Author Topic: Score ARF (Read 3406 times)

andreas johansson · « **on:** July 18, 2007, 05:29:36 AM »

Hi fellow CLers

One hobby shop in Sweden sells the Score ARF for a pretty low price. I have an ST .51 (italian version) with very low time on it. What do you think? From what I understand i must change: the bellcrank, leadouts, clevises and hinges.

cheers

Andreas

Bill Hummel · « **Reply #1 on:** July 18, 2007, 05:35:44 AM »

Hi, Andreas,
My experience with three Scores is they will fly with the ST 51, but will fly much better with something bigger. We are currently flying one with a RoJett 65 side exhaust, which pulls it very nicely! Similar excellent results with a PA 61 se. After using the bigger engines, I would not want to go back to something smaller in this stunter!

Kev Morgan · « **Reply #2 on:** July 19, 2007, 03:21:53 AM »

Hi Andreas
I have been trying to locate a supplier of the TF Score here in the UK but no luck so far. Perhaps you would be kind enough to post details of the outlet in Sweden and I could try them maybe?

Many Thanks

Kevin

andreas johansson · « **Reply #3 on:** July 19, 2007, 03:59:27 AM »

Hi Kev

I´ll be glad to do so. Go to www.rotorflyg.se (unfortunatly its only availble in Swedish) in the menu to the left choose "Flyg Linkontroll" and then "Top-flite" There you can see the price in Swedish Krona.

I would recommend you to send an e-mail to info@rotorflyg.se to check with them if they ship to foreigen countries.

Andreas

Gary Anderson · « **Reply #4 on:** July 19, 2007, 12:12:44 PM »

Hi Andreas, I have two different type score's and I know several people that fly them with smaller engines. I fly one with a Merco 61 lite case and the other with a K&B 61, both fly well. At first I was using an os 46 on one of them and was doing well, in some of the square manovers, the plane acted like it was out of air speed and dropped and guess, what totaled the fuseage. I rebuilt her using a magnum type fuseage.(wings and stab area wasn't hurt). I was using a merco 49 on my second one, did the same thing. I checked for wraps, miss alignment, cg, found nothing. Watched several other score's fly, flier said they loved the ship. After what happen to mine I watched as they when into the manovers and noticed their's had the same tendencies. Now that I'm using the bigger motors, doesn't seem to be there! The score looks great in the air seems to fly well. Probably just me but I would really be careful with running a smaller power plant. I know several people will tell you different and I'm sure they are right, its just what has happened to me. Good luck and have fun, Gary

Bob Reeves · « **Reply #5 on:** July 19, 2007, 02:46:17 PM »

The Score builds heavy with a wing loading around 14 oz sq ft. It needs HP to fly well.. Mine does great with a Saito 56 swinging a 13-7 but think a ST 51 might be marginal.

Jim Oliver · « **Reply #6 on:** July 19, 2007, 07:26:28 PM »

My Score has Ultracote on wings, horizontal stab and elevators with silkspan and Sig dope on the fuse--wt. is
64 oz. I have been flying with a Tom Dixon ST 51 with APC 12x6 and Tru-Turn spinner for CG control.

After lots of head scratching over trim issues (mainly solved now) I have decided that the plane needs more power--not more speed, just more torque. If I keep the ST in the rpm range where it is happy, I don't have quite enough power. If I increase the revs for more power, I get too much speed.

So, I agree---the ST 51 is marginal for my Score. I am presently considering my options.

Jim

Gary Anderson · « **Reply #7 on:** July 19, 2007, 11:17:58 PM »

Quote from: Jim Oliver on July 19, 2007, 07:26:28 PM

My Score has Ultracote on wings, horizontal stab and elevators with silkspan and Sig dope on the fuse--wt. is
64 oz. I have been flying with a Tom Dixon ST 51 with APC 12x6 and Tru-Turn spinner for CG control.

