News:



  • May 16, 2024, 09:18:53 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: LAS 40  (Read 1640 times)

Offline Leester

  • 2014 Supporters
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2530
LAS 40
« on: May 01, 2006, 03:06:03 AM »
Will an LAS 40 pull a 50oz plane alright or do I need to move up to a LAS 46? What would be considered to heavy for the 40?  Thanks
Leester
ama 830538

Offline Mike Clark

  • Lets get together and burn some fuel!
  • ACE
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 62
Re: LAS 40
« Reply #1 on: May 01, 2006, 08:32:34 AM »
Which Airplane Leester?

I have flown LA40's on Vectors and ARF Cardinals without a problem. Both are in the 42 to 48 ounce class.
 
Mike Clark
Mike Clark

Offline Leester

  • 2014 Supporters
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2530
Re: LAS 40
« Reply #2 on: May 01, 2006, 11:59:24 AM »
It is a Tower R/C converted to C/L UPROAR. Modified to 54" WS (added wing tips) and cowling.
Leester
ama 830538

Offline phil c

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2480
Re: LAS 40
« Reply #3 on: May 03, 2006, 07:26:08 PM »
I'd say be prepared to put in a 46.  The LA 40 is a 40 and only has so much torque.  A heavier plane is likely to need a bigger prop, hence a larger engine.  You can get more power out of the 40 by going to a larger venturi and higher rpm.  That would work also, but would require some odd-size props for stunt.
phil Cartier

Offline Dennis Moritz

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2464
Re: LAS 40
« Reply #4 on: May 07, 2006, 10:13:36 PM »
Wait, a Tower 40 is a different animal than an LA40. If the mods left the boost port alone it should run like an FP40. More power than an LA40. See my post under the FP35 question.

Offline Leester

  • 2014 Supporters
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2530
Re: LAS 40
« Reply #5 on: May 08, 2006, 06:11:28 AM »
Dennis: The plane is a Tower the engine is the LAS 40. See my Uproar post. j1 j1 j1 j1
Leester
ama 830538

Offline Dennis Moritz

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2464
Re: LAS 40
« Reply #6 on: May 08, 2006, 08:46:21 AM »
yes yes yes gotcha ::)

Offline Bill Little

  • 2017
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12671
  • Second in COMMAND
Re: LAS 40
« Reply #7 on: May 09, 2006, 12:13:36 PM »
Leester,
I would go with the guys suggesting the 46LA.  If you can get a fuel tank in there (I would think you can) the 46 will be insurance.  IMHO, the 46 is even "friendlier" than the 40LA.
Big Bear <><

Aberdeen, NC

James Hylton Motorsports/NASCAR/ARCA

AMA 95351 (got one of my old numbers back! ;D )

Trying to get by

Offline Mike Clark

  • Lets get together and burn some fuel!
  • ACE
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 62
Re: LAS 40
« Reply #8 on: May 09, 2006, 12:51:08 PM »
Hi Guys,
"friendlier" I don't know about, more powerful a difinite, Both will crank like the OS FP's second flip! Both will run on 5% fuel, Both will run on the same prop 12/5 to 12/6, Both are nice engines I have them both! The LA40 is a good 40 and the LA46 is a top of the line 46. It may be the oinly 46 I'll put into a Sig Magnum.

If selected wisdom is not available for you use, always go with more horsepower! You can't go wrong.

Mike Clark
Mike Clark

Offline Leester

  • 2014 Supporters
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2530
Re: LAS 40
« Reply #9 on: May 09, 2006, 01:44:33 PM »
I went with the 40 knowing that I could swap the 46 if needed. But like Bill said tank size could be a problem since I put in maple motor mounts which cut in half the available tank space. It was more or less a fun type project so I'll just have fun with the fuel that it's got.
Leester
ama 830538


Advertise Here
Tags:
 


Advertise Here