260 and BME 110 anyone?
#2
Senior Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 6,189
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
From: Flower Mound (near Dallas),
TX
It should balance with no problem, the plane is designed for a light engine like the BME.
Power is extreme. That engine has been used on 30-33 lb. planes with great results, the 260 will weigh right at 22 lbs. It is unlikely you will ever need more than 1/2 throttle, but it's there if you need it.
We've sold several planes that are flying with the 110. You should hear from somebody else.
TF
Power is extreme. That engine has been used on 30-33 lb. planes with great results, the 260 will weigh right at 22 lbs. It is unlikely you will ever need more than 1/2 throttle, but it's there if you need it.
We've sold several planes that are flying with the 110. You should hear from somebody else.
TF
#5
Thread Starter

My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: gainesville, TX
Geistware,
I agree the 110 is more powerful It had more advanced porting than the 105 and produces more power with less weight, But like a lot of other manufactures powerful 100cc class engines one lean run and the engine is toast. The 105 is slightly heavier and less power, it has the same case and rods as the 110 and the same type but slightly smaller pistons. The only difference is the 105's have some super rugged "bullet proof" cylenders. Even if you use and abuse these engines and run them lean it will survive to fly another day. If i buy new I will probably get the 110, the weight and power is to apealing, I will just be careful on the needles and make good use of some cowel ducting.
I agree the 110 is more powerful It had more advanced porting than the 105 and produces more power with less weight, But like a lot of other manufactures powerful 100cc class engines one lean run and the engine is toast. The 105 is slightly heavier and less power, it has the same case and rods as the 110 and the same type but slightly smaller pistons. The only difference is the 105's have some super rugged "bullet proof" cylenders. Even if you use and abuse these engines and run them lean it will survive to fly another day. If i buy new I will probably get the 110, the weight and power is to apealing, I will just be careful on the needles and make good use of some cowel ducting.
#6
Senior Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 6,189
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
From: Flower Mound (near Dallas),
TX
In the 260, the way I fly, I'd probably use the 105. I have a 102 and will keep it for just this reason.
I am not a 3d hot dog, streaking skward from a dead stop is not my thing. The 105 is really more power than this plane needs.
Just FYI, the 105 is made using Echo chain saw cylinders and pistons. The 110 cylinders were custom designed and made for BME.
TF
I am not a 3d hot dog, streaking skward from a dead stop is not my thing. The 105 is really more power than this plane needs.
Just FYI, the 105 is made using Echo chain saw cylinders and pistons. The 110 cylinders were custom designed and made for BME.
TF
#7

My Feedback: (1)
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,753
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Grantsville, WV, VA
I just did a cursory balance of my 260 with the BME 102 & a pull-pull rudder setup. The plane is nose heavy without the batteries installed. Not a lot, battery placement is going to make it spot on. It is so refreshing to get an airplane that does not need to have a lb. of lead added to the engine box to get it to balance. I fully expected it to come out tail heavy, hence the pull-pull setup. I could put one rudder servo in the tail & have it perfect, two and I would probably have to put at least one battery in front of the fuel tank. (or switch out the CF spinner for an aluminum one)



