Conference vmszoo::rc

    Hi Bob,
    
    	I have resently finish building the ACE 60/90 Bipe. A very easy
    ship to build. The part that I found the hardest were the wire 'N' sturts
    I went out and bought me one of those micro torch. I think that you'll
    need one.
    
    	I did make a few modification. On both the elevator and the rudder,
    I used a pull-pull setup. I like this because it's much more positive
    action. 
    
    	The cowl, I didn't use their setup. because in past models that I
    have had that used the balsa cowling usually being destroied. So I
    fashoned a fiberglass round cowl and mounted it with angle brackets.
    
    	One other thing, the way the top wing is mounted. Instead of
    bolting the wing on, I got some long nylon bolts, cut the head off,and
    glued the threaded rod in the wing. This way adding spacers, for
    setting the incedance angle, is easier.
    
    	I haven't had the chance to fly her yet, so I can't say how it
    handles. hope to try it soon.
    
    Norm

    	I have just received the ACE 4-60/90 Bipe. The plans call for a
    broad range of engines in particular a 40 to 91 4-stroke. A 91FS seems
    quite a bit much. would possibly the Enya .53 FS be enough? ANy
    suggestions would be appreciated.
    
    Regards,
    Bob G.

    
        In my opinion, the 91 fs is not too much engine for the airplane.
    I believe the 60/90 recommends a 60 or 90fs, not a 40 fs that you
    mentioned in your note. As I have said in previous notes, the ACE
    series was really designed around the 4 strokes, and they fly very nice
    with them. I have not seen one of the series fly with a 2 stroke,
    but I am sure it would fly fine. The only thing that would be lost is
    some of the "character and grace" the FS provides.
         For reference, I have an ACE 4/40 monoplane (less drag than a
    bipe) and I started with an old FS40 (non surpass). The plane flew
    fine, although the climb was marginal, and it was generally suited to
    low/slow flying around. Keep in mind this was the exact engine this
    plane was designed for. I have just replaced the older FS40 with a
    70 Surpass. The weight of the plane (Dry) is now 5 lbs 6 oz. The plane
    has great performance. In hind sight, I could have even upgraded to
    a 91 Surpass with little difficulty for total vertical performance.
       So as you can see, with the extra weight and drag of your plane,
    a 90 FS or preferably a 91 Surpass would be just about right, and
    you could maybe even stretch it and use a 1.20 FS for outstanding
    performance. I would guess that a 60 or 70 FS would be fairly mild
    in your installation.
    
          Hope this has helped provide some reference,
    
                                                     Dan W.

I have a ACE 4-60/90 Bipe. I have two flights on it so far. I installed the 
KB.65Sportster, nice engine. One thing that I have noticed is that with this 
particular engine, the model is tail heavy. With the added weight from a 4s, it
may have taken care of that problem. 

If I had the bucks, I would go for the  90 4s


Norm C.

P.S.

I'm going to try and show up at the CMRCM field this Saturday. If I do, I'll 
have it with me.

    Bob,
    
    R/C Report published a review of the 60/90 Bipe not too long ago.  If I
    remember correctly, Gordon Banks used the new OS 70 Surpass in his
    model with outstanding performance.  I'll dig out the article if you
    can't find it.
    
                --|--             Happy (con)Trails!
                 (O)             
          _______/ \_______       Scott Cox