JIMMYTHEEAGLE

My Feedback: (47)

I'm about 2/3 done with a carden 35% extra and need to chose a motor. I'm more into the scale aerobatics with smoke than I am a true 3D flyer. I do rolling circles, harriers and play around with torque rolls but I like large loops, 4 and 8 point rolls and tumbling better.

I'm at a toss up between the inexpensive ZDZ 80 single or spending the money for a DA 100. Because I don't participate as much with the radical 3D, I expect based on my other planes' longevity that I will have this combination for a while.
I also build very light and sometimes get carried away with the sanding block to shave off ounces.

I've read many posts on both motors and I'm just trying to decide based on my flying habits which motor will provide hours of flying time plus enough power. Ease of installation with smoke mufflers would also be a plus.

Thanks for the replies, Jim

mglavin

My Feedback: (31)

Jim

A Carden Extra built light will most likely tip the scales at the minimum suggested weight. Unless of course you utilize a lighter engine package as you've suggested. Do you intend to use a tuned or muffled exhaust system? I would consider a tuned cannister type exhaust system, these work very well with the ZDZ and have been purported to increase the power while meeting sound standards.

I suspect the ZDZ 80 will provide what your looking for. Build and rig light. The lighter engine package will require some consideration for equipment location to achieve the recommended CG.

raineman

My Feedback: (5)

The DA 100 is a great motor in that size bird. You would have an ear to ear grin on your face when you go verticle and put the throttle up. I had a DA100 in 33% CAP. Let's just say, "WOW"!

P-51B

My Feedback: (5)

I would check out the BME 110.

Kris^

My Feedback: (1)

I'd suggest one of three choices. . First off, the ZDZ80 is touted as being "equal" to a 100. . it's not. . not even with a tuned pipe (still 200+ rpm short of even a a BME102 on regular mufflers), and even though its top rpm number might be close, the time it takes to rev up to that level is very long, whereas a 100cc twin will jump to max rpm immediately.

Best choices, at this time . .DA100, BME102 Evo (200 rpm less than the DA but 1.5 lbs lighter too) , wait on the BME110 Xtreme. all three will power your Carden very well. . I've seen "pattern" style Carden 35% Extras with the old BME5.8 that were just awesome in the pattern, but would still freestyle very well. given the power and weight differences between the BME102 and the DA100, consider this. . the BME will lighten your airframe 1.5 lbs, which means that the difference in power-weight will be nil when compared to the DA100. But, lighter planes fly better, so a BME102 on the nose might actually be a bit of a better choice.

If you were going to flip and flop and tumble a LOT, I'd say use the DA. . but for pattern and sequence work, the BME102 is probably just a teensy bit superior as a total powerplant-airframe package. EITHER will be a much better choice for the plane than the ZDZ80, with substantially more power, better response and transition, and the ability to do things at lower throttle settings.

OnTheEdge

One other thing to keep in mind is the noise. If you plan to run bolt on mufflers then go with the DA. The ZDZ80 is VERY loud if you don't put a can on it.

Diablo-RCU

My Feedback: (1)

Sound? A DA-100 will be quieter on the ground, but a ZDZ-80 will be quieter in the air...on a typical 2-blade prop. That's what my calibrated ear tells me anyway....

The DA will rip the prop (27x10 Menz-S for example) and the prop noise will be louder than the ZDZ's (with either a 26x10 or 27x10 Menz-S) loud Pitts muffler noise. The ZDZ won't rip those props.

Oh, and the ZDZ-80 is slightly stronger (about 100 rpm) on a Pitts muffler than the BME 5.8, but about 200 rpm down on the BME-102......from what my tach tells me. I also can't see how any engine could have a faster throttle response than the ZDZ-80 with a wood prop.

Cobra1

My Feedback: (42)

Go ahead, get the DA 100. You know down deep you really want it!!!

Aero330LX

My Feedback: (-1)

You mean you need convincing? Well, ok...

