speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

It's a pretty widly known fact the the MA props measure less pitch then an APC equivalent. I won't speculate why beyond the fact that some people can't seem to see past RPM. If you are happy with MA props then I would not be the guy trying to convince you to change brands. If you were to ask me which is a better performing prop then I would without hesitation reccomend APC. Take a look at what every pylon and pattern pilot uses. Not a single MA prop would be found in those circles.

airraptor

My Feedback: (66)

i have checked both on a prather pitch gage so yes the MA have less pitch. heck anyone that can see can see for them self. take both props of same diameter and pitch. put one on top of the other and look at them from the side and see the difference. MA used more in combat because they survive better when landing.

now some planes the MA look better and may even do better but mainly on slow cub like planes because they have wider tips and look better.

049flyer

My Feedback: (18)

What is the big deal with the pitch? Are you guys in some sort of competition where you are restricted by prop pitch? Geez!

If a 10 x 6 doesn't do what you need, mount up a 10 x 7 or 10 x 8. Seems pretty simple to me or am I missing something?

All that matters is how your airplane performs, the weight, the cost and how the thing looks. Advertised prop pitch is insignificant.

airraptor

My Feedback: (66)

that is true but when comparing engines a guy will say i turned a 10x6 at 15000 on a MA prop and think he has a hot engine. Another guy has an engine that runs a APC 10x6 at 14000 and that thinks he has a week engine and he wastes money on the other guys engine.most people new to the hobby dont know.

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

Raptor has a great point. Like I said in my first post is that most guys can't see past RPM. We see threads all the time where someone is boasting about a high RPM or is not seeing the RPM he feels he needs. I have a suspicion this is why the MA props are not true pitched. For the guys who get hung up on RPM the MA 10x6 will turn faster then the APC 10x6. In their world the MA is the better prop because it turns up higher. It also sounds faster in the air. The reality is that in almost all cases the APC will out perform the MA. Most guys do not get the pig picture when it comes to matching prop to the engine and airframe. Then again, if your goal is to go out bore holes in the sky and have fun with your buds then it really doesn't matter. If you have a marginally powered airplane or want the best performance your airplane/engine combo can offer then look at the APC prop list. They make all those different sizes for a reason.

jester_s1

Actually, the rated pitch is just an average of the pitch along the length of the blade, the theoretical distance the prop will pull the plane per revolution. Yes, the APC has more pitch in the middle and base than the MAS. That's because it has no pitch at all at the tips. The design works well, but it's not like you're getting something from the APC that you aren't getting from the MAS.

And yes, some pattern pilots do use MAS props. I tried 10x6, 10x7, and 11x5 props on my Kaos from both brands. I found that the MAS classic 10x6 was the best for that plane and engine at that weight and with my flying style. Others with different planes who like different characteristics will make a different choice.

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

1. The APC gives you more performance across the board. This is due to the higher degree of science used in design and a stiffer blade due to materials.

2. How long has it been since you have been to a pattern contest? With today's modern 2M pattern airplanes the E guys are running 20.5x14 APC or Falcon CF and the Glow (YS) guys are running 20.5x10. The classic guys are running APC 11x7 or 11x8. You may find a couple different sizes then mentioned but you won't find any MA props. Sport flying a 30 year old pattern airplane is not really what I ment by a pattern airplane.

airraptor

My Feedback: (66)

cant teach a old dog new tricks. lol

1QwkSport2.5r

AR and Speed - good info there, guys. Kudos. Not to mention, but I think the rotational limit for MA is 170,000/Dia. Where APC is 190,000/dia. Don't think an MA will hold up on a 19,000rpm Jett or Nelson.... Eh?

jester_s1

I fly SPA with my Kaos, Speed, which I guess kinda qualifies as flying pattern. I haven't even heard of an F3A contest in my area in a good while, and I don't have one of those planes. Either way, I'll stand by what I said. The important thing is how the plane performs with a given prop, and MAS props are sometimes the best choice. They don't load the engine as much as the equivalent APC prop does, so in some applications they'll let the engine get into the happy RPM range where it makes the best power while the APC doesn't. In my example, if my plane was a bit draggier or my engine was ported for torque more than speed, the APC probably would have flown it better. Even a fuel change might have swayed the choice one way or another.

spaceworm

I am completing the build of a CAP P-47. WS 61+ inches. I plan to power with a Saito FA-120abc (Big Jugs). What 2 blade prop would you recommend? If available, what four blade prop would also be a good fit? Thank you ver' much.
Sincerely, Richard
Club Saito #635; Saito 56, 100, 120abc, 130T, 180;
YS F 120;
Welcome-the not so scale, almost ready to fly, soon to be scrap, Warbird Brotherhood #52
Spitfire Brotherhood #252: HK Spitfire, Flyzone Spitfire, Guillow's Spitfire

airraptor

My Feedback: (66)

16x7-16x8 APC