Engine choice for my winter build, Sig Magnum

[Matt Brown]

Doing a bit of pre-planning for my winter build. My original thought was to find a ST .51 for this Sig Magnum kit. I scrounged a bit and found an RC version for cheap. It feels like it has great compression and bearings are clean and smooth. I figured Randy Smith or someone similar could hook me up with venturi and NVA that would be suitable.
I’ve just been reading some of the posts in the engine tuning threads and I’m wondering if maybe my LA .46 might be a better choice or even some other engine out there?
My initial thoughts are this plane will be film covered but lately I’ve been thinking about silkspan or its current equivalent and dope finish.
Engine thoughts?

Thanks, Matt

[MikeyPratt]

Doing a bit of pre-planning for my winter build. My original thought was to find a ST .51 for this Sig Magnum kit. I scrounged a bit and found an RC version for cheap. It feels like it has great compression and bearings are clean and smooth. I figured Randy Smith or someone similar could hook me up with venturi and NVA that would be suitable.
I’ve just been reading some of the posts in the engine tuning threads and I’m wondering if maybe my LA .46 might be a better choice or even some other engine out there?
My initial thoughts are this plane will be film covered but lately I’ve been thinking about silkspan or its current equivalent and dope finish.
Engine thoughts?

Hi Matt,
Go with the ST 51 (very good choice).  If you have time and money send it to Randy and have him blue print it and set it up.  I don’t think the LA will have the power unless you build it super light under 53 ounces but it can be don’t.  If you need help and recommendations feel free the email or call. 

Later,
Mikey

[Brett Buck]

Doing a bit of pre-planning for my winter build. My original thought was to find a ST .51 for this Sig Magnum kit. I scrounged a bit and found an RC version for cheap. It feels like it has great compression and bearings are clean and smooth. I figured Randy Smith or someone similar could hook me up with venturi and NVA that would be suitable.
I’ve just been reading some of the posts in the engine tuning threads and I’m wondering if maybe my LA .46 might be a better choice or even some other engine out there?
My initial thoughts are this plane will be film covered but lately I’ve been thinking about silkspan or its current equivalent and dope finish.
Engine thoughts?

   I have seen them fly, back in the good old days when the standards were different, on as little as an ST46.  A 46LA will probably fly the airplane, but I would go for something more powerful. If you have a known-good ST51, that's more like it, but there are a lot of ST51 modifications that have the effect of making it wimpier. If you are talking 4-2 break engines, I wouldn't use less than a PA51 or an ST60.

    4-strokes like the Saito 56, etc, would be good, too. Mikey can confirm, but I think he used an Enya 46. There has been some advancement in the understanding of how to run them since they stopped being a big thing, but the super-high-pitch setup makes be nervous with the very thin wing, because I don't see where the speed control comes from.

     Brett

[Brett Buck]

Hi Matt,
Go with the ST 51 (very good choice).  If you have time and money send it to Randy and have him blue print it and set it up.  I don’t think the LA will have the power unless you build it super light under 53 ounces but it can be don’t.  If you need help and recommendations feel free the email or call. 

Later,
Mikey

   AY YI YI, Mikey, close his quote!

   On-topic, a Saito 56 running low pitch seems like a viable alternative .

    Brett

[Matt Brown]

   AY YI YI, Mikey, close his quote!

   On-topic, a Saito 56 running low pitch seems like a viable alternative .

    Brett

While I am a huge fan of Saitos on my RC stuff, I’m trying to stay as mainstream as I can with this Magnum build. Looks like it’s back to my original plan of using the .51. I also have a decent ST 60 but it is the two piece case design so I’m guessing quite a bit heavier. That might work if I decided to go with longer tail moment but I know I’m in that 90% that likely couldn’t tell the difference between a longer tail and stock.

Matt

[Dave_Trible]

I’d go for the Tiger .51,  especially if that’s what you already have.  A few year ago I pretty effectively pulled a 69 ounce airplane about the same size ( Music) with one.  Jim Lee can Ukie-ize it for you and make a light tongue muffler for it.  Pitch that space shuttle fuel tank.  Otherwise use it box stock and I found they are happiest on no more that 11-11 1/2” diameter props.

