Top Flite Cessna 310 posted
09-03-2018, 04:27 AM
#3851
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bisson mufflers
12-17-2018, 04:35 PM
#3853
My Feedback: (49)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 1,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wanted , Bisson Muffler screw on exhaust extension
I built my TF 310 back in 2006 or 2007 when they first came out. I use Os .46ax engines with Bisson pitts style mufflers. Back when I built it there was a gent (RCU screen name Meesh) who was making and selling thread in exhaust extensions for the bison muffler. The builder of the model was too cut off all but about 3/8 to 1/2" of the muffler exhaust tubes. Then they were to be tapped with a 9mm x1.0 tap. What this did was allow the entire nacelle to be slid on and off without getting hung up on the stock exhaust tubes which stuck down well over one inch. The engines with the bison 4046 muffler with all but 3/8" or so of exhaust tubes cut off were mounted on the mounts and then the nacelle slides over and is screwed in place. Then the threaded exhaust extensions and threaded on.
Well I recently stripped the threads on one of my four Meesh made extensions. He no longer makes them.
I need ONE. HELP. Anybody have one from a new set or a crash that they are not and will not be using ????
Well I recently stripped the threads on one of my four Meesh made extensions. He no longer makes them.
I need ONE. HELP. Anybody have one from a new set or a crash that they are not and will not be using ????
02-05-2019, 04:34 PM
#3856
Got my C310 in today and yes they are 172mm wide at the widest point but tapper down to about 165 towards the front 
. So much for using two 90ts . The Saito 60t will fit though, but doubt power will be adequate.
On another note why in the world did they put the nose weight IN!!! that sucks. They should have just given you the lead and glue and made it optional.
. So much for using two 90ts . The Saito 60t will fit though, but doubt power will be adequate.On another note why in the world did they put the nose weight IN!!! that sucks. They should have just given you the lead and glue and made it optional.
02-09-2019, 06:37 AM
#3857
Banned
Finally re-maidened the 310 with the DLE 20's on her. Flew like a champ. Stable, plenty of power in reserve and sounded sweet. Plane is awesome. For all who said DLE 20's are too much. Sorry to disappoint you. The plane flies better than ever. https://youtu.be/N2NoDMN3hEg https://youtu.be/hSOqjqmvjnA https://youtu.be/1tzw7FC-x4M https://youtu.be/9D0MI1ew6v4
02-14-2019, 07:30 PM
#3861
5 years ago I started participating in some local Warbird pylon racing. We were putting YS 115 engines into WWII fighters with 515 Sq in wings. Some of these airplanes would weigh up to 7.5 pounds. I consider that a fairly heavy airplane yet they land no faster then an old school pattern airplane. One of the biggest reasons is the correct CG. That's why I focused my comments on your other thread around the CG. Think about a heavy pylon airplane pulling 20 G with no tip stall tendencies. It's usually not an issue when you have the knowledge to correctly set up an airplane.
02-18-2019, 06:21 AM
#3862
Banned
The proof of the pudding is in the flying. You do what you want and we'll see what happens.
You asked for opinions. I gave mine. I pointed out that with your initial engine thoughts you were pushing things. You didn't like that so you proceeded to accuse me of saying things I did not say. Now you try to pass stories about me while I've said nothing more. Who's reaching?
I see the potential for problems and issues some of which I have read about in other threads for this very model where larger engines were used. But hey, what do I know? Been in model aviation for over 60 years now. You obviously have the upper hand here.
You asked for opinions. I gave mine. I pointed out that with your initial engine thoughts you were pushing things. You didn't like that so you proceeded to accuse me of saying things I did not say. Now you try to pass stories about me while I've said nothing more. Who's reaching?
I see the potential for problems and issues some of which I have read about in other threads for this very model where larger engines were used. But hey, what do I know? Been in model aviation for over 60 years now. You obviously have the upper hand here.
02-18-2019, 07:55 AM
#3863
The proof of the pudding is in the flying. You do what you want and we'll see what happens.
You asked for opinions. I gave mine. I pointed out that with your initial engine thoughts you were pushing things. You didn't like that so you proceeded to accuse me of saying things I did not say. Now you try to pass stories about me while I've said nothing more. Who's reaching?
I see the potential for problems and issues some of which I have read about in other threads for this very model where larger engines were used. But hey, what do I know? Been in model aviation for over 60 years now. You obviously have the upper hand here.
You asked for opinions. I gave mine. I pointed out that with your initial engine thoughts you were pushing things. You didn't like that so you proceeded to accuse me of saying things I did not say. Now you try to pass stories about me while I've said nothing more. Who's reaching?
I see the potential for problems and issues some of which I have read about in other threads for this very model where larger engines were used. But hey, what do I know? Been in model aviation for over 60 years now. You obviously have the upper hand here.
