Zenoah and HP
Giorgio Azzalin
Horsepower. Today in the same web page it is 5,5 HP and 6 H.P on the
manual!
On the paper catalog that I just receive, the same engine is rated 5 H.P.
Somebody know how many horsepower this engine is?
--
Giorgio Azzalin
Florida
comt...@bellsouth.net
RSchlen791
>Horsepower. Today in the same web page it is 5,5 HP and 6 H.P on the
>manual!
>On the paper catalog that I just receive, the same engine is rated 5 H.P.
>Somebody know how many horsepower this engine is?
>
>--
>Giorgio
I'm sorry, I don't know the the number you want. Most model engine HP ratings
are pretty worthless anyway. The important number is how may RPM an engine can
turn a known prop and more importantly, how well it pulls your plane. The 445 I
flew this past summer turned a Menz Ultra 23-10 at 7500 and a 24-10 at almost
7200. Very smooth running engine though a bit heavy compared to some other
twins. Very pleasant engine to fly!
Roger S.
AT
RSchlen791 20001118205833...@ng-fa1.aol.com>...
Those numbers (23-10 / 7500 and 24-10 /7200) means something like 8 - 9 hp.
Which I do not believe! I do believe RPMs which are some 1000 less than.
Regards,
Ari
Pé Reivers
24x10.
Like A.T. I am not inclined to believe the accuracy of your measurements,
unless you have some kind of very peaky tuned pipe attached, or have very
narrow-bladed props. Even then, at the indicated rpm, power output should
decrease, not increase with reduced rpm, if the power range is above 100
hp/litre
--
Pé, from Arcen, south-east Netherlands
http://home.planet.nl/~preivers
Please remove the not.this. to reply my messages
"RSchlen791" <rschl...@aol.com> schreef in bericht
news:20001118205833...@ng-fa1.aol.com...
Ray Shearer
>
> RSchlen791 20001118205833...@ng-fa1.aol.com>...
> Which I do not believe! I do believe RPMs which are some 1000 less than.
>
> Regards,
> Ari
The 23x10 at 7500 would be about 8.2 HP and the 24x10 at 7200 would be
about 8.6 HP. I doubt the RPM figures also unless this is is
modified engine. I doubt a stock engine could do this.
Ray S.
Terry Rago
24-10 at 7250 consistently. Yanks my 1/3 H9 Extra around the sky
with authority.
Terry Rago
Giorgio Azzalin
22X12 there is no way that I can reach more that 6500/6600 RPM. With a
Zinger 24X10 no more that 6300/6400 Rpm.
Maybe we use different tachometers?
Thank
Giorgio
> On the Horizon Hobby web site a few months ago the G74 (Z 4.45) was 6
> Horsepower. Today in the same web page it is 5,5 HP and 6 H.P on the
> manual!
> On the paper catalog that I just receive, the same engine is rated 5 H.P.
> Somebody know how many horsepower this engine is?
>
> --
> Giorgio Azzalin
> Florida
> comt...@bellsouth.net
>
>
rcign
"Pé Reivers" <not.this...@wxs.nl> wrote:
> When I calculate horsepower, I get 7.6 hp for the 23x10, and 8 hp for
the
> 24x10.
> Like A.T. I am not inclined to believe the accuracy of your
measurements,
> unless you have some kind of very peaky tuned pipe attached, or have
very
> narrow-bladed props. Even then, at the indicated rpm, power output
should
> decrease, not increase with reduced rpm, if the power range is above
100
> hp/litre
>
> --
> Pé, from Arcen, south-east Netherlands
> http://home.planet.nl/~preivers
> Please remove the not.this. to reply my messages
>
> "RSchlen791" <rschl...@aol.com> schreef in bericht
> news:20001118205833...@ng-fa1.aol.com...
a TNC tach, turn a 24-10 Zinger 7000 rpm. Altitude 6000 feet, NO mods
except for one that has my CD ignition..It runs the same as the other
two, just lighter..
