I have a new Taurus 52, and am looking for a Yak to put it in. Is the firewall on the Yak large enough to fit the Taurus radial mount on it? I would think that it would be.

That radial mount I believe is 4" in basic diameter. If someone can provide the firewall size for the Yak you should be able to make the determination. As far as the engine displacement and weight is concerned, you'd be just fine.

Thanks silversurfer for the response. This will be my first gasser experience, and I am leaning towards a Yak. Just not sure which one to buy, maybe a QQ 85 or Ultra RC. They say that the Ultra is identical to the no longer available EF Yak.

Now that was kinda painful. WildHare markets a very nice Yak, ya know.

Firewall
Width: 5 1/2"
Height: 3 3/4" [:@]

So you came in here to promote my competitor's planes?



TF

Ouch

I like the WH Yak,but I was surprised that you guys did not race to get an 85-87 incher out there also.The 80 incher seems like an awkward size.almost too big for glow and a tad small for gas?

Sorry about that TF, but I never got a response to a simple question for 2 days. I was in no way trying to promote anyones planes. I was just looking for some information, and silversurfer was the only one to respond. Now ken has given me my answer. I like the WH line of products very much, but I don't think the Yak will work for this application.

I would also like to add that just today I was telling a buddy about the mini pylon racer you have, and gave him your web address so he could check it out.

Actually it's quite the opposite. While the guys struggle to get enough power in their 87" planes for excellent 3d, our little plane is already under 15 lbs. with a DA-50 on the front.

Everybody else is spending $650 for a plane then a couple hundred bucks more for CF and light weight components to get their plane down to a weight that will work, while ours sells for $389 and is under 15 lbs right out of the box.

Where did you get this "tad small for gas". Is that based one some actual experience or is it just some decree that 50cc planes shall be 84" and up? Have you read any of the flight reviews? The only people who ever say that have never flown the plane, or they have an agenda.

If you will recall 4 years ago there was no 50cc ARF market, then Wild Hare brought out the Edge 540T and changed everything. Do you think I don't understand the 50cc market?

In fact we do have an 85" Yak in development, but only because there are people who act before they think and follow the crowd, not because it flies any better than the 80" plane. For those who feel more wing area is necessary and that it's better to haul around more volume, it will be out in the spring.

And racing to get a new plane out is the surest way to come up with a dog! I test my airplanes and think them through.

TF

Did you ever think about calling me? I get about 50 tech support calls a day.

I did not answer because I don't have the specs on every engine so I cannot possibly give accurate answers all the time. I was hoping, as did occur, that someone else would have the information.



TF

The W/H Yak flys big for it's wing span. I've flown one with only a Moki 1.8 on it and it flys very well. Not with the power I would have chosen for myself had it been my plane. Had it been mine, I would have selected a 40-50cc engine and never looked back. Overall I believe the W/H Yak to fly just as well as the 28% Extra, if not a little better due to a lighter weight. One item that many forget is that every Wild Hare plane I have seen to date, with the exception of the racer for I have not seen one, has proportionally more wing area that most others with similar spans. A Wild Hare plane with an 80" span will usually have close to 10% or more wing area than the competitors. Area and weight are what make it all go 'round when the power plants are equal. Span means far less than area in the larger scope of performance.

One of the reasons the response to your question was "slow" is because not everyone has a Taurus engine. Most 50cc only owners jumped on the DA bandwagon and have not yet experienced the higher performance of what you have. I have a Taurus 52 and just happened across your post shortly before I replied to it. Unfortunately my internet access is not quite as spontaneous as most everyone elses at the moment.

No ,my comment was not based on experience.Just from reading a ton of threads and responses on various airframes,and from what I understood a bigger wing and a 15 pound weight is what everyone is after.Yeah I noticed that some are going on expensive diets and the WH Yak is RTF with 50cc.Now I do have my eye on the WH Extra 300,it is a super looking machine,The Yak looks good too.It would be for hard 3D and I have just bought a Taurus 52 also.Is the Yak a better choice for me?

From what I know the Taurus is a little heavier than the DA and has excellent power. I'd say you will probably be happier with the new Extra, that ought to be an excellent match.

TF

Apparently Kyle W got a hold of the WH Extra 300S and awed the owner and audience

FYI we have a new Edge coming out too, same weight as the Extra, huge ailerons and rudder, very neat new airplane.

TF

Just wondering, on the Taurus. What's the bolt hole to bolt hole distances? THe reason I ask is you will most likly have to use some sort of stand off to move the engine forward to clear the cowl or shorten the cowl.

The bolt distance top to bottom might fit the measured distance. I don't have the engine so I can not verify this.

Sorry man, 1 day 6 hours is not the same as 2 days. Got to defend Tom on this one, you came into a specialty forum, you must give a post 24 to 36 hrs to get answered. This isn't like the ARF section that fills a page in one day. Please be patient, and please respect this forum section is a Wild Hare section.

The hole to hole center distance on the taurus 52 is a tad under 4". I can't get to my stuff right now to measure, but a phone call to Bill at Taurus will give you all you can ask for. He's always ready to answer questions when they arise. You may have to try more than once to get him, but I assure you that he'll answer any question you have.

As for the plane choice, that kinda difficult to be absolutely specific about. How does one or the other fit your transportation capabilities? What do you prefer for aircraft appearance lines? Are you going to want to fly some precision? Only balls to the wall 3D? All of those questions have an impact on the selection.

For 3D only, the the new Edge would be, and is to be, MY choice. For a mix of precision and 3D then either the Yak or the Extra will be great. For a smaller vehicle then the Yak wins hands down.

The difference between the Edge and the Extra will be that the Extra will hold a straight line better and still fly lightly and accurately. The Edge will be a turn and burn airplane and will suit the needs well for all those that don't prefer the geometry of IMAC.

Is the "new edge" something different than what's on the WH website already? It's 50cc size right?

Yes, it's a totally new design. The only thing carried over from the original is the color scheme and the wingspan. Everything else is totally new.

The cowl is much wider and mounts on a cowl ring, no visible fasteners. Ailerons are HUGE, elevators are like the new Extra, moved forward. Rudder is larger, it should have no wing rocking issues. Probably 1.5 lbs lighter.

It has builtup wings which are very light, rolls will start/stop instantly.

This plane addresses all the outstanding issues that the original Edge had. Weight, more room for the muffler, wide enough to accept a small twin, canister tunnel, wing rock, aileron authority.

And our new Chinese builder is about 10 times more consistent. We have reduced by 90% cases of shipping damage, missing parts, manufacturing mistakes, etc. These things drove us nuts and cost me a lot of money sending out replacement parts that shouldnot have been necessary.

The original Edge was great for its time, but this new one blows it away in every way.

TF

Aha a new Edge, do I need to crash my Cap?[:@]