1. High Quality Machined Case (A Work Of Art)
2. High Power and Awesome throttle transition
3. Swings Big Props with Authority
4. Smooth (won't shake a plane apart)
5. Backed By The Best Service In The Hobby
6. A True Gas Up and Run Engine (No Headaches)
7. Perfect Match For A Carden (Balance&Power)
8. DA Auto-Advance IGN Is The Best I've Seen

It's just an amazing piece of machinery

Kris^

My Feedback: (1)

We need to start a thread about "True RPM and power of the ZDZ80" since so many people believe it is so strong. Truth is, a few people have had good success with the 80, but it still does not make "100cc" power, or come even close to it, unless it is run with a tuned exhaust system. A lot of numbers I ahve seen quoted are in the 6200-6400 range with the Menz-s 26-10, ON PIPE, but if you take the pipe off it drops to well under 6000 rpm. Put a Pipe setup on a DA100 and your 28-10 is going to be in the 6600 range and a 26-10 well over 7000. For a BME Evo it'll be swinging the 28-10 Mejzlik at 6400-6500 Rpm (Even the old 6.2 turned 6200-6300 with that prop) and the 26-10 Menz will be a solid 6900-7000. The ZDZ 80 will not even think of turning up well with a 28-10 Mejzlik, and no one has ever posted rpm figures for it (that I have seen) but 5900-6000 would be a good ballpark figure for it.

All being said and done, a lot of people quote the 26-10 @6400 rpm figure for the ZDZ80, but its on a closely optimized tuned-exhaust setup when it does it (they seldom mention that little fact though), but that's usually the first pull on the throttle after startup. I've seen a BME5.8 turn the same prop at 6600 rpm when it was cold, with standard mufflers,but settle to 6450 when hot. It all depends on who is doing the testing, and how forthcoming they wish to be with the testing information and conditions.

All that said (and clarified) the 100cc twins are a better power option than the ZDZ80. In FACT. . I have a 3W TOC100 I am offloading if anyone wants it (no mufflers) that is stronger than any DA I have ever seen by 200+ rpm (on Johnson mufflers), and comes WITH a Mejzlik 28-10 prop and DA ignition for $750. .no mufflers (I use headers and canisters now). There are no leaks (I fixed that little problem. . .PERMANENTLY) and it has a DA ignition. For the money, it's a much better buy than the other choices, but hey, go with what you like. 100-125 flights and has been on the shelf for over a year since I've been doing 40% stuff. Just another option.

Desertrat

My Feedback: (2)

... or realistic BME numbers for that much.
The BME 110 numbers arent out yet, the engine is still unavailable. Keith Baker claims the engine will turn a 28x10 in the mid 6000's. It should, but its not being produced yet.
The average BME 102 evo will turn a 26x10 Menz approx 6400-6500, and the Mezjlik a little faster. A 28x10 would likely not get above mid 5000's but I've never heard of anyone running a prop that big on them.
The average BME 100 couldnt get any 26x10 over 6500 without a pipe. The average on that motor is close to 6200.

The average DA will turn a 27x10 at 6500-6800.

its all in black and white on http://www.rcfaq.com/

JIMMYTHEEAGLE

My Feedback: (47)

Gosh, thanks. Some very good responses and I appreciate all of them. I'm sure the BME is an excellent engine as well. I know one flyer with both a DA 100 and 150 and he's been very happy with both motors and I've heard superior ratings on RCU about DA's serviceand that's my reasoning for picking the DA over the BME. I think you've helped me to decide to go the route of the DA 100. I'm assuming the stock mufflers can be tapped for smoke. Now I just need to decide whether to stay with the JR 8411 servos that I've already cut the correct size into the wing and stabilizer or go back to the 8101 and 4721 that I've used in my 30% models with great success. But that's another post in a different forum. Again, thanks for all the good comments. Jim

Kris^

My Feedback: (1)

Okay. . NOW you have heard about it. . .

I have seen a solid (hot ) 6300 from the BME102/6.2 when they were first produced, on canisters, with the Mejzlik 28-10. This is with canisters of course. Current Evo's (I've seen two) will spin the 28-10 Mejzlik at a solid 6200 on mufflers. i've never seen a DA100 turn faster than 6600 with that prop, and that was when the motor was cold, after it warmed up it went to 6500.

I used to do a lot of expermineting with the BME5.8 and 6.2, and spinning a Mejzlik 26-10 at 6600 on mufflers was a cakewalk for the 6.2. You could not ever get me to run a Menz, though. . the prop is just too inefficient and you ahve to be on the throttle to keep from stopping in midair.

AS far as Keith's reporting. . 6700-6800 on mufflers for prototype 106's, and you can bet the 110 will be stronger. Add in the extremely light weight of the engine and its the most bang for the buck out there, losing two pounds of weight and surpassing the competition in power.

let's see. . 2 lbs of weight in a 28 lbs plane equates to about 300 rpm for the additional thrust necessary. .. I don't see any DA's or 3W's turning 7000+ with a Mej 28-10, do you?