--
Go Fast, Turn Left, Don't Cut
www.rcignition.com
"Brand X"
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Kjell Aanvik
Again, according to Mr Clark in Germany, the G80 delivers approx. 0.4hp more
than the G74, and also some more tourque.
Mr Clark did his testing with The Menz S and Ultra propellers, and gor the
figures I mentioned.
Ambient air temperature at the time was +4 degrees centigrade (39.4 F), air
pressure at 1052 millibar, and relative humidity at 88%.
The engine used the stock silencers and an intalke venturi of 60 mm (2.36
inch)
I have no reason to believe that the figures given are incorrect in any way.
Best regards
--
Kjell Aanvik
Oslo, Norway
"Terry Rago" <tr...@mediaone.net> skrev i melding
news:3A17E96B...@mediaone.net...
Megasmoke
sukhoi vertical without stopping ..
simon
"Terry Rago" <tr...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
Cliff Griffin
props.
Cliff
Giorgio Azzalin wrote:
>
> I'm flying a Zenoah G74 (4.45)for the last two years and with a Zinger
> 22X12 there is no way that I can reach more that 6500/6600 RPM. With a
> Zinger 24X10 no more that 6300/6400 Rpm.
>
> Maybe we use different tachometers?
>
> Thank
> Giorgio
>
> > On the Horizon Hobby web site a few months ago the G74 (Z 4.45) was 6
> > Horsepower. Today in the same web page it is 5,5 HP and 6 H.P on the
> > manual!
> > On the paper catalog that I just receive, the same engine is rated 5 H.P.
> > Somebody know how many horsepower this engine is?
> >
> > --
> > Giorgio Azzalin
> > Florida
> > comt...@bellsouth.net
> >
> >
RSchlen791
>about 8.6 HP. I doubt the RPM figures also unless this is is
>modified engine. I doubt a stock engine could do this.
>
>Ray S.
Ray and others,
I can guarantee the figures I quoted! If you would bother to note, I clearly
quoted the props used for measurement .... the Menz Ultra. I have tested the
Zenoah Twins with Zinger props and yes, the RPM figures for these "paint stir
stick" props is far less! To suggest and list "calculated" RPM figures clearly
indicates that one is out of touch with the real world. Further, to suggest
that any size prop from one brand is the same as the same size in another brand
and is the same as the numbers you would plug into a calculation is ridiculous.
I believe the response to this post from a Zinger user that said his figures
didn't come close to mine. I also believe those from the Bolly user and the
other Menz user. I could care less what the actual HP is, I only care how the
engine pulls the plane. If I was engineering a project and had a task to
accomplish that required a given amount of HP to do the job, then HP would be
important. I am always amazed at the number of vehicles, machines, aircraft,
etc that get designed and built "to the numbers" only to have additional HP
added to subsequent models to correct for the engineering deficiencies in the
first model.
Question my RPM readings if you must and calculate if you wish .... I'm just
reporting from the real world.
Roger S.
rcign
sticks..Useful for comparison purposes..Glasner props turn even slower
than Zingers.....
Cliff Griffin
them into my Excel file. My file was posted online last week--you can
see it here:
Kjell Aanvik
rpm.
This accoring to measurements done by Toni Clark in Germany
--
Kjell Aanvik
Oslo, Norway
"Ray Shearer" <rsh...@naisp.net> skrev i melding
news:3A17EA...@naisp.net...
> AT wrote:
> >
> > RSchlen791 20001118205833...@ng-fa1.aol.com>...
> > Those numbers (23-10 / 7500 and 24-10 /7200) means something like 8 - 9
hp.
> > Which I do not believe! I do believe RPMs which are some 1000 less than.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ari
>
James G. Branaum
I don't know how the variations in prop brand and type work on that size, my
engine collection stops with the G-62. However, on the 3 inch engines I
have run those Zinger paint sticks and won't do that again! Almost any
other prop will give you better RPM on the exact same engine with absolutely
no changes other than bolting on the different prop. I also have seen that
some props seem to be really valuable if you have an engine that turns X
RPM.
