Conference vmszoo::rc

    Ok, Waddya up  up this time to inqueire about these monsters ? Your
    attic not cramped enough ??
    
    md

	Hya Marc, what'd'ya mean?... up to now? huh, fine talk 
	from someone plannin to sink $0000s into ducted disaster...
	You'd have better luck fitting you Viojetts into the Turkey
	you picked up the other day. Bit more seasonal too.......
	Oh well live and let live.... 

        Seriously, as it happens another bloke in the Club has the
	same 1/4 Laser kit that Santa's bringing me. Anyway he's had
	his in the loft for a while, but i've persuaded him to build 
	his aswell.. He's seen one of them flying, and it had a 
	ST 2000 in, tho' the owner was planning to put a 2000/25 to
	get better vertical performance. Visions of that expensive
	glow fuel schlurping through a 25cc glow engine made me wonder 
	about a petrol (gas for you foriengers) engine, ie a small
	Quadra/Zenoah. Think how spectacular it would be as it hit the
	ground and burst into flames....

	The ST 2000 is by no means small.

	cheers

	bob

	I'll think about the Moped, but by balance deteriates proportional
	to the quantity of ale. 
	

    Bob,
    
    I'm no expert on gas [as opposed to glo] engines but I can provide
    you "some" information based on the experiences of 2 of my flyin'
    buddies.
    
    The Q-35 Quadra is considerably larger/heavier than the large Super
    Tigre engines.  It the Quadra will turn a larger prop and likely
    has more low-end torque/power which makes it best suited for low
    performance large-scale types like J-3 Cubs, Aeronca Champs, etc.
    As a gerneral rule, the Q-35 isn't well suited to fighter and high-
    performance aerobatic types.  I'm not that well informed on other
    similar sized makes of gas engines but I suspect similar performance
    [or lack of same] can realistically be predicted.
    
    Surprisingly enough, the Super Tigre 2000/2500/3000 series is "not"
    the gas [glo-fuel] hog one might expect.  Fuel consumption is
    comparable [in our experience] with a .90 size engine, i.e. 1 1/2
    oz. per minute or so.  While not as economical as the gas [petrol]
    engines, we find this quite acceptable for such a large engine.
    
    Adios,	Al

    Bob,
    Your chopper will be very heavy with a Quadra on it.
    Ken

    
    	Don't sell short the webra Bully. It come in glow or gas.
    
    					Tom

    I am in the process of starting a B&B Laser 200 1/4.  The manufacturer
    is runnung a 1.3 Zenoah and says it performs quite nicely.  As an
    alternative they push a OS 1.2.  An OS 1.2 is rather pricy.  Anybody
    know about a 1.3 Zenoah?
    
    NCMWVX::VOSS

    Anybody have any comments on Malloney??

        Re:< Note 404.7 by NCMWVX::VOSS >

                I have  a  Malloney  125.   It's only been used about 6-7
        flights, so it;s  far  from  run  in.    But  even  then  it runs
        extremely well, is easy  to adjust and because it drinks gas runs
        for a long time.   I  have a 12 OZ tank and haven't timed it, but
        it  definitely  stays up a lot  longer  than  the  10  minutes  I
        normally stay up.
        
                I had the  Malloney  badly underpropped with a 15x6 prop,
        but have just bought  a  14x8  for running in and a 15x8 for when
        it's fully run in.
        
                It  pulls  the  Robinhood  real   well.    Loops  weren't
        spectacular, probably because of the underpropping.   I'll try to
        remember to report on the difference the new prop has made.
        
                As  with  any  large  engine  you  have    to  make  some
        investments.  The primary one is a electric starter and a battery
        that's big enough to generate adequate starting current.   I  use
        an  el  cheapo  Sears car battery ($30) and the regular  Sullivan
        starter  and it pumps it right around.  With a motorcyle  battery
        it  was  pityful.   The other investment you have to make it  the
        right fuel  line, tank and pump.  Trying glow equipment creates a
        mess.
        
        Anker

    MURPHY::ANKER,
    
    Please tell me more about the specil equipment required for running
    gas engines.  Can you start the Maloney by hand?
    
    NCMWVX::VOSS

        Re:< Note 404.9 by NCMWVX::VOSS >

                They claim  that  you can start it by hand.  I can't spin
        it fast enough to generate a spark.
        
                The special equipment you need is:
        
                Electric starter.   Big  enough to generate the necessary
        torque. As I mentioned the Sullivan starter is big enough.
        
                Car  battery for electric  starter.    Motorcyle  battery
        won't hack it.
        
                Fuel tank and fuel lines for gas.  You typically purchase
        a standard fuel tank and a  separate  stopper  made for gas.  You
        can find all you need in the Tower Hobbies catalog.
        
                Fuel pump for gas.  The six  shooter  pump  comes  in two
        versions. One for glow fuel and the other for gas.
        
                The fuel is normal gasoline with normal two  stroke  oil.
        The Malloney requires 3% oil.
        
