60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
12-30-2010, 07:08 PM
#77
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
The gas engine won't start spinning by just turning on the receiver. I feel much more diligence is required with electrics as these little accidents are rather common IMHO, helicopters included. Others may feel differently.
12-30-2010, 08:28 PM
#78
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Victoria,
MN
Posts: 3,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
I would love to run a magazine that did testing of the very subject...
Test planes with dif. engines and post results...
liCe the mags....Racer X or Motocross mag.... ( a letter on my Ceyboard dosn't worC so subed in the "c" for it)
So .....Anyone actually have any real data on the 60cc engines and how they compare to the 50cc?
Or a 50cc to a OS 55cc ???
I believe this was what the real question is on this post???
We are not talCing about Electric Motors and batteries.....
I thinC that with LArge aircrafts that are in the 50cc catagory, need a 55cc-60cc nowdays
for truely 3d performance.....
Example....18.5-21 lb aerobatic aircraft (classified as a 50cc Biplane)
A.... 55cc to a 85cc engine sounds about right...
I believe that biggest disadvantage to larger cc's can be, assuming that it is a top shelf engine....
1. weight (if weighs more)
2. The pounding that engine is going to deal to the airframe....Some of these latest WIZZ Bangs...can't hold
up to the power pulses of the engine....and last more that 10-15 flights....w/o major reinforcement of the airframe...
Test planes with dif. engines and post results...
liCe the mags....Racer X or Motocross mag.... ( a letter on my Ceyboard dosn't worC so subed in the "c" for it)
So .....Anyone actually have any real data on the 60cc engines and how they compare to the 50cc?
Or a 50cc to a OS 55cc ???
I believe this was what the real question is on this post???
We are not talCing about Electric Motors and batteries.....
I thinC that with LArge aircrafts that are in the 50cc catagory, need a 55cc-60cc nowdays
for truely 3d performance.....
Example....18.5-21 lb aerobatic aircraft (classified as a 50cc Biplane)
A.... 55cc to a 85cc engine sounds about right...
I believe that biggest disadvantage to larger cc's can be, assuming that it is a top shelf engine....
1. weight (if weighs more)
2. The pounding that engine is going to deal to the airframe....Some of these latest WIZZ Bangs...can't hold
up to the power pulses of the engine....and last more that 10-15 flights....w/o major reinforcement of the airframe...
12-30-2010, 11:00 PM
#79
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
The good "60's" produce more power than the 50's certainly, however, the budget 60's don't quite have it together. A DLE 55 when tuned right will at minumum equal the budget 60's. There was a lot of idle propulsion talk in this thread but there was also a lot of information in that idle talk for those perceptive enough to recognize it. If buying a 3w 55, BME 58, DA 60, or MVVS 58, you are getting that 60 size power and a little more. Ain't going to happen with the others.
A point that was attempted to be made some time back was that because an engine has more displacement does not mean it has more power, or an increase in power proportional to the increase in displacement. Then you have problem areas associated with that increase in displacement in various RPM bands if all else was not addressed along with the increase in displacement. Bottom line is most of the Chinese "cheapies" did nothing other than perhaps stroke an engine for more displacement. Some might have used a different height piston, but they likely didn't do anything with case volumes and porting. That would have required making new cylinder molds. Matter of fact, I know they didn't do anything with porting because with the exception of DLE all their ports are pure chit. I'm not going to mention the other places they leave power on the table.
Now I've flown 3d with 52CC engines on 21.5 pound mono wing planes so I will have to disagree that a 60 to 80 is needed for 3d flight. That was an 84" plane btw. I've also flown an 18.75 pound biplane (W/H Ultimate) with the same engine and it would 3d with anything out there. Most everything on the market for 50cc engines today will come in under 18 pounds (many at 16) with a little thought going into the equipment and assembly, so a good 50cc engine is plenty for them. A 20 pound bipe has plenty of wing area for a 50 to fly it well.
I guess people only need to know how to use thrust AND lift, not just thrust. If all people are doing is using the prop to blow the tail out of the way they need more practice. THAT will let them fly better 3d. A good 50CC engine in a reasonable weight plane with good hands on the sticks is hard to hold down. Propped right a good 50 turns out close to 30 pounds of thrust so they have enough power. Anytime you best 1-1 power to weight you have the power to fly 3d. 1.5-1 is better but 2-1 or more is not necessary.