In most cases finding the correct prop can be very significant as to engine
RPM and usable horsepower. It is not always obvious what the correct answer
is, you have to do the research. Meaning, that you have to spend some money
finding the prop that gives you the best performance with the power plant
you have. Resting on numbers that seem to be common works, but not as well
as a little (expensive, but worthwhile) testing. BTDT!
Spend a couple of hundred dollars and buy 2 or 3 props and try them! Or if
you are really a squeaker with the wallet, buy O*N*E of the expensive props
of the correct size and try it. You might be pleasantly surprised. Just
think, it might be like bolting on horsepower! BTDT and it is nice when you
find the correct combination. Recall, the prop is not dependant on the
powerplant, but on the airframe.
Worst case result? You find the need to buy a set of those neat Hangar 9
prop covers to protect your expensive prop. Best case the same thing, but
you also have better performance and feel better about the prop bootie!
Good luck,
Jim Branaum j...@flash.net AMA 1428
Another modeler providing glue for the AMA
"Giorgio Azzalin" <comt...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:S0TR5.359$AA.2...@news2.mco...
> I'm flying a Zenoah G74 (4.45)for the last two years and with a Zinger
> 22X12 there is no way that I can reach more that 6500/6600 RPM. With a
> Zinger 24X10 no more that 6300/6400 Rpm.
>
> Maybe we use different tachometers?
>
> Thank
> Giorgio
>
>
> > On the Horizon Hobby web site a few months ago the G74 (Z 4.45) was 6
> > Horsepower. Today in the same web page it is 5,5 HP and 6 H.P on the
> > manual!
> > On the paper catalog that I just receive, the same engine is rated 5
H.P.
> > Somebody know how many horsepower this engine is?
> >
> > --
> > Giorgio Azzalin
> > Florida
> > comt...@bellsouth.net
> >
> >
>
>
Cgb6810
24x10. >>
How much HP does an engine have turning a 24x10 at 6400 have? That's what my
3W60 turns. Just curious. Can someone point me in the direction of a website
I could calculate this?
thanks
Chris
Jim Archer
http://freespace.virgin.net/barry.hobson/
and download 'Thrust HP'.
--
Best regards
Jim Archer, Norwich, UK
http://www.jimarcher.cwc.net
Cgb6810 <cgb...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20001119205048...@ng-mj1.aol.com...
AT
Personally, if those reported RPM愀 are correct, it means that the engine
is one of the most powerful on its size.
So, there are two questions remaining;1) weight/power ratio 2) good
behavior between low and high end. (yes, price, and longevity as well)
Jim, I agree, that Zinger paint sticks are good to compare different
engines,
however, Menz have very good price/performance, so one can easily
spare few hundred (name the currency).
AT (without the AMA number, never will)
Miles
of thrust. How do you hold it without destroying it???
> Have to disagree. I have a Zenoah GT80 which is spinning a bolly
> 24-10 at 7250 consistently. Yanks my 1/3 H9 Extra around the sky
> with authority.
--
The R/C Aircraft Proving Grounds
http://www.geistware.com/rcmodeling
miles...@my-deja.com
Information on the building and flying of Radio Control Aircraft.
Great site for BEGINNERS in the R.C. Aircraft modeling world
AT
>How do you measure the RPM of a plane that is putting out over 50 lbs
>of thrust. How do you hold it without destroying it???
>
If the plane is airworthy, one can hold the plane from wing leading edge
close to the fuselage.
Elevator should stay in one part as well (close to the fuse), if one is
careful ...
AT
Richard Huffer
Horizon tech support for advice. They told me the G74 had carb/idleing problems
that nobody could solve, which the changes in the G80 solved those problems.