Dave

[Will Hinton]

One other good choice for the Mag', at least for me, was my Merco 61.  It acted like a stunt engine for four seasons on my  heavy Magnum.

[Randy Cuberly]

In the late 1980's to the early 1990's I had two Magnum's with ST51's.  Excellent combination.  I flew several OP's with ST46's and they worked OK but the 51 in my opinion was the perfect combination!

For what it's worth here's a photo taken in Phoenix in 1987.  It's a little grainy because it was converted from a conventional 35mm to digital.

Whew was I ever that young?

Randy Cuberly

[Dane Martin]

I have a yellow magnum built by Bob Pitkins built in 1992, or 94. It's got an ST51. It's got great power! Way too much control though. Poor Paul Taylor borrowed it and stalled on a few manuevers. But the power is great!

[Dave Royer]

One other good choice for the Mag', at least for me, was my Merco 61.  It acted like a stunt engine for four seasons on my  heavy Magnum.

That Merco 61 is still flying stunt and I'm here to tell you, it ain't acting! 

[Dave Hull]

Be sure to check the fuse width for the bigger engines. I found the ST 60 a bit wide for a supposedly stock nose.

Dave

[Matt Brown]

Be sure to check the fuse width for the bigger engines. I found the ST 60 a bit wide for a supposedly stock nose.

Dave

I believe I read somewhere that you had to shave down the engine lugs to fit an ST60 in a Magnum.

Matt

[GERALD WIMMER]

Hello
Seem to be replacing formers with wider home made versions on a lot of kits as my chosen engine normally won't fit . Don't like grinding lugs or crankcases to fit a model , when its easy to add more wood. My Magnum motor choice was to use one of my Fox Hawk engines but found from experience on another model it is poorly timed for stunt unless you let it rev out. My Avistar 61 would probably work a lot better but I like the look of the Fox Hawk.
Regards Gerald

[Will Hinton]

That Merco 61 is still flying stunt and I'm here to tell you, it ain't acting! 

Hi Dave!  Great to know old faithful is still pumping out the patterns!  Hope all are well there.

[MikeyPratt]

While I am a huge fan of Saitos on my RC stuff, I'm trying to stay as mainstream as I can with this Magnum build. Looks like it’s back to my original plan of using the .51. I also have a decent ST 60 but it is the two piece case design so I’m guessing quite a bit heavier. That might work if I decided to go with longer tail moment but I know I’m in that 90% that likely couldn’t tell the difference between a longer tail and stock.

Matt

Hi Matt,
If you are considering a 4-stroke engine stay with the 6 inch props.  I didn't have good luck with the four strokes at all and went back to the 2-stroke engines (the four stroke engine cost me a good placing at the Lake Charles Nat’s) so I'm not a fan.  The four stroke didn't have the power in the hot humid air even with a bunch of Nitro (35%) and trying many different props.

Another engine to consider is the Magnum 52 from Randy Smith.

Later,
Mikey

[goozgog]

Hello Matt,
      An engine that I think you should consider
an Aviastar .61 from Brodak for $149.99
It available and in stock .

   Last weekend, I flew CLPA at the
Southern Ontario Controline Conference and
managed a fourth with the Aviastar in a 68 oz
plane. Lots of power turning a 12-7 wood.

  This engine is an exact change out for my
RoJett .67 and ST.60's and it runs and needles
very well in a soft two.
  This engine does not run like a St.60 with
that basso profundo growl. Imagine it as a
.61 size LA.46.
This is a real CLPA engine and IMHO is every bit
as lovable as the LA .46.
  I like that it runs on common 10% - 50/50 fuel
like Riche's Brew, or Sig.
  I don't like the huge beer can muffler ( 3.2 oz)
but I get good engine runs with it.