A point that was attempted to be made some time back was that because an engine has more displacement does not mean it has more power, or an increase in power proportional to the increase in displacement. Then you have problem areas associated with that increase in displacement in various RPM bands if all else was not addressed along with the increase in displacement. Bottom line is most of the Chinese "cheapies" did nothing other than perhaps stroke an engine for more displacement. Some might have used a different height piston, but they likely didn't do anything with case volumes and porting. That would have required making new cylinder molds. Matter of fact, I know they didn't do anything with porting because with the exception of DLE all their ports are pure chit. I'm not going to mention the other places they leave power on the table.
Now I've flown 3d with 52CC engines on 21.5 pound mono wing planes so I will have to disagree that a 60 to 80 is needed for 3d flight. That was an 84" plane btw. I've also flown an 18.75 pound biplane (W/H Ultimate) with the same engine and it would 3d with anything out there. Most everything on the market for 50cc engines today will come in under 18 pounds (many at 16) with a little thought going into the equipment and assembly, so a good 50cc engine is plenty for them. A 20 pound bipe has plenty of wing area for a 50 to fly it well.
I guess people only need to know how to use thrust AND lift, not just thrust. If all people are doing is using the prop to blow the tail out of the way they need more practice. THAT will let them fly better 3d. A good 50CC engine in a reasonable weight plane with good hands on the sticks is hard to hold down. Propped right a good 50 turns out close to 30 pounds of thrust so they have enough power. Anytime you best 1-1 power to weight you have the power to fly 3d. 1.5-1 is better but 2-1 or more is not necessary.
12-31-2010, 03:49 AM
#80
My Feedback: (13)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: berlin hts,
OH
Posts: 1,462
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
i love the instant speed and torque of an electric,hate the batteries when need replacing,don't care much for the sound of a electric.don't care for the chance of a battery fire either,and the amount of batteries you carry with you to fly for a day.
it will always be a gasser for me,besides if i don't have some needles to twist,plugs to look at,or something to take apart,i would just be lost.electric is just to easy
it will always be a gasser for me,besides if i don't have some needles to twist,plugs to look at,or something to take apart,i would just be lost.electric is just to easy
12-31-2010, 06:38 AM
#81
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
50 cc engines are no comparison to 80cc ones as u are looking at airplanes of different sizes. You can not swap out a 50 cc and replace it with an 80 cc, which u can do with a 60 cc.
I personally like electric motors because of reliability, simplicity, and almost linear torque. The sound of a gas engine does not matter much as you can judge the state of your power system by the speed of the airplane.
I personally like electric motors because of reliability, simplicity, and almost linear torque. The sound of a gas engine does not matter much as you can judge the state of your power system by the speed of the airplane.
12-31-2010, 12:09 PM
#82
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
ORIGINAL: Tired Old Man
The good "60's" produce more power than the 50's certainly, however, the budget 60's don't quite have it together. A DLE 55 when tuned right will at minumum equal the budget 60's. There was a lot of idle propulsion talk in this thread but there was also a lot of information in that idle talk for those perceptive enough to recognize it. If buying a 3w 55, BME 58, DA 60, or MVVS 58, you are getting that 60 size power and a little more. Ain't going to happen with the others.
A point that was attempted to be made some time back was that because an engine has more displacement does not mean it has more power, or an increase in power proportional to the increase in displacement. Then you have problem areas associated with that increase in displacement in various RPM bands if all else was not addressed along with the increase in displacement. Bottom line is most of the Chinese "cheapies" did nothing other than perhaps stroke an engine for more displacement. Some might have used a different height piston, but they likely didn't do anything with case volumes and porting. That would have required making new cylinder molds. Matter of fact, I know they didn't do anything with porting because with the exception of DLE all their ports are pure chit. I'm not going to mention the other places they leave power on the table.
Now I've flown 3d with 52CC engines on 21.5 pound mono wing planes so I will have to disagree that a 60 to 80 is needed for 3d flight. That was an 84" plane btw. I've also flown an 18.75 pound biplane (W/H Ultimate) with the same engine and it would 3d with anything out there. Most everything on the market for 50cc engines today will come in under 18 pounds (many at 16) with a little thought going into the equipment and assembly, so a good 50cc engine is plenty for them. A 20 pound bipe has plenty of wing area for a 50 to fly it well.
I guess people only need to know how to use thrust AND lift, not just thrust. If all people are doing is using the prop to blow the tail out of the way they need more practice. THAT will let them fly better 3d. A good 50CC engine in a reasonable weight plane with good hands on the sticks is hard to hold down. Propped right a good 50 turns out close to 30 pounds of thrust so they have enough power. Anytime you best 1-1 power to weight you have the power to fly 3d. 1.5-1 is better but 2-1 or more is not necessary.
The good "60's" produce more power than the 50's certainly, however, the budget 60's don't quite have it together. A DLE 55 when tuned right will at minumum equal the budget 60's. There was a lot of idle propulsion talk in this thread but there was also a lot of information in that idle talk for those perceptive enough to recognize it. If buying a 3w 55, BME 58, DA 60, or MVVS 58, you are getting that 60 size power and a little more. Ain't going to happen with the others.
A point that was attempted to be made some time back was that because an engine has more displacement does not mean it has more power, or an increase in power proportional to the increase in displacement. Then you have problem areas associated with that increase in displacement in various RPM bands if all else was not addressed along with the increase in displacement. Bottom line is most of the Chinese "cheapies" did nothing other than perhaps stroke an engine for more displacement. Some might have used a different height piston, but they likely didn't do anything with case volumes and porting. That would have required making new cylinder molds. Matter of fact, I know they didn't do anything with porting because with the exception of DLE all their ports are pure chit. I'm not going to mention the other places they leave power on the table.
Now I've flown 3d with 52CC engines on 21.5 pound mono wing planes so I will have to disagree that a 60 to 80 is needed for 3d flight. That was an 84" plane btw. I've also flown an 18.75 pound biplane (W/H Ultimate) with the same engine and it would 3d with anything out there. Most everything on the market for 50cc engines today will come in under 18 pounds (many at 16) with a little thought going into the equipment and assembly, so a good 50cc engine is plenty for them. A 20 pound bipe has plenty of wing area for a 50 to fly it well.
I guess people only need to know how to use thrust AND lift, not just thrust. If all people are doing is using the prop to blow the tail out of the way they need more practice. THAT will let them fly better 3d. A good 50CC engine in a reasonable weight plane with good hands on the sticks is hard to hold down. Propped right a good 50 turns out close to 30 pounds of thrust so they have enough power. Anytime you best 1-1 power to weight you have the power to fly 3d. 1.5-1 is better but 2-1 or more is not necessary.
12-31-2010, 12:26 PM
#83
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 2,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
ORIGINAL: w8ye
I was at the field and a guy turned his 2.4 transmitter off without first unplugging the battery and he had his fail safe set backwards and the electric motor went full throttle.
I was at the field and a guy turned his 2.4 transmitter off without first unplugging the battery and he had his fail safe set backwards and the electric motor went full throttle.
Unfortunately a very common error for those new to electric.
Frankly even some who are NOT new to electric.
The only upside to that is that once you've escaped such an encounter you will not soon forget it !
HOWEVER, once you tame the beast (that happens to refer to the Electric flier not the system)
it is unbelievable. Want a 2% power increase on a landing approach, no sweat at all.
Shoot crosswind touch and go's while the others wait for a change in weather.
I am not against properly muffled IC engines.
I am just addicted to the electrics positive points.
For those using battery care and feeding as well as cost as a negative try A123's. Different world !
12-31-2010, 01:06 PM
#84
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
ORIGINAL: captinjohn
Some day I what a Ultimate bipe with a 55cc DLE....what ones do you recomend...and why? Thanks Capt,n
Some day I what a Ultimate bipe with a 55cc DLE....what ones do you recomend...and why? Thanks Capt,n
12-31-2010, 03:12 PM
#85
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
Just a little tid bit of info, Got a hands on look at a DA 60 and instructions yesterday. They suggest 91-92 octane which would indicate they have increased compression and they reccomend synthetic oil after break in of 2 gallons lawnboy.