After lots of head scratching over trim issues (mainly solved now) I have decided that the plane needs more power--not more speed, just more torque. If I keep the ST in the rpm range where it is happy, I don't have quite enough power. If I increase the revs for more power, I get too much speed.

So, I agree---the ST 51 is marginal for my Score. I am presently considering my options.

Jim

Hi Jim, for around a hundred dollar a K&B 61 from Mecoa will put some real power in the drivers seat. I have one with a Merco 61 and one with the Mecoa K&B 61. The K&B is doing five second laps and I can stand her straight up with out any problems. The only thing that worked for me has power. The OS 46 was great until I start doing square manovers. Crashed both plane with the smaller engine. When I snapped her up to start a square loop she acted like the lines weighted a thousand pounds, hinged right in. Some will say trim problems? I checked everything I could think of, installed the bigger engines and she doesn't seem to have that problem anymore? The K&B 61 control line engine from mecoa is a stronger engine and less money than a Merco. (But, I love my Merco!) Good luck, Gary

andreas johansson · « **Reply #8 on:** July 20, 2007, 06:00:25 AM »

Ok, I see your point. Its odd that they marketing the Score as a 40-51 model when its needs a 60 size engine.

Andreas

Jim Oliver · « **Reply #9 on:** July 20, 2007, 07:42:13 AM »

Gary,
I have experienced much the same flight characteristics with the Score--in the beginning I had the wrong prop which caused lots of problems. The right prop helped but more power is the real answer.

As far as why the Score is marketed as a 40-51 model---Tower doesn't have a CL engine larger than 51.

Jim

Gary Anderson · « **Reply #10 on:** July 20, 2007, 09:40:38 AM »

Hi Jim, I was sure there had to be a wrap, so I checked the plane with an incidence meter, two foot level. Checked the flap and elevator to be sure they where level. Checked to be sure everything was square. Tried different props, checked engine rpm's. Flew well until started harder manovers. Just keep thinking I was doing some wrong, I guess that's why I crashed both of them. The one with the Merco 61, I have a 13/6 apc prop on her turning 6900 rpm's and she seems to love the low rpm's and all my problem's have disappeared. I was thinking maybe in the design? Anyway thanks for the info, have a great day, Gary

Mike Scholtes · « **Reply #11 on:** July 22, 2007, 10:55:46 PM »

Hi Andreas:

I have a Score with a Chinese-built ST51 fitted with a Bowman ring and cleaned up internally. It pulls the 67-oz (??grams) combination just fine with a 12-5 Zinger Pro on 10% nitro fuel with about 24% oil. Maybe its my sea-level coastal California air but I have no complaints about it being "marginal." If you want to buy another larger engine, of course more power would not hurt, but as you already have the ST51 it should get you flying. I am however planning to experiment with a 4-stroke, and the new compact OS56 looks very interesting. The model itself flies very well as far as design is concerned. Lots has been written about the Score; check the archives here and on Stuka Stunt.

Eric Viglione · « **Reply #12 on:** July 23, 2007, 08:20:57 PM »

Hey TY - You seem to intimate some knowledge of the origin of the Score? I'm just curious because when they first came out, I asked many times if anyone knew who was involved in the design and production of these , and if they were "Regular" modelers we would know or talk to or just some engineers hidden away in the back rooms at TopFlite. Also, is there actually plans for the Score so as to scratch build? Is there a scratch built Score with a ST51 being flown somewhere, if so, how does it fly at the lighter weight?
EricV

Quote from: Ty Marcucci on July 22, 2007, 07:55:52 PM

When it was designed, these are the engines used. But the ARF version comes out heavier than the original. Never fails. If you built one from plans, choosing your balsa carefully, it would be several ounces lighter and the .51 would carry it just fine.