Again, you referenced things on the TF C310 as general assumptions and not actual knowledge please see your post from the other forum. I am happy you came to this TF C310 thread and read around. In aviation and RC there are some generics that apply to all plans and some that are unique to specific types of planes. Example, there was a pilot that came to the local airport that I teach ground school to talk about his career as a show pilot in a turbo prop transport plane. At the end he said he could help as needed but he did not know a lot on general aviation. He just did not throughout general statements.
I understand your concern with larger engines, but I must ask with your 60 years of model aviation how much of this is with scale planes? I asked because with scale model they require considerably more nose weight than other RC planes. About 90% of my planes are scale models, and with all I always run into issues with needing nose weight. Instead of adding dead weight people normally add a larger engine. Examples:
My TF Staggerwing needed lbs of nose weight to get it to balance. In this case I would have been better to add a bigger engine instead of going with the suggested engines by TF and adding all the nose weight.
My H9 P-47 I added a DLE 55 which is 25cc more than H9 suggest but balances it out perfect without having to add weight.
My GP GeeBee. I needed to add a heavy nose spinner weight to the very tip of the engine shaft. I would have been better to use a larger engine that suggested in the manual instead of dead weight spinning on the engine. If I did not add to the very tip I would have had to add way more weight on the firewall.
This same applies to the TF C310. Therefore, they added all that lead in the nose.
I can keep going if you want. I also have videos if you need…Also years, does not directly correlate to experience.
Thanks and my offer still stands you can PM me instead of us mudding up these forums with this.
02-19-2019, 12:59 PM
#3866
My Feedback: (18)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: SheCarGo, Sillynoise, IL
Posts: 2,252
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Gentlemen.......
As you may know I am the MOD for this forum...
As you may also know I have the power to make things happen..
So, gentlemen, I am at this time asking you to refrain from any further
negative discussion in the forum.
You may take it into PM's as I do not deal with those..
The last two post in this forum should be either deleted or changed into a positive comment.
I think you gentlemen know what you should do...
Thank you,
Robby
As you may know I am the MOD for this forum...
As you may also know I have the power to make things happen..
So, gentlemen, I am at this time asking you to refrain from any further
negative discussion in the forum.
You may take it into PM's as I do not deal with those..
The last two post in this forum should be either deleted or changed into a positive comment.
I think you gentlemen know what you should do...
Thank you,
Robby
04-25-2019, 03:09 AM
#3869
rowdog wrote "I understand your concern with larger engines, but I must ask with your 60 years of model aviation how much of this is with scale planes? I asked because with scale model they require considerably more nose weight than other RC planes. About 90% of my planes are scale models, and with all I always run into issues with needing nose weight. Instead of adding dead weight people normally add a larger engine. Examples:
My TF Staggerwing needed lbs of nose weight to get it to balance. In this case I would have been better to add a bigger engine instead of going with the suggested engines by TF and adding all the nose weight.
My H9 P-47 I added a DLE 55 which is 25cc more than H9 suggest but balances it out perfect without having to add weight.
My GP GeeBee. I needed to add a heavy nose spinner weight to the very tip of the engine shaft. I would have been better to use a larger engine that suggested in the manual instead of dead weight spinning on the engine. If I did not add to the very tip I would have had to add way more weight on the firewall.
This same applies to the TF C310. Therefore, they added all that lead in the nose.
I can keep going if you want. I also have videos if you need…Also years, does not directly correlate to experience.
Thanks and my offer still stands you can PM me instead of us mudding up these forums with this"
I removed over a pound of lead shot from the nose of the TF 310.__________________
My TF Staggerwing needed lbs of nose weight to get it to balance. In this case I would have been better to add a bigger engine instead of going with the suggested engines by TF and adding all the nose weight.
My H9 P-47 I added a DLE 55 which is 25cc more than H9 suggest but balances it out perfect without having to add weight.
My GP GeeBee. I needed to add a heavy nose spinner weight to the very tip of the engine shaft. I would have been better to use a larger engine that suggested in the manual instead of dead weight spinning on the engine. If I did not add to the very tip I would have had to add way more weight on the firewall.
This same applies to the TF C310. Therefore, they added all that lead in the nose.
I can keep going if you want. I also have videos if you need…Also years, does not directly correlate to experience.
Thanks and my offer still stands you can PM me instead of us mudding up these forums with this"
I removed over a pound of lead shot from the nose of the TF 310.__________________
11-17-2019, 05:19 AM
#3870
Well got a 2nd saito 60t and now need to find one more so I can keep a 3rd in my H9 cub. Will try and get this sucker built over the winter months. I really want some electric Robart retract but I might convert the Sierra airs I have to electric. Anyone have any new videos of their 310 or updates?
12-30-2019, 04:06 PM
#3871
Ok I just purchased a third saito 60t! This one new in the box like the first one. The second one I put in the H9 Cub because it has some time already on it. Wanted to keep the engines in the 310 close to same run time.
Very excited to start building this model! Now need to get the lead out of the front to help with weight.
i know this is an old thread…
Very excited to start building this model! Now need to get the lead out of the front to help with weight.
i know this is an old thread…
01-23-2020, 05:44 PM
#3875
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Springfield,
MO
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts