I do not have the Vector, but I have seen (and used!)  ST 46s in 35 size Classic planes.  Especially the larger size ones that now seem very underpowered with a "Classic" 35 engine.  My Spacehound was orginally a 35 powered plane, but it flew really good with the ST 46.

I don't think there would be a problem using the ST 46 in a Vector ARF.

Bill <><

Can anyone tell me if a ST 46 will fit into the Vector ARF without major surgery?  Are the engine bearers far enough apart?  Is the 46 too heavy?  Is this even a viable combination or should I just get one of the smaller 36 or 40 sized motors?  I was trying to save a little money, I have this very nice ST 46's looking for a home.  I can't find much information on here about anyone using this motor in this plane, which may just answer my question.

I was also wondering how the motors are secured?  Do they use that plate clamping system?

Thanks guys

Vince

I dont know about the ST 46, but I bought a Vector ARF for a testbed for my os 40SF, which is going to go into my Vector im building, and it was too big for the engine bearers. Had to use the 40FP. The SF fits nicely into the kit-built Vector, but not the ARF.Theres no plate mounting system included.The ARF has an hatch that glues ontop the of engine bearers after you bolt the engine on. The hatch covers the blind nuts once the engine is mounted.

We once replaced a FP 40 with a ST 46 on a profile .

There's you answer Vince!

Thanks for all the support.  I just ordered my new Vector and am anxiously awaiting it's arrival.  I will post as to exactly how the motor fits in the airframe and if I had to make any modifications. 

Vince

By the way, I noticed that some guys were talking about a possible problem with their Vector wings being warped.  Is that still something that I have to check for?  I'm assuming (there's that word again) that this plane will be one of the newer production runs, but I guess there's no way to tell that.

Shouldn't be too hard to check the wing for straightness.  I'm thinking I should just block it up on my workbench and take a bunch of measurements on the leading and trailing edge.  Sound reasonable?

Vince

That will work, but I *think* the guys could tell their wraps just from a "visual".

Hi, Vince, after reading all these posts about a ST 46 in a Vector, I took out my Vector ARC today to see.  Yes, a ST 46 will fit, actually pretty nicely, and a 5.5 ounce tank will fit as well. Problem I see is the front end of the Vector is pretty lightly built: lite-ply formers, lite-ply doublers, soft wood motor mounts, huge cowl, and little "block" over the engine. I'm thinking the "shaky" ST 46 might not get a good motor run due to vibration...and drive you nuts!  Even if you 'glassed the inside and outside of the fuse, I'm not sure you'd pick up enough rigidity to make it run well.  I love my ST 46's, but not in a Vector ARF, is my two cents...Agree with Big Bear, though, ST 46 in this size ship is awesome!  Just need a stronger front end, is what I'm suggesting...

Probably make a good electric conversion...low vibration! and you dont have to fuelproof 

Great news!  The ST 46 fits in there as if the plane was designed around it.  I can't see any problems.  Dropped right in with no modifications necessary at all.  The thrust washer sticks out past the nose ring a hair too much, but I'm really not going to worry about it.  I'm not even going to bother stripping the covering back to fiberglass the nose.  I'm going to give the entire inside of the motor and tank compartment a nice coating of epoxy, put it together and fly it.  If it lasts one season, I'm ahead of the game.  If it's still in one piece come the end of the season, I'll strip the nose and strengthen it.

Thanks again for all the help and encouragement.

Vince

Here's a progress report on my Vector.  I removed all the components from the box and carefully examined them.  Everything looks pretty good.  No shipping damage at all.  There was a slight separation of one of the fuse sides at the rear of the tank compartment, I used Gorilla glue and some clamps to mend that.  The covering was badly wrinkled, it took me the better part of an evening to get that right.  It worked out OK, I'm not sure exactly what the covering is that they used, but careful use of the heat gun and iron, along with some pin holes and a soft rag, and it was looking good.  The covering tightened right up with the heat gun.  I'll use some trim solvent to make sure the edges don't lift.  The canopy is just OK, there's some slight discoloration all around the edges of the canopy where it looks like whatever adhesive they used to attach it must have attacked the plastic. 

The wing is not perfectly straight.  The leading edge has a slight bow to it, but, hey, it's not that bad.  My crude measurements tell me that it's off by about 1/4" from wingtip to wingtip.  My flying isn't that great anyway, so I doubt I could tell the difference even if it was perfectly straight.

As I mentioned, the motor fits very well, but it could stand to go back slightly.  The cap screws on the back of the crankcase cover are right up against the fuselage former.  The fit between the beams is so close to perfect that I actually had to put a slight chamfer on the edges of the beams to clear the machining on the bottom of the case.  I drilled the beams and installed the blind nuts.  I contemplated drilling some clearance holes in the former behind the motor so that I could move the motor back slightly, and then figured it wasn't worth it.  I'll look for one of those plastic spinners that Bill recommended, and if it doesn't look quite right, it doesn't really matter.

The slots that they cut for the hinges in the stab and wing are really long.  I suppose it's due to the automated machinery.  I guess the CA will strengthen the cut areas when I glue the hinges in.  The bellcrank mount looks sturdy, but as mentioned elsewhere on this forum, the bellcrank isn't bushed where the leadouts are attached.  Oh well, my goal is to just put it together with minimal work and fly the heck out of it, not spend a lot of time rebuilding it.

The construction looks pretty typical as I remember it.  The motor crutch looks like two 1/2" x 3/8" beams, not sure of the material, they seem a tad softer than the old maple beams that I remember.  I think it will be fine for my needs.  I may try to find some lightweight fiberglass to help strengthen it, but if I can't find any, it will have to do as is.  Remember the goal is to make it through one season.

I ordered one of Brodak's Magnum Uniflow tanks for it today along with one of the Aero Products tongue mufflers to keep the weight down.  Other than that, it's now time to start assembly.  I kind of looked at the cowl and figured out where I want to cut it.  There is no hole for the hot air to exit, so I'm going to have to do some carving.  I'll have to look for some photos to see what others have done in this area. 

I'll keep you posted.  I should have this thing together in a couple of days time.  With all the snow outside, there's not much else to do anyway.

Do you think I should use 62' or 64' lines to start out with?  I've been using .018 x 62' lines on my Cardinal profile with a ST46 and it seems a little quick, but I like the nice line tension they give me.  Just wondering.  What kind of lap times should I look for anyway?

Vince

I am starting with 62 eyelet to eyelet on my Nobler/ST46. Something in the low 5 second laps seems to be the sweet spot for most. Thicker wings can be flown a little slower, thinner wings (Nobler) need to be flown on the fast side. You just have to find a speed the airplane is comfortable with and adjust the line length so you are comfortable.

I'm flying my Nobler on 63 ft lines eyelet to eyelet. OS 40FP Muggelton. Seems to be fine and has good tension but I think I'll try 62's when I get a chance. It seems to fly much better as was mentioned if you keep the airspeed up.