                That's all you need!
        
        Anker

    I have looked at the Maloney 125 in the rags. and notice a side
    mounted muffler.  How will this work out with a large cowling??
    
    Regards,
    NCMWVX::VOSS

        Re:< Note 404.11 by NCMWVX::VOSS >

                The muffler  placement  is quite flexible.  First of all,
        the distance between  the  cylinder  and muffler can be varied by
        using 1, 2 or no approximately 1" spacers that come with the kit.
        In addition, as you can  see  on  the  picture,  the  muffler  is
        riddled with large screws that can be unscrewed and replaced with
        1,  2 or no approx.  4"  exhaust  pipes.    They  can  be  routed
        forward,  backwards,  up,  down or sideways.  It's  still  a  big
        sucker  and some planning will be needed.  I'll  be  bringing  my
        Robinhood 80 with it's Malloney to the next XRRC meeting.   which
        is on the 3'rd wednesday in January, it you want to see it.
        
        Anker

    Mr. Anker,
    
    Do all of the spacers and parts come with the engine, or are they
    nice additions that can be purchased for a little extra??
    
    If I mount the Malloney in my 1/4 Laser I would like to run the
    muffler out of the bottom of the cowling.  Since the muffler mounts
    on the side, what is the dimension of the engine from the outside
    of the muffler to the oposite side of the cylinder.  In other words,
    what is the width of the engine and muffler?
    
    regards,
    NCMWVX::VOSS

        Re:< Note 404.13 by NCMWVX::VOSS >

                All the spacers and tubes come with the engine.  I'll try
        to remember to measure the engine tonight and post the dimensions
        here when I get  back  (tomorrow I'm taking off to mess around in
        the snow).
        
        Anker

    There is an article in this months RCM on the Malloney engines.
    The article plus this note is plenty of information for now.
    
    regards,
    NCMWVX::VOSS

                On of  the comments in RCM was about the power, or rather
        lack of it.    I  wonder whether he ran it in completely, because
        mine is becoming much more  powerful  as  it's  running  in.    I
        suspect it's because it's a ringed  engine.   When I first got it
        there was next to no compression, now  after  2/3 of a gallon run
        throught it there is noticably more.
        
                As I have run it in I have gone from a 14 x 5, 14 x 8 and
        now a 15 x 8 prop and have the  final  16 x 8 sitting in the box.
        The  other  factor  to  take into consideration is the horrendous
        drag of the Robinhood.  There's a lot of frontal area and both to
        the fuse and  the  wings.    On  a more slippery ship I'm sure it
        would give more spectacular  performance.   I would be interested
        if anybody has rev figures  for 4 stroke 120s pulling a 15 x 8 or
        16 x 8 prop.
        
        Anker

    Let us know if you realy can get 7000 rpm out of a 16-8 prop as
    advertised.  The $130 price tag seems quite cheap compared to 
    $300 + for a OS120.  I may try the Malloney first and compare
    my Laser's performance compared to some guys with 120 powered Laser's.
    
    Regards,
    NCMWVX::VOSS

    I'd like to get the Carl Goldberg Anniversary Edition J3 Piper Cub for
    my next plane.  
    
    For an engine, I'd like to get the best long term purchase possible and 
    would like to know about how this would be with a Quadra Q35 (or similar) 
    type gasoline engine?  Is this too much power or weight?
    
    (Keep in mind I've often heard "You can always throttle BACK!!!")
    
    per Tower catalog:  	Quadra Q35 (2 cu in)
    				handles up to 28-30 lb plane
    				perfect for 1/4 scale
    				$142.95
    				weight - not pub
    				horsepower - not pub (guestimated @~2hp)
    				published rpm 8000 (therfore quieter?)
    
    	compared to:		OS .61 SF
    				$186.95
    				weight - 19oz.
    				horsepower - 1.85
    				published rpm - 16000
    
    Gasoline engines see to be a *value* in terms of $$$/HP and $$$/hr of
    operating time.  Is there something I'm missing here?  Is this *way*
    too much HP and weight for a J3 Cub (*not* 1/4 scale).  Why run GLOW
    when GAS power is cleaner *and* cheaper?
    
    Example:  10oz/tank, 4 tanks/hr, 15 hrs/yr = 600 oz = 4.69 gals =
    $56.25 for GLOW and only $7.03 for GAS.  SAVINGS = $49.22 or $3+/hr.
    
    There's obviously a good reason for using GLOW but I'll be darned if I
    know!
    
    THNAKS IN ADVANCE FOR THE HELP!!!
    
    Regards,
    Marc
    `-----/*\-----'
                   

 
  Marc,

  One big advantage to using glow fuel is safety!  It is no where near as
volatile as gasoline.  I believe they also offer the advantage of simplicity
of operation.  You don't have to worry about an ignition system.  Therefore
you also save in space.  A glow engine of x horsepower is (I believe) much
smaller than a comparable powered gasoline engine.