Desertrat

My Feedback: (2)

Kris: those are some very impressive numbers. My experience with my 5.8 is nowhere near that. To date with 2 gallons through I have yet to break 6000 on a NX 26x10, stock cans. I called Keith because I thought I had a bad one, and he says thats normal. I should see in the neighborhood of 6200 when the engine is broken in - certainly within possibility as the engine gains about 20-30 rpm every other flight. I asked about the 102 evo upgrade - his answer was I would gain a max of 500 rpm on the high end - 6700 - hmm, very similar numbers to the RCFAQ database. My friends DA is turning 6800 on a NX 27x10, and its considerably smoother. per the charts, that's 2 full horsepower, and 12lbs more thrust over the evo! That got me looking at the DA's real hard, and certainly left me dissapointed in my 5.8. I am going to try a Mezjlik now, hoping to pop up a few rpm and get a little further into the power band, but I'm not a huge fan of the Mezjlik props, the NX has a little better spool up, and a lot more bite.
I believe the 110 is going to shame DA into a revised 100, even if Keiths numbers are optimistic, but I think he was conservative in his advertising. Couple that with the need to hack my new airplane, and I'll wait for the 110, rather impatiently .

Diablo-RCU

My Feedback: (1)

Say Kris:
Have you run a ZDZ-80 on the J&A Pitts muffler or early-version Supersonic Exhaust Pitts muffler?
The ones I've seen, (about 8) including mine, turn right with the BME 5.8, or a little better. On a cold pull, Mejzlik 26x10-S 6700, after a flight 6500.
On a cold pull, Menz-S 26x10 6500.

A Krumscheid can with a 12" header will boost the engine by 300 rpm.

These engines are very muffler sensitive. Some of the restrictive ones will flat out kill the power. From what I've seen posted, the engines that aren't making good power (sub 6,000 rpm with a Menz 26x10) are using a Bisson Pitts muffler.

Kris^

My Feedback: (1)

Desert Rat . .the BEST prop for that 5.8 is the 26-10N Mejzlik!!! PERIOD!! I ran one on my first 5.8 and it was the best prop I ever used on the 5.8's, turning in the 6650-6700 rpm range (hot) and really letting the 5.8 get its power going. On a 6.2 the best prop I ever used was the 26-10 standard Mejzlik, NOT the N . . ."N" stands for "narrow" blade. The NX props you are running are pretty draggy, and will of course pull the motor down. Theya re actually slightly draggier than a Menz-s.

Hope this helps.

Tim_Indy

Engines don't rip props, PILOTS do!

Kris^

My Feedback: (1)

welllllllll. . . TRUE. .but only of the engine is capable of it!!

Gotta remember folks. . the ZDZ has a disc valve, NOT a reed valve, so the disc is timed and sized for a specific rpm and power curve. If they made the disc open for longer duration, boosting top-end power, it would kill any idle or midrange. If they shortened the intake event it would kill the top end. What they HAVE done is compromise the timing, which effectively kills power above a certain point (even with pipe) because you can't get any more air-fuel into the motor!! So. . WHY don't ZDZ's rip props even though they have seemingly impressive static rpm figures (on the ground)??? Simple. . they run out of power!!!!! nothing you can do about it either. What you get on the ground is ALL you are getting, plus just a little more as the prop unloads in the air. The flat twins, conversely, use reed valves, so as long as the porting in the cylinder allows the mixture to get into the cylinders the reed will allow it to pass. That's why flat twins unload in the air and rip props and the ZDZ's won't . . the twins can BREATHE!!!.. the ZDZ's just run out of air. Add a pipe setup to a flat twin and it will just rip the prop harder, while the ZDZ is all done (close to its max ground rpm) no matter WHAT you do on the exhaust side.

It's simple physics, folks. . air in.. exhaust out. . power. . you choke either one, you run out of power no matter what the other one is doing . .and the ZDZ's run out of air IN.

gravityrulz

My Feedback: (2)

If you want the best , get a DA. There are no comparisons. 3w100 is closest but still wont match a DA for power. The 3w wont push a 26X10 menz supersonic. DA will do it out of the box.

P-51B

My Feedback: (5)

Well you convinced me, I was trying to decide between a DA-50, BME-55, or ZDZ-50 for my new GP patty, ZDZ just got taken off the table.

FrancisG

The fifth item on Tim Durbin's list of reasons to go with a DA100 cannot be over emphasized. I am just a plain regular customer, and DA has always treated me like royalty. Everyone I know here in the Northwest who has a DA has had the same experience when it comes to Desert Aircraft's Support and Services.

For a couple of hundred bucks extra, I will go with the DA over anything for the reasons that Tim Durbin has posted above.

- Francis Garcia
NW IMAC flyer
3D flyer wannabe

Kris^

My Feedback: (1)

P-51. .I'm sure you will be happy with either engine you choose. .

