stunthanger.com
General control line discussion => Open Forum => Topic started by: frank mccune on November 10, 2020, 10:57:10 AM
-
Hi All:
After many lectures and and father to son talks, I finally made the switch to using these engines. The reasons included, very easy starting, steady run and ease of adjustment. I mucked about far too long with inferior engines that were a headache to use. I fly for fun, not frustration. These engines are real treat to use.
Be well,
Frank
-
That's right. But it's hard to understand why O.S. dropped production of the 46, when it was universally accepted.
-
That's right. But it's hard to understand why O.S. dropped production of the 46, when it was universally accepted.
I think the handwriting is on the wall for that - electric is where the industry is going. I would not be surprised to find that the current models (35AX, etc) are the end of the road for major IC manufacturers.
Of course that assumes the industry is going anywhere at all. It is far from clear whether the drone users war on RC is going to effectively put an end to the entire model airplane industry. It wouldn't surprise me, because any serious enforcement of "remote ID" will kill current RC sport flying dead-dead-dead.
That the 25 and 46 LA (and the 20 and 25FP before them) are good stunt engines is, as far as I can tell, accidental. They certainly did not start out geared to our needs, it just happened to work out that way.
Brett
-
After a couple years of flying electric planes (and with the unfortunate recent demise of my wonderful e-Sultan :'( ...), I recently dug out my old foam wing mongrel that I learned the pattern with. It runs an unmodified stock LA46, LA25 venturi(.255") , OS needle valve sealed with large fuel tubing, APC narrow 12X4 cut down to 11", 6oz plastic clunk tank, Mac's mini pipe on muffler pressure, 15/22 fuel. Ran perfectly every flight in a very fast 4 or wet 2 with no break. Started on the first or second flip. Sounded great and flew with no headaches. Gordan Delaney and I also flew his LA46 Pathfinder at that flying session. It runs beautifully smooth every time. Stock engine, ST needle, .275 venturi, 10x4 3-blade.
-
When I returned to CL 6 years ago after fiddling with my old Fox and McCoys I decided to buy a new Evo 36 as a substitute for one of my 35's. I quickly realized there's no comparison with these engines, but the point is I no sooner received the Evo only to discover it was being discontinued. I moved on to acquire some OS LA 25, 40, and 46 engines. I use the 46 on my Snow Bird with a 12x4 prop, it's the best engine to plane match I own, I love flying it. I second everything you say about these IC engines but unfortunately, sales drive production in any business.
The RC guys next to our circle are flying 95% electric, you can't blame them especially those guys flying those big expensive ARFs. No one wants to pile in a $1500.00 out of the box or built airplane because of a finicky fuel issue. I still love the smell of castor and everything that comes with it even after flying my enjoyable electric Primary Force.
Nothing stays the same.
Steve
-
Seems that the R/C folks didn't like the LA series engines very much, because they weren't as powerful as the FX and AX series engines. Plus, i have a feeling that the throttles were the cheapest & crumbiest possible. They may also have found out that fuel was a problem, causing peeling cylinder plating. If their .46 won't turn a 11-6 at 12,000+ on 10% nitro and 15% (by weight) oil, it's obviously not adequate for "boring holes in the sky". n~ Steve
-
"That the 25 and 46 LA (and the 20 and 25FP before them) are good stunt engines is, as far as I can tell, accidental. They certainly did not start out geared to our needs, it just happened to work out that way"
Boy is that the truth .... The timing numbers have always amazed me ..... certainly not typical stunt timing .... but ..... the proof is in the pudding ... the 46's sure do run a nice pattern.