  I don't have any first hand knowledge of the Q35, but I did have an ASP .61
in my Anniversary Cub and it was WAY more than enough power to fly it.  If it
didn't die on it's second flight it would have had verticle performance.



                        Jim

>    I'd like to get the Carl Goldberg Anniversary Edition J3 Piper Cub for
>    my next plane.  
>    
>    For an engine, I'd like to get the best long term purchase possible and 
>    would like to know about how this would be with a Quadra Q35 (or similar) 
>    type gasoline engine?  Is this too much power or weight?

That would be like putting a Ford V8 in a Honda motor cycle.
Maybe it could be done but you would be laughed off the field.
When you turn the 18-20 inch prop someone would have to hold
each wing tip so the plane wouldn't spin.

We're talking a large piece of iron here - even the small Quadra 
is made for 1/4 scale planes - the Anniversary Edition Cub is not
a large cub.  While a .40 FP may be low on power a .40 SF (bearing version)
is probably fine.  A .46 SF or .61 SF is plenty.

If you get the Quadra you will need lots of lead in the tail and
forget ever getting the cowl on.

But...

If you want the Quadra - think about a 1/4 scale Cub.  It won't take
much longer to build and won't cost much more (maybe one extra servo
and plenty extra covering material) but will fly better.  

Got a big car and nice wide open field?

Bye          --+--
Kay R. Fisher  |
---------------O---------------
################################################################################

    I believe that the Quadra would be too heavy and too large physicaly to
    go on this cub.  Gas is cheaper, but as Jim mentioned, you have to
    worry about safety and put up with the smell of raw gas in your
    vehicle.  Power to weight is much better with glow engines.  The
    ignition gas engines have a heavy magnito flywheel and must swing a big
    prop.  Also, you have to use different fueling (No regular electric
    pump) and special fuel line with gas.  I have never seen a gas engine
    in a plane much smaller than a 1/4 scale cub.  I'd go with  a 45 to 60
    two stroke or a 60-90 4 stroke in this plane.  You're talking more $$,
    but you will have a much better combination.
    
    Charlie
    

    Thanks guys!
    
    I knew there had to be a reason.  Darn.
    
    (...hmmm a Ford V8 in a Honda motorcycle...now that's an idea!!!  
    Naa...not a good idea...I like Chevy's!!!)
    
    Now my choices are go either with 1/4 scale _or_ get a ~45-60 2s.
    Ok, time to mod the Christmas list!!!  I _could_ get a 1/4 scale
    cause I have a pickup truck with a cap!  8^)
    
    Any pointers to info on ASP .61's?  Like how much and how reliable?
    ext...                              
                                      |
    Thanks again to the `-----* M a s t e r s *-----'.  These notes are so 
    helpful!                        /   \
                                    
    Marc
    `-----/*\-----'

  Go with the V8!  Then you will definitely be in the running for HTA
membership!! 8^)

(place Al Casey hat on head) I would HIGHLY recommend that you spend the 
extra bucks and go with a good quality engine such as the OS .61!  As Al
has said BILLIONS AND BILLIONS of times...ya' get what ya' pay fer!  Although
my ASP .61 had lots of power, the quality/workmanship was not nearly up to
OS standards.  If your going to spend the money and want an engine that will
last a LONG time, go with the O.S. engine.

  If you decide to go with a 1/4 scale Cub, keep in mind that you need a 
large field to fly it out of.  The field at CMRCM is about the smallest
field I would want to land it at.  I am thinking about putting flaps on 
my L4 to help in shorter landings (one point landings don't count).

  I personnally like the larger planes, but they can be a real drag to set
up if your looking for a quick flying session.



              Jim

    Thanks for the input.  I thought I had thought of a good combo.  Guess
    not.  No quarter scale either.  Too many drawbacks at this early stage
    in the hobby.
    
    I have to wait a while to save for an appropriate powerplant for this.
    
    I'm in no rush anyway.
    
    Thanks for the help.
    Marc
    `-----/*\-----'

    Marc,
    
    I hesitated to respond to yer' inquiry as all the inputs you received
    reflected pretty much what I would'a advised.  However, there _is_ one
    other gas-fueled engine you might consider...the Zenoah G23.
    
    The G23 is probably the smallest of the gas-fueled 2-stroke engines
    available.  Physically, it's probably about the size of an O.S.
    .90/1.08 with power being approximately similar, give or take a bit. 
    However _any_ of the three engines named would be a bit too much for
    the J-3 you're interested in.  Move up to one of the slightly larger
    ones (somewhere about 85" span but not quarter scale) and you'd have a
    nice combo.  All the advantages _and_ drawbacks of gas-fueled engines
    would continue to apply, however.
						 __
				|      |        / |\	   	       
      	         \|/		|______|__(o/--/  | \	   	       
      | |        00	       <|  ~~~  ____ 04 ---- | --------------------
    |_|_|        (O>o		|\)____/___|\_____|_/	   Adios amigos, Al
      |     \__(O_\_	        |	  |___/	 o	   (The Desert Rat)