Author Topic: Saito 62aCL (Read 2217 times)

Gordon Tarbell · « **on:** February 08, 2008, 01:25:01 PM »

Just picked up my new 62aCL Saito, LHS called last night to say it was in. Had to wait til today (my day off) so wife doesn't know. Little itty bitty muffler on it. Muffler weighs 24 grams or 3/4 oz. Engine without muff is 414 grms. or 14 5/8 oz. for a total of 15 3/8 oz. Comes with extra paper on CL set up, and has removable venturi insert. Without disassembling unit it appears to measure .238 -.240 " dia. with spray bar through middle and the hole is visable from looking in the venturi (doesn't seem right to me). I am going to disassemble and investigate.) I will be back .

Bob Reeves · « **Reply #1 on:** February 08, 2008, 02:52:32 PM »

Bought two of the RC versions before I knew they were comming out with a CL version. The UHP manifold for the 56 fits and is what I am going to use. Haven't ran either one yet so am interested in what you discover if you get the plug lit before me.

Wondering if the info for CL has any additional info on prop recommendations. I already have a pretty good idea of what prop I'll start with but wondering what Saito thinks if anything.

Gordon Tarbell · « **Reply #2 on:** February 08, 2008, 03:46:47 PM »

Hi Bob , yes there are prop recomendations. " fa-56 apc12x6@9000with stock venturi;9700with small venturi insert.

Gordon Tarbell · « **Reply #3 on:** February 08, 2008, 04:03:30 PM »

Hji Bob, here is what the booklet said "Fa-56cl apc 12x6 @9000 with stock venturi;9700with small insert. fa62acl apc 13x6@9100 with stock venturi and 9700 with small insert. fa72 cl apc14x6 @8400 with stock venturi and 9000 with small insert. These things come with the small insert install from the factory according to the book, I checked, it is. Fuel recomended is 20-22% syn oil and 10-15% nitro. high %castor is NOT recommended! but small amounts are acceptable. I figured the rpm's would be lower with the small insert not higher as stated in the booklet. I am now going to have to heat the carb body to rotate the spray bar it is definately facing up stream not down. I called horizon and the guy was very slow to respond to my questions . Seemed like he was spending more time formulating a defense than wanting to make a reccomendation, so I asked a few more questions that I already knew the answer ,to check his response then politely ended the call. I will now heat the carb boky and try to rotate the spray bar, so the discharge oriface is facing about 5 to 10 degrees of direct down stream.

Bob Reeves · « **Reply #4 on:** February 09, 2008, 09:14:36 AM »

Thanks for posting that.. Was wondering what Saito was saying..

Don't agree with the prop recommendations but I have never actually tried the APC, it might be fine, they are good props if you can get past the looks and weight.. I did start with a Bolly 12-6 on my 56 and it was a disaster. The airplane was doing about 90 at the bottom of the verticals and would loose airspeed like mad in the squares.. I switched to a Rev-Up 13-7.5 and choked the venturi down to get the rpm down to about 8100.. Now it is awesome, no wind up or slow down anywhere in the pattern.

Only thing I can think of for the 62 would be a cut down 14-7 to about 13.5. Am sure it will swing a 13-7.5 but using the same prop on the 62 that I am on the 56 makes me think I'm not gaining anything but 0.2 ounces in engine weight.

Keep us posted, really would like to hear what works for others..

Bob Reeves · « **Reply #5 on:** February 09, 2008, 09:25:48 AM »

Oh ya, higher RPM with a smaller venturi..

Funny thing I noticed when choking the venturi down to lower the RPM on my Saitos was fuel usage actually went up. This defies all conventional wisdom and the reason I tell anyone that asks me about 4 strokes it to completely forget everything you think you know about model engines, it won't do you any good with a FS.

My theory is that the smaller venturi helps fuel draw and four strokes need all the help they can get.

Gordon Tarbell · « **Reply #6 on:** February 12, 2008, 06:47:51 PM »

Got an email from Pete Bergstrom of Horison hobbies, he saw my post on the 62aCL and noticed my coments on the spray bar problem(and the luke warm response from tech). He expressed concern that this hopefully was just a one in a million fluke. I think Saito via Horizon hobbies wants to be a real contender in the CL engine world. I really appreciated the email from Pete.

ash · « **Reply #7 on:** February 12, 2008, 07:38:25 PM »

Is anyone currently flying a Saito 62 in stunt yet, either the CL or converted RC version?

Are they meeting or exceeding the standard set by the 56 and 72?

Walter Hicks · « **Reply #8 on:** February 13, 2008, 08:54:28 PM »

Hi Everyone,

I tested my Saito .62 with Ultra Hobbies Venturi/NVA assembly last Sunday. Eather 14x5.5 UTC prop,

Modified Top Flite Score (my testbed for engines) . I like the engine it is lighter than the .72 swings the big prop.

Flew the Score 70OZ with Saito! very well. Excellent fuel economy, I was overrunning on 3 .25 oz of Powermaster

20/20 Four Stroke fuel! This engine will find a home in a Windy Urtnowski designed Typhoon in the next couple of

years. I started out with a thinned Zinger 13x7 prop and it nearly ripped my arm off. I am sure I can choke the

venturi like has been done on the Saito .40 ( mine has this set up ) and run different props. Great engine...The picture below has the Stalker .66 , The Saito .62 has much more power, The Stalker is excellent for a lighter plane.

Walter Hicks · « **Reply #9 on:** February 13, 2008, 11:49:00 PM »

I forgot RPM at launch 7300! Yes this is correct....

Bob Zambelli · « **Reply #10 on:** February 14, 2008, 02:09:21 PM »

I tested one of the first 62s to arrive.

I put it in an 80 ounce Polaris and it went like a bullet.

12-6 three-blade carbon-Kevlar prop, 10-23 fuel.

It had about 30 minutes of run time before I flew it and it just ran better and longer every flight. John Brodak and I were flying it in his backyard and it was quite the handful. We had the carb on it since he plans to use it in scale with a 3-wire setup.

When the weather gets better, we plan to fly it more and also to evaluate the Z-muffler on this engine.

Bob Z.

wwwarbird · « **Reply #11 on:** February 14, 2008, 06:18:42 PM »

Can we see a photo of the muffler please

Thanks!

Bob Zambelli · « **Reply #12 on:** February 15, 2008, 05:24:35 AM »

Here are two I made.

The first was designed for a SAITO .72. As shown, it can be fitted a number of ways.
The (thermodynamic) analysis said it would work - the engine had other ideas. There was no power loss but the engine ran just a bit too hot. Also, it was not fully broken in - that may have had something to do with it.

In any case, I opened it up a bit and fitted it to the SAITO .62. We'll test it someday.

The second is a quickee setup I made for the side mounted SAITO .56 on my Staggerwing. It works beautifully and the next iteration will have a screw in nipple instead of the one shown, which is attached with JB Weld.
The rationale for this is that I'm not comfortable with the stock muffler hanging down. It's quite robust and a hard landing could break the boss where the steel nipple screws in. My design screws directly into the head with an aluminum nipple that will break away on impact.
As you may know, the Staggerwing has retracts and gear-up landing sometimes happen.

Bob Z.

Bob Z.

Bob Reeves · « **Reply #13 on:** February 15, 2008, 11:38:55 AM »

When I first saw the new muffler that came with the 62, I thought cool get rid of that long nipple and one could have a great muffler. Then I weighed it, the muffler alone weighs more than the old style long muffler including the steel pipe. I understand Saito is supplying the old style light muffler with the CL engines which I think is a good move. Also the old style muffler can be ordered from Kaz Minato in Japan.

Now that I have a lathe that will cut threads I'm going to playing with a couple ideas for the 40, 56 and 62. I like the stock mufflers but as stated above when you side mount a Saito with the stock adaptor/pipe you are asking for expensive trouble in the event of almost any kind of mishap. I bend the pipe on my 56's to give me a 90 deg pipe instead of the 45 or so of the stock one. This pulls the muffler up above the bottom of the fuselage but the pipe is still longer and heavier than we really need. The 40 comes with a 45 deg aluminum adapter, going to atempt to make a 90 as soon as I get the right taps for the female end.

Saito has all the right angle adaptors needed for the 72 but as far as I could find nothing that fits the 56, 62 or 40. Hope that will change..

Scott Hartford · « **Reply #14 on:** February 17, 2008, 09:33:09 PM »

This is what I use on the 56: http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products/Default.aspx?ProdID=SAI100T74

Bob Reeves · « **Reply #15 on:** February 18, 2008, 02:13:49 AM »

Not the 62 but finally managed to make an adaptor for my 40. Only took two days and two tries but am pretty happy with the end result.

Rudy Taube · « **Reply #16 on:** February 20, 2008, 02:41:37 AM »

Another muffler option for the Saito CL series are the excellent products from Performance Specialties:

http://www.pspec.com/results.asp?category=4

These are very light, quiet, and fully adjustable. I may try one on my new Saito CL .72 that is going into a Strega ARC. :-)

Author Topic: Saito 62aCL (Read 2217 times)

Gordon Tarbell

Saito 62aCL

Bob Reeves

Re: Saito 62aCL

Gordon Tarbell

Re: Saito 62aCL

Gordon Tarbell

Re: Saito 62aCL

Bob Reeves

Re: Saito 62aCL

Bob Reeves

Re: Saito 62aCL

Gordon Tarbell

Re: Saito 62aCL

ash

Re: Saito 62aCL

Walter Hicks

Re: Saito 62aCL

Walter Hicks

Re: Saito 62aCL

Bob Zambelli

Re: Saito 62aCL

wwwarbird

Re: Saito 62aCL

Bob Zambelli

Re: Saito 62aCL

Bob Reeves

Re: Saito 62aCL

Scott Hartford

Re: Saito 62aCL

Bob Reeves

Re: Saito 62aCL

Rudy Taube

Re: Saito 62aCL