12-31-2010, 03:15 PM
#86
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
I believe they suggest premium on all of their engines, at least on my 60, 85, and 170. I forget about my 100 and 150 but I run the same in them anyways. I have only run my DA60 a bit due to it being winter, but it looks to be a nice engine. Come on summer!!
12-31-2010, 03:18 PM
#87
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
SAP has been working on a 60cc version gas engine based on their 30cc engine, not sure how long it will be before it may come out. I think it will be a twin. I love their 30cc, starting is only slightly more difficult than starting an electric, usually takes one or two flips of the prop.
Anyway, ialways said my upper limit on engine size would be the 30cc. For some reason,I am now drooling over the thought of the Ultimate Bipe with a 60cc twin. Where to put it, how to transport it, and how to pay for it are some minor obstacles I need to overcome if the SAP engine is a success. Guess I'll cross that bridge when it gets built.
Anyway, ialways said my upper limit on engine size would be the 30cc. For some reason,I am now drooling over the thought of the Ultimate Bipe with a 60cc twin. Where to put it, how to transport it, and how to pay for it are some minor obstacles I need to overcome if the SAP engine is a success. Guess I'll cross that bridge when it gets built.
01-01-2011, 03:17 AM
#91
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
ORIGINAL: do335a
And don't those Chinese know it!
I still prefer my Webras and Nova Rossi. Those guys understande engines. To them, they are a living breathing thing with a personality, not just a blob of metal.
ORIGINAL: Tired Old Man
For most in this forum it's simpler to just chase the latest and cheapest product to come out with the approxoimate number of desired CC's and hope for the best while preparing for the worst.
For most in this forum it's simpler to just chase the latest and cheapest product to come out with the approxoimate number of desired CC's and hope for the best while preparing for the worst.
I still prefer my Webras and Nova Rossi. Those guys understande engines. To them, they are a living breathing thing with a personality, not just a blob of metal.
I have seen quite a few people come out to the field with a new engine with 5 or 10 more cc's than the old one only to put it on ebay a few weeks later.
It is hard to put a price on quality or peace of mind.
01-01-2011, 09:36 AM
#92
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
ORIGINAL: Super08
I believe they suggest premium on all of their engines, at least on my 60, 85, and 170. I forget about my 100 and 150 but I run the same in them anyways. I have only run my DA60 a bit due to it being winter, but it looks to be a nice engine. Come on summer!!
I believe they suggest premium on all of their engines, at least on my 60, 85, and 170. I forget about my 100 and 150 but I run the same in them anyways. I have only run my DA60 a bit due to it being winter, but it looks to be a nice engine. Come on summer!!
01-01-2011, 09:44 AM
#93
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
The DA 100 and up have always had a higher compression ratio than most people were aware of. If you have one of the lerger DA's they do better with premium grade gas, especially in the summer time.
01-01-2011, 12:36 PM
#94
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
ORIGINAL: Tired Old Man
A 50CC Ultimate will fit fully assembled in a pick up bed.
A 50CC Ultimate will fit fully assembled in a pick up bed.
01-01-2011, 08:29 PM
#96
My Feedback: (10)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Harrisburg, SD
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
Hey Tired Old Man. i wanna put down something you just commented on:
Anytime you best 1-1 power to weight you have the power to fly 3d. 1.5-1 is better but 2-1 or more is not necessary
I would LOVE to fly with you someday. You seem like a really interesting dude. Ethier you got mad skills or you simply dont understand the reason WHY people like 2:1 power:weight!
I had a plane once with a two stroke glow engine with 3:1! you could make that airframe do some wicked stuff.
Anytime you best 1-1 power to weight you have the power to fly 3d. 1.5-1 is better but 2-1 or more is not necessary
I would LOVE to fly with you someday. You seem like a really interesting dude. Ethier you got mad skills or you simply dont understand the reason WHY people like 2:1 power:weight!
I had a plane once with a two stroke glow engine with 3:1! you could make that airframe do some wicked stuff.
01-02-2011, 05:10 AM
#97
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
Plenty of opinions here - I know and occasionally fly with guys who are the best at the 3Dstuff (nationally rated.
The setups needed for doing the current 3Dstuf are about 2-1 or more .
The reason is simple - you need to accelerate as desired and 1-1 simply will not do this
some examples -a decent -not spectacular setup of 14 lbs thrust and 9 pounds weight.