 The history of these engines has been besmirched
because they were shipped from China with a very
tight cylinder fit near TDC and that caused the
big end of the connecting rod to "click" when turned
over by hand and the engine was cold.
This never caused me any problems but Brodaks
replaced the entire ABC P/L and rod assembly with
better parts.
  I know that any engine they ship has these new
components installed. Ask to talk to Clay the machinist
if you have technical questions.

This is my previous post.

https://stunthanger.com/smf/engine-set-up-tips/aviastar-61-cl-from-brodak/msg318491/#msg318491

   For what it's worth, I dragged out my half built
Magnum and measured between the 1/16" ply doublers.
It measures 2 -5/32"  or 55 mm.

- The St.60's drop right in.

- The RoJett .67 is very narrow across the lugs so
  it has lots of room.

- The Merco .61 is a wide engine and would only fit
   with major surgery but it could be done

- The Aviastar .61 is 55mm wide across the lugs
  and should fit OK but tight.
 


Cheers! - K

[Joey Mathison 9806]

I have a yellow magnum built by Bob Pitkins built in 1992, or 94. It's got an ST51. It's got great power! Way too much control though. Poor Paul Taylor borrowed it and stalled on a few manuevers. But the power is great!

that sounds strange I must have put that plane in the air 100 times and never stalled it.

[Dane Martin]

that sounds strange I must have put that plane in the air 100 times and never stalled it.

Yeah, well you saw it. Lol. I don't know what actually happened but it looked pretty bad @$$.

[Randy Powell]

I'd go with an LS-6

[FLOYD CARTER]

This "Larceny" is actually a jazzed-up "Legacy" with a T&L ST 51.  I have tried several props for this plane, and I settled on an ordinary wood 12-5 from RSM.  Almost all of my many engines are fed the same fuel:  SIG Champion 10-10-10.  Maybe not optimum fuel, but at least I don't have to mess with a special fuel for each model.


Floyd in Oregon

[Steve Helmick]

I'd vote for the Super Tigre G.51. To be clear, ST made a bunch of baffle piston .51's, none of which would be desirable. The G.51 is pretty economical on fuel, somewhere under 6 oz of 10% would work. With the Brian Gardner ABC piston/cyl. setup, it will need even less fuel and be more suitable for typical 10/18 R/C fuel.  The downside is that Super Tigres are apparently out of production. There are several sizes of APC props that work well with it, a plus. The Magnum/ASP .52 would be another good option.  Steve

[Matt Brown]

Okay, this idea may be ridiculous but,,,,,
I was lucky enough to win the K77 engine that was being raffled off. It sounds like way overkill for this plane but I thought I’d throw it out there. Put the K77 in my Magnum! From what I can gather, the Magnum is about 700 squares which is roughly the same as many other .60 size planes. I’m still learning towards getting a Dreadnought for the engine but I thought maybe just get the Magnum built this winter and then take my time building the Dreadnought.


Thoughts?
Matt

[Gerald Arana]

Hello
 Don't like grinding lugs or crankcases to fit a model , when its easy to add more wood.

AMEN!

And I can't stand drilling the lugs out or the venturi! 

Jerry

[Steve Helmick]

For what it's worth, I happened to see the ASP .52 was for sale on Hobby King for under $50. I've never bought anything from Hobby King, but some do. There is probably some chance that the shipping cost will be high, so pay attention to where it would ship from!  Steve

[Randy Cuberly]

Okay, this idea may be ridiculous but,,,,,
I was lucky enough to win the K77 engine that was being raffled off. It sounds like way overkill for this plane but I thought I’d throw it out there. Put the K77 in my Magnum! From what I can gather, the Magnum is about 700 squares which is roughly the same as many other .60 size planes. I’m still learning towards getting a Dreadnought for the engine but I thought maybe just get the Magnum built this winter and then take my time building the Dreadnought.


