Of course there are some box stock engine/airplane combos that are a match made in heaven others not so much.
That's exactly right. What *I* am trying to do is to find those combinations, and try to advise people to use those in appropriate situations (like this thread which asked a very specific question with combinations we have extensively tested).
I would have to beg to differ with some of the rest of it, there is one significant modification desirable on the Fox 35 - the bypass stuffer - and that came from not one of the "drill this and grind that" engine modifiers, but retired NASA engineer and long-time Top 20 pilot Frank Williams. He is also responsible for some other true breakthroughs, including the spigot venturi. Larry Foster does great work, too, but he is trying to put the engines back to stock with the only real modification higher compression in diametric opposition to the "general wisdom" that holds that all engines are "dangerously overcompressed" and need head gaskets. Similarly, Brian Gardner is fixing long-acknowledge problems by applying advanced techniques. For example, the one thing actually wrong with the ST46, particularly the last few runs of them, was hopeless ring issues, leading to weak performance at the best of times, and a random number generator at the worst. Brian fixed that completely. The engine is still effectively obsolete, but it addressed the one fixable flaw with it for those using it in classic (it timed out of Nostalgia 30 a few years ago).
I again emphasize that *I am not accusing anyone of setting out to commit sabotage*, I am absolutely sure (because I know of lot of these guys) they are not, and are just sure they found the "trick" and are helping their fellow modelers. Many of the are great guys trying to help others, just like the rest of stunt fliers. But in the vast, vast majority of cases, it might as well be sabotage.
A typical scenario is as described above - a sequence of events that I have seen over and over and over, and also, I have been faced with trying to resolve at a contest or practice field somewhere. Frequently it ends with "go get stock parts" (if possible), sorry you drove all the way to Oregon and didn't get in any decent flights".
It all started with people having no idea how best to run the 40FSR, became a common/nearly universal practice with the 40FP, and is now used to turn out 46LAs (which performs exceptionally well stock) that have less power than a Fox 35. *On purpose*.
Of course, this is just my perspective, and it is perfectly clear that people are going to keep doing it until stunt is over. I am trying to steer people away from this, into something that *I* think will provide objectively superior performance based on my 30 years of stunt competition with modern techniques. I have recently gotten another example of positive reinforcement by a few local examples where people went from "not being able to do a square loop" to "competitive in Advanced" in less than a single season. It's part and parcel with the thread in "At the Handle", because you cannot apply the techniques Ted and I are talking about without first having a modern-quality system.
Again, this thread asked a specific question about particular engines and airplane combinations for which my buddies and I have extensive and careful experiments over the period of decades. I am *pretty darn sure* how both of these engines work in various airplanes, stock. People can take advantage of this, or prove it wrong, and if so, I will tip my cap and go experiment some more.
As always, it is merely advice, I, too, am trying to give my best advice (and explain exactly *why* I think it works) just like everyone else. Anyone is perfectly free to follow it, or not. And as virtually every thread in the "Engine Setup Forum" (not posted by Randy or myself) shows, not that many people are following it, anyway.
Brett
Topic: OS .25 LA vs. FP (Read 4255 times)