GEOFFREY · « **Reply #13 on:** October 15, 2007, 06:04:28 PM »

i am having trouble with my SCORE. going way to fast. New K&B 61 cant go slow enough to fly it .. fuel is 10% 24. 12 in APC Pitch 4,5,6. . running pressure on clunk.. at 9600 r.p.m. thanks for any ideas in advance Geoffrey back to the bench

Eric Viglione · « **Reply #14 on:** October 15, 2007, 07:11:54 PM »

Hi,

12" is too little diameter for that engine. Just like a ST60, a 12" prop on anything smaller than a Patternmaster and you're off to the races.

If you need to stay with a 12", go to a 3 blade around 5 or 6 pitch. Otherwise might I suggest a wood Zinger 13x5 or 6. Less gyro effect also than the heavy APC, and chunky enough to bleed off some speed. Also bring a TopFlight Power Point 13x6 with you, in case the Zinger doesn't have enough pull for your taste. 9600rpm? Yoiks, try it more around 8000- 8400RPM.

Hope that helps. You might also ask Willis, he's run that motor a bit.
EricV

Steve Fitton · « **Reply #15 on:** October 15, 2007, 07:25:55 PM »

Quote from: Eric Viglione on October 15, 2007, 07:11:54 PM

Hi,

12" is too little diameter for that engine. Just like a ST60, a 12" prop on anything smaller than a Patternmaster and you're off to the races.

If you need to stay with a 12", go to a 3 blade around 5 or 6 pitch. Otherwise might I suggest a wood Zinger 13x5 or 6. Less gyro effect also than the heavy APC, and chunky enough to bleed off some speed. Also bring a TopFlight Power Point 13x6 with you, in case the Zinger doesn't have enough pull for your taste. 9600rpm? Yoiks, try it more around 8000- 8400RPM.

Hope that helps. You might also ask Willis, he's run that motor a bit.
EricV

Yeah, my flying buddy Willis had pretty good sucess with a zinger 13x5 on his new ("twist head") K&B. That was on a 76 or so ounce Strega ARC. I don't remember what rpm he was running at, it was kind of a "needle it till it sounds good" sort of setting job and lo and behold, it was good in the air. I think he was running Powermaster 10/22 in it. If ground clearance is an issue, you may consider something like a Bolly or Eather 3 blade. Those props will also let you tweak the pitch to really suit the motor/plane.

GEOFFREY · « **Reply #16 on:** October 16, 2007, 02:55:40 PM »

thanks guys the zinger did the trick . Now all i have to do is install a tank that will feed the K&B 61. Need to modify landing gear also. Might put the SCORE away for the winter. thanks Geoffrey out

Gary Anderson · « **Reply #17 on:** October 17, 2007, 03:21:05 PM »

Hi guys, I'm using a APC 13/6 on my veco 61, merco 61, ST 60, K&B 61, all of them turning around 7800 rpm's and lap time is right around five seconds on sixty three foot lines. Have a great day, Gary. (At that rpm the engine has a real nice sounding four-two run)

Leo Mehl · « **Reply #18 on:** October 28, 2007, 10:38:53 AM »

What kind of tanks are you guy;s using on the score?

Jim Oliver · « **Reply #19 on:** October 28, 2007, 11:32:52 AM »

I am using a 6 oz. plastic RC tank, set up for uniflow (no muff prressure). Six oz. is more fuel than needed, but a 4 oz. is not enough for the ST 51 I have in the plane.

I have the tank well padded with thin foam--if the tank is not isolated from the airframe parts, vibration will wear a hole in the tank.

Jim

Gary Anderson · « **Reply #20 on:** October 30, 2007, 05:18:05 AM »

Quote from: Leo Mehl on October 28, 2007, 10:38:53 AM

What kind of tanks are you guy;s using on the score?

I'm using the tank that came with the arf and it seems to do fine for me. Runs the same inverted or up right. I'm able to complete the pattern with a few laps to spare. Have a great day, Gary

Joe Yau · « **Reply #21 on:** October 30, 2007, 10:15:22 AM »

Quote from: Leo Mehl on October 28, 2007, 10:38:53 AM

What kind of tanks are you guy;s using on the score?

I'll be using a 6 oz Sullivan #403 clunk tank in my score. (the stock one is only 5oz.)