Thoughts?
Matt

The K77 is basically the same external dimensions as the PA75.  It's gonna be a very tight fit!   Also where do you plan to put the PIPE?  Also if the engine came with a muffler be aware that the early mufflers were too small to let the engine breathe properly.  The correct muffler is a much larger carbon one.  I've run mine on both and there is no comparison.  However it still runs better on a Randy 75 Pipe.  However if you can enlarge the fuselage to fit and accommodate the pipe it will be an excellent choice. 

Randy Cuberly

[Dave_Trible]

Matt I don't know where your learning curve is.  I assume if you are still in the earlier stages and are comfortable with muffled (as apposed to piped) airplanes and are not yet flying expert class, keep that .77 for your NEXT project down the road.  Thats a lot of engine and money that you might not be ready for,  considering you'll really want to use a pipe and coupler -$150- and assortment of carbon props and pitch gauge -$150-$200+++?, and a whole new program of learning to operate it properly.  Your Magnum is do-able for it but wasn't really designed for a pipe set up and would need to be modified some for it.  It would be a little better to build any suitable more modern design that was intended for pipe for that .77. ( I lovingly handled your new motor in Paducah-a nice one).  I'd still go for the .51 for this current airplane. 

Dave

[Matt Brown]

Thanks Dave!
 I flew my first stunt contest this year at the Nats in Intermediate with my electric SV11 arf. I knew if I moved to Advanced soon, I needed to get appearance points. I started flying stunt with glow engines but could never get decent runs. None of my engines though were real stunt engines. That’s why I went electric. However I fly with mostly all glow guys and most of them all get great engine runs. Most all of them have had them reworked or bought them that way. My ST 51 is an unknown. Most likely it is an RC version that someone stuck a venturi in and called it a stunt engine. I pm’ed Brian Gardner about P&L set for it but that’s a chunk of money too. That when I got the idea to drop the K77 in the Magnum. I figured it shouldn’t be too tough to mod the fuse and cowl of the Magnum and the header/pipe is still less that the P&L set. I wanted thinking I could campaign the Magnum a while and when my new Dreadnought or whatever I decide on is ready, I’d just swap out the power package from the Magnum to the new build. I’d save all the carbon prop games for the point at which I could tell the difference! I’m still a long way from there.
Someone suggested the Aviastar from Brodak. It’s still in the same $$ ballpark as new P&L set for the ST.
Decisions, decisions!

Matt

[Steven Kientz]

  Matt
   Save the K77 for the "next" plane. I would build the Magnum for the ST51(as is). If it doesn't want to give a good run, then check into rework. Or there are some St 60s locally, just have to find the right seller. If you modify the Magnum for the K77 and  then get something different you're stuck with an airframe that wants a bigger engine.
   Just my 2 cents
Steve

[Randy Cuberly]

Thanks Dave!
 I flew my first stunt contest this year at the Nats in Intermediate with my electric SV11 arf. I knew if I moved to Advanced soon, I needed to get appearance points. I started flying stunt with glow engines but could never get decent runs. None of my engines though were real stunt engines. That’s why I went electric. However I fly with mostly all glow guys and most of them all get great engine runs. Most all of them have had them reworked or bought them that way. My ST 51 is an unknown. Most likely it is an RC version that someone stuck a venturi in and called it a stunt engine. I pm’ed Brian Gardner about P&L set for it but that’s a chunk of money too. That when I got the idea to drop the K77 in the Magnum. I figured it shouldn’t be too tough to mod the fuse and cowl of the Magnum and the header/pipe is still less that the P&L set. I wanted thinking I could campaign the Magnum a while and when my new Dreadnought or whatever I decide on is ready, I’d just swap out the power package from the Magnum to the new build. I’d save all the carbon prop games for the point at which I could tell the difference! I’m still a long way from there.
Someone suggested the Aviastar from Brodak. It’s still in the same $$ ballpark as new P&L set for the ST.
Decisions, decisions!

Matt

Matt,
Don't worry about the ST51 being an R/C engine.  The only difference between the R/C and C/L engines was a venturi and a needle valve!  If the engine is in good condition and has good compression it will run just fine.  Also it's and easy engine to handle and get to run very well which was why it was so popular for stunt!