23pounds weight and 55 pounds thrust - also quite good
in thr small electrics , the power to weight is even higher.
But
One can hover-barely in a 1-1 setup
This requires more skill as there is no recovery power as needed when learning the 3Dstuff.
It makes it all more difficult
So If you want to learn this stuff- make a setup with easily 1.5 to 1 or 2 -1.
The setups needed for doing the current 3Dstuf are about 2-1 or more .
The reason is simple - you need to accelerate as desired and 1-1 simply will not do this
some examples -a decent -not spectacular setup of 14 lbs thrust and 9 pounds weight.
23pounds weight and 55 pounds thrust - also quite good
in thr small electrics , the power to weight is even higher.
But
One can hover-barely in a 1-1 setup
This requires more skill as there is no recovery power as needed when learning the 3Dstuff.
It makes it all more difficult
So If you want to learn this stuff- make a setup with easily 1.5 to 1 or 2 -1.
01-02-2011, 08:29 AM
#99
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
The question arises of what constitutes flying? Is all flying 3d? I hope not. Are there parts of most flights that are not 3d? Generally so unless the entire intent behind the flight is 3d. Id "fast" 3d the only desirable type of flight? Should 18lb-40lb planes always fly like a foamie? The last, and perhaps most important question; do people really know how to fly or is all they can do is use a prop to push the tail out of the way?
None of that is derogatory but each establishes the amount of power that will be desirable for a flight. A 20 pound plane with a 50 will 3d. Will it fly "loke a foamie"? No, because it will require some energy management, but it will hove, torque roll, harrier roll, and most everything else. Will it do those better if lighter? Sure it will, but it doesn't have to be.
None of that is derogatory but each establishes the amount of power that will be desirable for a flight. A 20 pound plane with a 50 will 3d. Will it fly "loke a foamie"? No, because it will require some energy management, but it will hove, torque roll, harrier roll, and most everything else. Will it do those better if lighter? Sure it will, but it doesn't have to be.
01-02-2011, 09:18 AM
#100
RE: 60cc gas engine power, Theory or just wishful thinking.
A few year back, this whole thing started with the free programs at the TOC in Las Vegas. This brought about a lot of interest from guys who really never felt Pattern was their cup of tea.
The technological changes of 2.4 - really good electric equipment AND really good RTF plane foe a low price -set the stage - EVERYONE could now do the stuf f once the province of a few
Did I like it - only for my little electric stuf as the cost of losing a big model simply went against my grain
When I was a happy go lucky drag racer and blown clutches /trans/engine/rear ends /tires -etc., finally
got to me - I said- nuf is enuf.
So my 3Dstuff was pretty low cost comparatively.
The electrics fit this bill perfectly
Others like the thrill of the big stuff -and accept the costs -
Been there -
Precision flying is NOT for the majority - it takes too much practice to get REALLY good at it.
And for the observer -like watching paint dry.
ThreeDee is a rush for many -and for some - it is possible in the first week of flying a model!
Being just one year younger than God - I have watched and participated in much of the ongoing evolution in flying models.
from a controlline O & R 23 BRAVE to a 42% EXTRA-with a piped 160- etc., etc..
The latest crop of 3D guys are so good at all of it-I jus have to set back and say - wow
The technological changes of 2.4 - really good electric equipment AND really good RTF plane foe a low price -set the stage - EVERYONE could now do the stuf f once the province of a few
Did I like it - only for my little electric stuf as the cost of losing a big model simply went against my grain
When I was a happy go lucky drag racer and blown clutches /trans/engine/rear ends /tires -etc., finally
got to me - I said- nuf is enuf.
So my 3Dstuff was pretty low cost comparatively.
The electrics fit this bill perfectly
Others like the thrill of the big stuff -and accept the costs -
Been there -
Precision flying is NOT for the majority - it takes too much practice to get REALLY good at it.
And for the observer -like watching paint dry.
ThreeDee is a rush for many -and for some - it is possible in the first week of flying a model!
Being just one year younger than God - I have watched and participated in much of the ongoing evolution in flying models.
from a controlline O & R 23 BRAVE to a 42% EXTRA-with a piped 160- etc., etc..
The latest crop of 3D guys are so good at all of it-I jus have to set back and say - wow
