and the power of the 55 is greater- in fact the power of all the AX series of engines is awesome- my 75 AX is turning a 14/6 apc @ 11,300 RPMS my 91 FX turns a 13/6 apc - a full one inch bigger prop- all AX series engines are putting out more power for there size than any other series of OS engines in the past and that is a real good thing
A 55 SIZE engine is as big as i would go in a 40 size airframe-or the wing loading starts to be an issue especially on landingwere you need to look you best always



