Author Topic: Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use? (Read 1463 times)

Sport Pilot · « **on:** August 09, 2010, 11:46:20 AM »

Hi fellows.
Some time ago I read something about the use of the TT 36 Pro engine in combat use.
These engines "catch"? they seems to be strong built and powerful for the job.
Regards
Carlo

phil c · « **Reply #1 on:** August 09, 2010, 06:56:22 PM »

Quote from: Sport Pilot on August 09, 2010, 11:46:20 AM

Hi fellows.
Some time ago I read something about the use of the TT 36 Pro engine in combat use.
These engines "catch"? they seems to be strong built and powerful for the job.
Regards
Carlo

They can work fine, with the right prop and right venturi size. depends on what rules you are flying to. But if you're flying with a bladder it doesn't take much fiddling to get a good running combination. They have plenty of power to haul a big plane over 80 mph. They do need a bigger plane because they weight a couple ounces more than the lighter 25 size motors.

I tried one running wide open an 8/6 prop and 10% nitro. It hit about 95 mph on a 500 inch plane for three or four flights. Then the shaft broke across the port.

For speed limit events most folks are going towards smaller engines. The LA 25 is popular and easy to run. The Brodak 25 is even lighter and more powerful. You can even get good results with any of the F2D motors with a 7/3 APC prop and restricting the venturi to ~.125 in. with a piece of brass tube wired into a piece of bladder tubing and fitted over the venturi.

Dwayne · « **Reply #2 on:** August 10, 2010, 05:46:25 AM »

Not to highjack this post but what about a GMS 32 for fast the specs say it will turn 20,000 rpm.

Paul Smith · « **Reply #3 on:** August 10, 2010, 05:39:20 PM »

Is that the Thunder Tiger 37? The engine that was proven to be oversize for Profile Carrier, so they stretched the rule to legalize it? Thereby cheating everybody who owned and operated genuine legal 36's?

From Tower Hobbies Tech Notes:

SPECS: Displacement: .365 cu in (5.98cc)
Bore: .8189" (20.8mm)
Stroke: .6929" (17.6mm)

There's no such rules-fiddle in Combat, so it's over the limit. I don't think the Combat Rules Board will be as wiggly as Carrier.

Make the engine fit the rules, not the reverse!

Steven Kientz · « **Reply #4 on:** August 11, 2010, 02:03:36 PM »

Does Speed Limit Combat have a maximum engine displacement?
I have a TTpro 36, put a Evo venturi on it and an a needle valve, runs good. Not broke in yet, but will find its way on a Pysco later this year.

Steve

Greg McCoy · « **Reply #5 on:** August 11, 2010, 03:30:54 PM »

Quote from: Steven Kientz on August 11, 2010, 02:03:36 PM

Does Speed Limit Combat have a maximum engine displacement?
I have a TTpro 36, put a Evo venturi on it and an a needle valve, runs good. Not broke in yet, but will find its way on a Pysco later this year.

Steve

Speed limit in most cases allows any engine as long as it's tuned to run at the speed limit.

Paul Smith · « **Reply #6 on:** August 12, 2010, 04:59:16 AM »

According to the AMA Rule Book, the .3600 cubic inch limit applies to Fast, Slow and Speed Limit. This rule was written when people were using 35's and the 36 gave them some slack. But enough is enough. If the rules gets changed, maybe 26 would be better. Then you could use the abundant 25's with the same amount of slack.

Since Fast and Slow are virtually dead, it's not much of an issue there. Speed Limit, if run by local rules, can be anything the organizer wants it to be. So why buy a new engine that wants to go 100 and try to get it down to 70, 75, or 80? And also risk being disallowed buy somebody who (very correctly) wants to comply with the rules.

john e. holliday · « **Reply #7 on:** August 12, 2010, 09:49:06 AM »

As someone used to say some time ago, "They are cheating worse than I do because they keep beating me". I was there when Bill B DQ'd his self from Foxy racing at the NATS. He had bought the engine as a stock unit from an individual and just ran it. During the teardown of engines before awarding of trophies, Bill pulled the back plate and stated I am DQ'd. The previous owner had done a lot of interior work on it. If local contests had the turn out to warrant it, tear downs and measuring would cure some of the over size engines. But, in reality it is only done at the NATS and record trials. At the local race track is the word that if you are going to cheat, don't win. Hurts the pocket book when you go from first to last in a 24 car field. Best bet is get equipment that the people are using instead of trying to save a penny or two.

phil c · « **Reply #8 on:** August 12, 2010, 05:05:15 PM »

Quote from: Dwayne Donnelly on August 10, 2010, 05:46:25 AM

Not to highjack this post but what about a GMS 32 for fast the specs say it will turn 20,000 rpm.

One of our guys bought a GMS 32. It ran very well when set up for speed limit. Actually, it seemed to have better response to the NV than almost any other engine. Very well behaved. You do need a fine pitch NVA(OS CL or the 1a RC needle valve).

Steven Kientz · « **Reply #9 on:** August 13, 2010, 02:30:52 PM »

The Evo venturis fit the GMS .32 and .25 cases. i have a Gms .32 set up on the test stand , waiting for cooler weather.

Steve

Paul Smith · « **Reply #10 on:** August 14, 2010, 09:55:29 AM »

Quote from: john e. holliday on August 12, 2010, 09:49:06 AM

As someone used to say some time ago, "They are cheating worse than I do because they keep beating me". I was there when Bill B DQ'd his self from Foxy racing at the NATS. He had bought the engine as a stock unit from an individual and just ran it. During the teardown of engines before awarding of trophies, Bill pulled the back plate and stated I am DQ'd. The previous owner had done a lot of interior work on it. If local contests had the turn out to warrant it, tear downs and measuring would cure some of the over size engines. But, in reality it is only done at the NATS and record trials. At the local race track is the word that if you are going to cheat, don't win. Hurts the pocket book when you go from first to last in a 24 car field. Best bet is get equipment that the people are using instead of trying to save a penny or two.

There are lots of gray & fuzzy areas in the rules, and if you don't push the corners of the envelope, you don't win.

But engine displacement is a HARD LINE that you just can't cross.

When the manufacturer publishes the bore, stroke, and displacement, there's nothing to debate. It's either legal or it isn't.

john vlna · « **Reply #11 on:** August 17, 2010, 01:48:16 PM »

I don't know how strict combat is, but in carrier we changed the .36 rule to 6cc. This accomidates many of the newer engines that are sometimes advertised as a .36, but are really 6cc, not 5.8. I think the TT 36 might be one of those, bit I am not really sure. It is legal in carrier as a 6cc engine.

Paul Smith · « **Reply #12 on:** August 18, 2010, 07:29:50 AM »

In combat, (back at the beginning of time), 35's were common, so they drew the line at 36 to "give 'em a little slack". So the next generation of engine was microscpically below .3600. At least one manufacturer issued "stroker" cranks to retrofit 35's up the full .3600.

In Profile Carrier (once they lifted the stock engine rule), guys paid big bucks to DE-stroke high performance 40's down below .3600. If they want to use the TT 37, they should do the same.

Any rule that increases (even microscopically) the displacement, is a gross injustice to everyone who owns a LEGAL engine.

Mike Greb · « **Reply #13 on:** November 14, 2010, 02:08:43 PM »

The small increase in the Profile Carrier engine size didn't hurt anybody. .01 increase in displacement is lost in the noise.

phil c · « **Reply #14 on:** November 17, 2010, 08:51:21 PM »

As a CD I wouldn't bother anyone who used a Thunder Tiger 36 in speed limit combat. It ain't worth it, and the .005 extra cubic inches provides no advantage whatsoever. Also, we generally specify "up to plain bearing sport 40's).

More importantly, the nickel plated sleeve in the TT seems to be more susceptible to dirt than some of the other engines. True ABC would have been nice. I think I'll have Bob Oge put a heavy chrome job on the liner and fit the piston to bring it down to .359999999 cu. in. About .003 ought to do it.

Author Topic: Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use? (Read 1463 times)

Sport Pilot

Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use?

phil c

Re: Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use?

Dwayne

Re: Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use?

Paul Smith

Re: Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use?

Steven Kientz

Re: Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use?

Greg McCoy

Re: Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use?

Paul Smith

Re: Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use?

john e. holliday

Re: Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use?

phil c

Re: Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use?

Steven Kientz

Re: Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use?

Paul Smith

Re: Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use?

john vlna

Re: Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use?

Paul Smith

Re: Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use?

Mike Greb

Re: Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use?

phil c

Re: Thunder Tiger 36 PRO good for combat use?