stunthanger.com
General control line discussion => Open Forum => Topic started by: David M Johnson on August 04, 2011, 12:32:27 PM
-
OK let the opinions begin. I'm looking to know which makes the better STUNT engine and Airplane recommendations for these engines. Yes I'm aware that there are more modern power plants available. I have one each of these that are in good shape and I am not interested in using something I don't have.
David Johnson
Phoenix Az
-
OK let the opinions begin. I'm looking to know which makes the better STUNT engine and Airplane recommendations for these engines. Yes I'm aware that there are more modern power plants available. I have one each of these that are in good shape and I am not interested in using something I don't have.
David Johnson
Phoenix Az
Well, I think they both can be made to run very well for stunt. The ST is a little lighter and there are more of them around. It's also easier to get parts (rings Etc. for the ST). There are also more folks around that understand how to make the ST's work very well (remember one won the last World Champs).
So... if the ST has a good sleeve, get a good ring, run around 22% oil (half castor, half Klotz) and keep the K&B or sell it!
Just my humble advice of course and nobody ever listens to me! LL~
Randy Cuberly
-
I'm gonna break with tradition (others, not mine) and agree with Randy. Use the ST. For an airframe, you should be able to get an SV-11 ARC or Legacy ARC (I read that the ARFs are sold out). In kits, the Legacy is the bargain of the bunch, but the RSM lineup has several that would work dandy. RJ's Hawker Hunter (Classic legit), RJ's Shoestrang (not Classic), and there's no reason a Trivial Pursuit or Pathfinder LE wouldn't work quite well. The Hunter would make sense, since you could fly it in both Classic and PA. There are probably other kits that would work well, but it's 76F here, and I'm just about to melt. Well, not really, but I thought you'd like to know... LL~ Steve
-
Your killing me its 112 and I am melting. Yes the Super Tiger looks an feels new, it came on a R/C plane that was built flew twice and then hung on the wall. The compression "feels" good but I'm not an "expert". My friend that is familiar with Older super Tigers is a speed legend and took one look and said "be a good stunt motor but too slow for speed". What size square area for a stunt plane should I look for?
David
-
Are we talking the ST G-61 late(r) model engine or the classic ST 60 stunt engine? Big difference. At any rate, a good selection of kits has already been posted. Size? - 650 -700 square inches would be 'bout right. 8)
-
Its a G60
-
Other than owning a few and running them in the past I'm not a ST expert so I'll defer on further advice. I do know that the most popular stunt version has a different case with a large "V" on it, rather than the "G" that this one exhibits. 8)
-
Good eye, Pete!!! I think the feind David was messin' with us, by leaving the ampersand out of the K&B. It did distract my eye from the ST...I thought it was a .60, as did Randy, I'm sure.
The G.61 is about 19 oz without a muffler, so I would like to change my vote to the K&B .61 (assuming it really is a K&B .61 and not a HB .61, you dog!). The K&B is a bit heavier than the ST .60bb (the fab stunt engine), and it's also a little bulkier, but not horribly so. They are known to work pretty well, and Clarence Lee still offers parts and service in occasional ads in Model Aviation Classifieds. I won't change my model suggestions, but would add one, the Impact. There have been two kits offered for the Impact. Plans are available from FM and probably both plans and laser cut ribs from UHP. :-[ Steve
PS: David...are you coming back up to the Seattle area again this summer? Holla if you do!
-
It was my mistake on the topic I put KB 60 by mistake The other engine is a KB61 and this engine is the 60 size. I apologize for the error. I wish I could come up this summer but I don't think its in the cards.
-
I flew the blue head ringed version of this engine in R/C pattern for about 10 years. It is a very fine engine, and almost bullet proof. But it is a little heavy for stunt, and I think the timing is to aggressive.
-
I have a Tom Dixon review of the K&B 61. He says it has the exact same timing and performance as the ST 60, but is an ounce heavier and a little wider. The mounting holes don't match. I will probably fly a K&B 61 rather than the ST 60 because: (1) I have two K&B 61's and no ST 60, (2) my airplanes tend to come out tail heavy so I can use the extra oz. S?P
-
There are also more folks around that understand how to make the ST's work very well (remember one won the last World Champs).
You only told half of the story... ::):That same ST 60 lost the E Ch to an electric set up last week..... It's time to move on.
I already upgraded from ST 60 to electric in 2006 and see no good reason in ever going back to such a noisy,
greasy thing up front that doesn't perform as good as what is available now .....