I very much concur with what Dave said above.  Use the ST51 and keep the K77 for future builds that won't require a lot of modifications to properly use the engine.

I would strongly recommend that you contact Randy Smith and Talk him about choices of kits to build for the K77.  He's a good guy and very "savy" about what will work and what props etc. will work for the K77 as well as for the ST51, etc.

Personally I would recommend the SV11.

Randy Cuberly

[Fredvon4]

Above there was one mention of the Hobby king Low cost magnum .52...but will need some tinkering...if into engine tinkering best bang for the buck
Randy Smith has light muffler for it and several sources for the best Venturi and NVA...done and done for under a hundred $$$...hauls the mail very well on lower cost propellers

Randy Smith probably has three or 4 engines right now ready to ship that are all good for this plane...I bet his Blue head B&B Magnum .52 is a good engine for the Magnum....Turn key solution inn the $170~$190 range

There just are hardly any T&L ST 51s to be had...zero rings or for that mater any other parts.. high slime

I bailed a while ago one most of my old skool engines...My fleet was growing and I was seeking ease of use, ease of tune, ease of start, and common fuels

ASP, Magnum, OS   

[Dan McEntee]

Matt,
Don't worry about the ST51 being an R/C engine.  The only difference between the R/C and C/L engines was a venturi and a needle valve!  If the engine is in good condition and has good compression it will run just fine.  Also it's and easy engine to handle and get to run very well which was why it was so popular for stunt!
.

Randy Cuberly

   There most DEFINITIVELY IS  a difference between the R/C and the C/L versions of the G-51. If you have a new one with the paper work, check out the part numbers for the cylinder liner. Significant difference in the porting. I have compared the two side by side and measured them with calipers, but the difference is plainly easy to see. I would contact Randy Smith on what he can do with the R/C version. I have posted this information about 4 times in the last two weeks and I'm beginning to wonder if any one ever reads what I write!! I have campaigned ST G-.51s since they came out in 1994, I think it was, and have posted how I run them more times than I can count. Do a search on the forums and you will find more than you can read tonight on how to operate them.
  Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee

[Randy Cuberly]

   There most DEFINITIVELY IS  a difference between the R/C and the C/L versions of the G-51. If you have a new one with the paper work, check out the part numbers for the cylinder liner. Significant difference in the porting. I have compared the two side by side and measured them with calipers, but the difference is plainly easy to see. I would contact Randy Smith on what he can do with the R/C version. I have posted this information about 4 times in the last two weeks and I'm beginning to wonder if any one ever reads what I write!! I have campaigned ST G-.51s since they came out in 1994, I think it was, and have posted how I run them more times than I can count. Do a search on the forums and you will find more than you can read tonight on how to operate them.
  Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee

Hmmmm....Well I've had at least 6 of the R/C versions apart and two or maybe three of the C/L versions apart and never noticed any difference whatsoever.

In fact my first three 51's were converted R/C engines and ran very well in two different Magnum's. 

Maybe there were changes over the years but after I read this I went out to my shop and checked this out on a C/L version that I think I got from you!  It's never been run and it looks just like my old converted R/C engine inside and out!

What's up with that?

Randy Cuberly

[Chris McMillin]

Hi Matt,
I like Super Tigre engines, even Chinese built, and they work great. Go with it.
Contact Dan McEntee about venturi/muffler/prop combos for the ST51. Magnum specific trim ideas, also contact Dan.
Build it light. Paint it? Yes, no problem, but don't go crazy with the paint so you can keep it light.
 
Think of this model as your next season's ship to progress as far as you possibly can. Mike Pratt was always a Open qualifier at the Nats with it... It's a good flying model design by a well known and respected designer, the ST G51 is a good running engine proven over decades, and the two are well suited.

If your model ends up a little heavy, or engine run a little weak/strong, just keeping at it and trimming and working to make that model and engine work for you as a stunt model is the best approach... so that at the end of the season it is better flying and you are better at flying it at the end of the season. Reasonable flying, well trimmed models are more help to the progressing stunt flyer than anything else.