Bob Reeves · « **Reply #22 on:** October 30, 2007, 11:39:14 AM »

I'm using a 4 ounce Sullivan slant front clunk held in with wire-ties, runs about 6 1/2 minutes on 20% nitro.

Rudy Taube · « **Reply #23 on:** November 15, 2007, 08:41:42 PM »

Quote from: Bob Reeves on July 19, 2007, 02:46:17 PM

The Score builds heavy with a wing loading around 14 oz sq ft. It needs HP to fly well.. Mine does great with a Saito 56 swinging a 13-7 but think a ST 51 might be marginal.

Hi Bob,

Thanks for your input on using a 4S Eng. in a Score. I'm thinking of using a Score with a 4S or as an ECL. I have a few questions:

What 13 x 7 prop do you use on your Saito 56?

What RPM does this prop give you?

Do you think the .56 is just enough, or does it have extra reserve power for the Score?

Would the new CL Saito .62 be a better engine for the Score? It is actually 3/4 oz LIGHTER than the .56. More power/less weight, how cool is that!

(My guess is that it is a bored out .56?, or a misprint on their web site)

TIA for your answers.

Bob Reeves · « **Reply #24 on:** November 16, 2007, 03:37:52 AM »

Hi Rudy,

I have two 62's but don't feel it's worth the effort to change out the 56. The 56 is more than enough and am sure I would end up running the same prop at the same rpm. If I didn't already have the 56, wouldn't hesitate to install a 62.

Running a Rev-Up 4 stroke 13-7.5 at around 8K maybe 7800, been a while since I had a tach on it and my memory sucks. The Rev-Up 4 stroke props have a slight uncamber and are slightly under pitch at the tips. I believe whoever designed these props knew what they were doing and the prop is a significant part of my Score's success.

However because the Rev-Up's are so hard to come by I have been telling anyone that asks to try the Pro Zinger 13-7. I have not personally ran one on the 56 but switching between a Rev-Up 11-7 and Pro Zinger 11-7 on my 40a proved to me the Zinger should work almost as well as the Rev-Up. Wouldn't be real difficult to rework a Zinger if one feels it needs a little help.

I am happy enough with the Score that one of my winter projects is a BOM ship based on Score numbers. I feel the Score is an excellent design and the 4 stroke really makes it a killer package. The tough decision is going to be use the 56 Golden Knight I have stashed away or use one of my 62's.

I have always been under the impression the 62 is 1/2 ounce heavier than the 56.. Haven't actually weighed them myself, might just do that for grins...

Walter Hicks · « **Reply #25 on:** November 16, 2007, 09:36:24 PM »

Saito .62 is 1/2 oz more that .56 .

Rudy Taube · « **Reply #26 on:** November 16, 2007, 11:53:30 PM »

Quote from: Walter Hicks on November 16, 2007, 09:36:24 PM

Saito .62 is 1/2 oz more that .56 .

Hi Walter,

Thanks for weighing your Saitos for us. The Saito (Horizon) web site must have made a mistake on their weights for the new Saito CL 4S engines. Unless the CL engines are different from our Dark Arts conversion engines?? They make no mention of any difference other than the new lighter CL muffler and the CL venturi. Unless the missing Dark Arts Carbs were different? ....... No matter, I still think that the 4S engines are perfect for CL. Great torque, Cool sound, quiet, use less fuel, VERY user friendly, and they cost almost 1/2 of an equivalent high quality 2S/pipe engine! And they are almost as reliable/repeatable as my ECL systems.

http://search.horizonhobby.com/index.jsp?N=0&Ntt=control%20line%20Saito&sid=1164C4385893

They list the Engines as: (Weight W/O light CL muffler)

Benchmark
Saito .56 = 15.5 oz $195 .90 HP APC Prop   12 x 6
Saito .62 = 14.7 210 .92    13 x 6
Saito .72 = 16.6    225   1.20     14 x 6

Regards,