Diablo-RCU

My Feedback: (1)

Kris:
You really think a reed valve is superior to a rotary valve?
If this were so, then the ZDZ-40 B (reed valve) motor should out turn the ZDZ-40 rotary valve motor. But it doesn't.

My seat of the pants guess on why the ZDZ-80 doesn't rip a Menz 27x10 prop and the DA-100 does is that it has something to do with an extra 20cc of displacement, and nothing to do with the induction method.

The ZDZ-80 doesn't rip that prop, and neither does a BME 5.8. Now if someone were to do some in-air testing of the new ZDZ-100 with the same prop, we'd find out if the rotary valve miraculously prevented prop rip.

Oh where's DH?

Kris^

My Feedback: (1)

If that was the case, then the ZDZ160. . a whole 10cc's larger than the 3W and DA150's would be ripping 32-10 props like crazy.. and it does NOT do that. . a DA or 3W winds up and keeps making power past the point where a ZDZ's intake disk valve starts limiting the amount of mixture a ZDZ160 can pull through the carburetor. Since the ZDZ80 is nothing more than half a ZDZ160, it suffers the same fate when the disk valve runs out of timing or area at a certain rpm. I daresay that a BME Evo, with it's improved and enlarged reed valve WILL rip the prop much better than the Vaunted (on PIPES no less) ZDZ80 that supposes itself to be equal.

The old 5.8 BME made about the same power as the current ZDZ100 twin, but used a very small reed valve block, so flow was restricted above about 6400 rpm. Add the restrictive stock Echo-type chainsaw ports and diminutive exhaust ports and it's little wonder that the BME is flow restricted. The BME engine lines forte is its extreme light weight, as well as midrange smoothness, not overall top end power, and it is ported, reed valved and carbureted to support that niche. The ZDZ 80, however, uses SIX Schneurle-style loop scavenged ports (versus 3 for the BME) that are so large that there have actually been wear issues associated with some of the ZDZ 80's due to the lack of cylinder wall. Add to this the inherent efficiency advantage associated with single cylinder versus flat twins of approximately the same displacement (Usually 15% or so), and one has to wonder WHY the ZDZ80 is not making MORE power than it does. . and why it does NOT rip a 26-10 prop. . even on a tuned exhaust, while a BME 5.8 (I've owned 3) WILL rip a 26-10 (Mejzlik) on STOCK exhaust manifolds!!!

The only "advantage" the ZDZ80 has over any 100cc twin is that it costs less. . Put a stock exhaust on it and it's down 400+ rpm from even a flow-restricted BME and OHHHH don't the DA's and 3W's blow it away. It's the same weight as the current BME Evo (no weight savings there) and still has the inherent vibration issues between 2500-3500 rpm associated with ALL singles (even though ZDZ crutches this by putting in a timing "retard" feature in this area of the rpm band). It "seems" smooth in this area due to the ignition retard, but it's static imbalance is still there.

Tellyou what I'm gonna do. . . since EVERYONE wants numbers, I'm gonna get some. .from a brand new BME Evo that is due to arrive at my door next week. I'm going to set it up the SAME way the ZDZ 80 is, with a tuned canister exhaust. . THEN I'm going to bolt on a 28-10 Mejzlik and turn the same, or more, rpm as a ZDZ80 will with a 26-10 menz or Mejzlik. how do I know this will happen?? Because I've done it before. . with a 6.2 (modified 5.8) about 2 years ago. The 6.2, with the same exact Mejzlik 28-10 that my TOC100 could only turn 6650 rpm, was spun at a consistent 6250-6300 by the BME 6.2 after break-in. Now, with larger reed bank and improved crankcase design of the Evo, I expect another 200 rpm, and I'll get it. imagine that. . a lowly BME Evo turning a 2" larger prop just like a similarly equipped ZDZ80. Kind of puts things back into proper perspective.

Diablo-RCU

My Feedback: (1)

Kris:
I have no hands-on experience with the ZDZ-160 twin, haven't seen one yet. But, there are some dyno tests on the Amelung Modellbau site that I believe were performed by Krumscheid. They show a torque peak at 5700 rpm and a horsepower peak around 6700 rpm. This with the K&S cans. This seems to me a reasonable place to put the power peak considering the size of props used and the rpm range.

A 3W-150 turns a Menz-S 32x10 around 5400 rpm static and will rip in the air. It would surprise me greatly if the ZDZ would not out turn it on the ground and also rip the prop in the air.

If you are correct about this rotary valve thing preventing prop rip, then perhaps the "sound task force" will think about requiring rotary valves for IMAC....