Be able to recognize and reject the ideas floated that lead you astray and settle on something that directs this project forward. Get it to work and stay there for a time. If you can fly it 500 flights next year, you will benefit much more than something leading you to change course, learn new things mid course, and limiting your flying time.
Good luck with your new ship and look forward to seeing your name next season through Stunt News at the midwest contests.

Chris... 

[Chris McMillin]

Don't you just run the high timed one's like Paul Walker ran the FSR's, with low pitched props?
Chris...

   There most DEFINITIVELY IS  a difference between the R/C and the C/L versions of the G-51. If you have a new one with the paper work, check out the part numbers for the cylinder liner. Significant difference in the porting. I have compared the two side by side and measured them with calipers, but the difference is plainly easy to see. I would contact Randy Smith on what he can do with the R/C version. I have posted this information about 4 times in the last two weeks and I'm beginning to wonder if any one ever reads what I write!! I have campaigned ST G-.51s since they came out in 1994, I think it was, and have posted how I run them more times than I can count. Do a search on the forums and you will find more than you can read tonight on how to operate them.
  Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee

[RandySmith]

Above there was one mention of the Hobby king Low cost magnum .52...but will need some tinkering...if into engine tinkering best bang for the buck
Randy Smith has light muffler for it and several sources for the best Venturi and NVA...done and done for under a hundred $$$...hauls the mail very well on lower cost propellers

Randy Smith probably has three or 4 engines right now ready to ship that are all good for this plane...I bet his Blue head B&B Magnum .52 is a good engine for the Magnum....Turn key solution inn the $170~$190 range

There just are hardly any T&L ST 51s to be had...zero rings or for that mater any other parts.. high slime

I bailed a while ago one most of my old skool engines...My fleet was growing and I was seeking ease of use, ease of tune, ease of start, and common fuels

ASP, Magnum, OS

Hi All

I do not have anymore  ultralight  tube mufflers, but I do have  tongue mufflers
And  I have plenty of  RINGS  for  ST G 51   ,  ST 60,  ST 46   and many others, plus  I have  good  bearings   and  many parts  for all 3 engines
The  Only difference in the  RC version  is  the  timing on the  sleeve  is higher on the  RC version, and  of course  the  RC Carb  vs  the  Stuck on restrictor for  CL

Regards
Randy

[Matt Brown]

Anyone have any measurements on the heights of the ports between the two versions? I’ve searched as Dan mentioned he had posted his setup in several posts. I’d like to check my engine and see which version I have.

Matt

[Dan McEntee]

Hmmmm....Well I've had at least 6 of the R/C versions apart and two or maybe three of the C/L versions apart and never noticed any difference whatsoever.

In fact my first three 51's were converted R/C engines and ran very well in two different Magnum's. 

Maybe there were changes over the years but after I read this I went out to my shop and checked this out on a C/L version that I think I got from you!  It's never been run and it looks just like my old converted R/C engine inside and out!

What's up with that?

Randy Cuberly

    Have you got a dial caliper Randy?  Just measure from the top pf the liner to the top of the ports for a simple measurement to see the difference. You may not be able to see it by eye, but I could. As I've mentioned before, Tom Lay had a few customers that preferred the R/C version but I do not know what he may have done internally other than installing the needle valve the way he preferred to do. I have only ever run C/L versions, but hope to play with some R/C conversions just for giggles and grins some time. I don't think I ever sold off any ST.51s. I'm a hoarder and I  have a rather large stock of them, stock T&L, and a Randy Smith or two. I have actually only run three so far, but all three have untold numbers of runs on them, and all still have their original rings in them also, and have been swapped out from plane to plane as I've needed them. The one I have in my second Shark.45 was the same engine that I had in a 72 ounce Magnum that performed well for me, missing qualifying in Advanced at the NATS one year by a half point! Flew some of my first 500 point scores and won my first Expert contest with that combination. It's like Chris mentioned already, if the model comes out a bit heavy, you just need to stick with it and  learn how to fly it. Trimming never really stops. If you can learn to fly a marginal model really well, flying a really good model will be a walk in the park! I learned most of what I know about this stunt game from Chris McMillin when he lived here in St. Louis and he witnessed a lot of what I'm talking about.
  Matt, if you have the R/C version, ask around to some of the guys that have installed the Gardner ABC P&L sets in one of their engines and see if they will part with the C/L liner. You can test fit the piston ring you have and see what the gap is and if it is in good shape, just build yourself a C/L version of the R/C version does not behave for you. Randy has said he has rings and if you send him known good parts he can do the assembly probably at a saving from buying an engine outright. In the mean time, you can be building the airplane to fit the engine, and be on the look out for a Randy tube muffler to come up for sale or try contacting Scott Dinger to see if he has any ready to go. Good luck and have fun!
  Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee

[Bill Ervin]

Matt, another vote for the Supertigre, here’s a vid of my 64oz Magnum and a (stock) ST51 (c/l version).

[Air Ministry .]

Sounds Good , what muffler were you running there ? is that field in grass now .

Yep,
Anyone that cant handle Super Tigres should stick to O. S. es .

 









If anyone prints some , they can let me have a few .

[Bill Ervin]

Tongue muffler, thinned Zinger 12-5

I live in the desert SW United States (southern Nevada), have fond memories of grass from my childhood growing up in Minnesota.  Thanks for the images!

[Matt Brown]

I’ve decided I will stay with my ST 51. I’ll box it up and send it to Randy Smith for him to set it up. I want the best chances of having a solid running engine for this plane. Last year I spent too much time fighting crappy engine performance and not learning the pattern.
I decided over the last winter to go electric so my Twister and my SV11 arf that I’ve been flying all year has let me really work on my flying. However, watching other glow powered planes versus my electrics, I do see a performance advantage of the glow engines. That is the ability to lean out a bit in maneuvers for a boost in power. I really feel like both of my electrics could really use that boost in a couple maneuvers. Maybe one of the exotic timers available would help this?

Thank you all for your time and advice on this!
Matt

By the way, I pulled the liner out of my .51 this morning. Using calipers, I measured from the top of the exhaust port to top of liner. It was .600
From the sharp edge of the opposite port on the OD to top of liner, I got .724” and the two other ports checked .655”. So, from those numbers can anyone tell me if I have a CL or RC engine?

[john e. holliday]

Bill, love your flying site.  Is that Vegas in the back ground?   

[MikeyPratt]

hi Matt,
That's a great way to go!  Randy will set you up with the best combination for the ST 51.  Go with a 6 ounce tank uni-flow tank so you have room to switch to a higher Nitro fuel.  You only need about 5-1/4 ounces of 5% to fly the pattern, with 5-3/4 of 15% Nitro for the pattern.

Drop me a line and I'll help you out.  There are a bunch of not helpful ideas out there that for the most part just add weight or do very little to help performance (I know because I tried most of them).  Are you going to fly it Nostalgic or fly it in Expert or Advance?

Later,
Mikey

[Matt Brown]

hi Matt,
That's a great way to go!  Randy will set you up with the best combination for the ST 51.  Go with a 6 ounce tank uni-flow tank so you have room to switch to a higher Nitro fuel.  You only need about 5-1/4 ounces of 5% to fly the pattern, with 5-3/4 of 15% Nitro for the pattern.

Drop me a line and I'll help you out.  There are a bunch of not helpful ideas out there that for the most part just add weight or do very little to help performance (I know because I tried most of them).  Are you going to fly it Nostalgic or fly it in Expert or Advance?

Later,
Mikey

Strike 3! Intermediate! I just flew my first ever stunt contest at the Nats in Intermediate. Hoping to fly my Twister in profile tomorrow and the SV11 in Intermediate on Sunday at the FCM contest at AMA but the weather isn’t looking good! It depends on how I progress what class I’ll fly next season.

Matt