'and nobody ever listens to me!' LL~
I did.... ;)
-
A few people here have reported good results with the G-60.
There was a r.c. P-47 in FM or whatever with Two 14x6 props , for a 4 blade .
For a semi scale thing without a lot of nose , the weight could be usefull .
There was a abc version , 2.2 hp claimed , ordinarilly 1.6 , so good for a battleship . ~^
-
Back to the issue at hand. I vote for the K&B 61. Of this is through attrition since the ST60 is the big block for pattern flyers. Probably can sell that one to nostalgic pattern people.
I am attaching Tom Dixon's "Time Machine". Great little 650 incher well suited for 51 to 60 power. Many have used the basic design as a springboard to do cosmetic changes for a custom look. Pour your own, you know. The TM is a great machine for a slam-dunk experience.
Pat Johnston
Skunk Works
-
The K&B and all parts can still be bought new at www.mecoa.com
-
If it is a G60 then I would go for the K&B. Interestingly enough, I have it on reasonable authority that the Old Merco 61 was the engine that Super Tigre copied to produce the ST60. The numbers are uncannily similar. The K&B looks as though it was inspired by the ST60. I have been told that the K&B numbers are uncannily like the ST60!! Perhaps more information than required!
Regards,
Andrew.
-
Back to the issue at hand. I vote for the K&B 61. Of this is through attrition since the ST60 is the big block for pattern flyers. Probably can sell that one to nostalgic pattern people.
I am attaching Tom Dixon's "Time Machine". Great little 650 incher well suited for 51 to 60 power. Many have used the basic design as a springboard to do cosmetic changes for a custom look. Pour your own, you know. The TM is a great machine for a slam-dunk experience.
Pat Johnston
Skunk Works
Yeah, The Time Machine is a very honest stunter that can be built to look like just about anything and the aerodynamics are excellent. Very easy to trim and will fly as good as anything.
Tough airplane that really flies great.
Randy Cuberly
-
Back to the issue at hand. I vote for the K&B 61. Of this is through attrition since the ST60 is the big block for pattern flyers. Probably can sell that one to nostalgic pattern people.
I am attaching Tom Dixon's "Time Machine". Great little 650 incher well suited for 51 to 60 power. Many have used the basic design as a springboard to do cosmetic changes for a custom look. Pour your own, you know. The TM is a great machine for a slam-dunk experience.
Pat Johnston
Skunk Works
Looks similar to Stiletto. Which one came first ?
-
Looks similar to Stiletto. Which one came first ?
The Time Machine is a 90% version of the Patternmaster which looks similar to a Stiletto as well.
-
I beleive the Stilletto came first. H^^
-
K&B 61 Twist head C/L version- EVO 60 C/L
This was tested today on a friends Strega , It is a beast! 13x5 Rev Up prop , Randy Smith Tube Muffler.
Both people watching it fly have St .60 C/L and said that the K&B has way more power. Having said that , it is only running 5:30 seconds on 10/29 fuel . 7 oz tank. The venturi is probably too big as it has a fairly harsh break in the 2-4 transition. The K&B pulls the Strega around like it was a ringmaster. I will try to keep adding layers of the Stocking with an o ring to choke it down. with 4 layers it went from running 5 min to 5:30. Loads and Loads of power but needs to become more friendly.
Yes it is heavier than the ST .60 but has more power. It will swing a 14' prop no problem. It was $99 from Mecoa
I changed the stock Needle valve assembly to a Super Tiger .60 set up to choke it down more.It is just a matter of harnessing all the power.
On the Other hand we tested the EVO 60 on a Community Profile plane. Much overweight Profile Pathfinder .
The EVO is very smooth and good on fuel economy. It has a very mild 2-4 break in the 8000 -8400 rpm range. We started out with a Rev Up 12x6 and later switched to a Rev Up 13x6. The fuel tank was 6 oz I believe.
It was set up stock with stock NVA , not sure which venturi we used . Stock tongue muffler used. 10-22 fuel.
Very Nice 60 sized motor for $139.00, For those wanting a large motor without the $400 price tag + header+ pipe
this a very user friendly set up
-
A few people here have reported good results with the G-60.
There was a r.c. P-47 in FM or whatever with Two 14x6 props , for a 4 blade .
For a semi scale thing without a lot of nose , the weight could be usefull .
There was a abc version , 2.2 hp claimed , ordinarilly 1.6 , so good for a battleship . ~^
Be care full Matt!
Your gona scare them back into their box! LL~