Enlarging to 80cc was one of the changes. Basically they told me I would be alot
more happier with the new 80cc over the 74 just from the liability of running. They
just couldn't get the 445 to run reliable.
Are you having these problems with your 445 as they say. Such as quitting on idle
and keeping carb adjusted. Did you do any modifications to get your engine to run
as smooth as you say? Thanks in advance
Rich
Megasmoke
trying to sell you a 80 twin ... hum!!
"Richard Huffer" <rhu...@indy.net> wrote in message
news:3A19A1A0...@indy.net...
> Thats interesting Roger. I'm considering the G74 or the G80 Zenoah. So I
called
> Horizon tech support for advice. They told me the G74 had carb/idleing
problems
> that nobody could solve, which the changes in the G80 solved those
problems.
> Enlarging to 80cc was one of the changes. Basically they told me I would
be alot
> more happier with the new 80cc over the 74 just from the liability of
running. They
> just couldn't get the 445 to run reliable.
>
> Are you having these problems with your 445 as they say. Such as quitting
on idle
> and keeping carb adjusted. Did you do any modifications to get your engine
to run
> as smooth as you say? Thanks in advance
>
> Rich
>
> RSchlen791 wrote:
>
Terry Rago
Miles wrote:
> How do you measure the RPM of a plane that is putting out over 50 lbs
> of thrust. How do you hold it without destroying it???
Very large screwdriver in the ground. Nylon strap around the
base of
the rudder. Only problem is at full throttle it really puts some push on
the
tail wheel assy.
B.T.W. I only have about 20-30 flights on this engine and haven't
measured
RPM since #5 I believe it has picked up at least a hundred
due to
break-in. I'll tach it again this week.
Terry Rago
USPA #94690
Richard Huffer
see of the prop/rpms you guys are getting, they are close to the same if not the
same.
P.S. I think your right about the sales pitch
Rich
Megasmoke wrote:
> my 74 runs lovely never stopped or missed a beat at idle I think they are
> trying to sell you a 80 twin ... hum!!
> "Richard Huffer" <rhu...@indy.net> wrote in message
> news:3A19A1A0...@indy.net...
> > Thats interesting Roger. I'm considering the G74 or the G80 Zenoah. So I
> called
> > Horizon tech support for advice. They told me the G74 had carb/idleing
> problems
> > that nobody could solve, which the changes in the G80 solved those
> problems.
> > Enlarging to 80cc was one of the changes. Basically they told me I would
> be alot
> > more happier with the new 80cc over the 74 just from the liability of
> running. They
> > just couldn't get the 445 to run reliable.
> >
> > Are you having these problems with your 445 as they say. Such as quitting
> on idle
> > and keeping carb adjusted. Did you do any modifications to get your engine
> to run
> > as smooth as you say? Thanks in advance
> >
> > Rich
> >
> > RSchlen791 wrote:
> >
Pé Reivers
The Excel spread sheet is on my page under goodies
--
Pé, from Arcen, south-east Netherlands
http://home.planet.nl/~preivers
Please remove the not.this. to reply my messages
"Cgb6810" <cgb...@aol.com> schreef in bericht
news:20001119205048...@ng-mj1.aol.com...
RSchlen791
First, I must be technically correct about the ownership of the engines I quote
RPM's from. These are owned by a flying partner, A great gentleman whose
handicap prevents him from flying as much as he would like these days. He is
also the person who taught me to fly RC 30+ years ago. Together, we have burned
many gallons of gas in both a GT-74 and a GT-80.
Both engines run very well with few if any problems. Both engines are modified
for use with a servo actuated choke because you sure can't get to the
mechanical choke in a cowl. They are both a bit quirky to set compared to
single cylinder engines but no real problems. Both will die if you slam the
throttle closed quickly. Solution, don't slam the throttle shut. No running
related problems other than these.
The GT-74 has a bit less vibration than the GT-80 but both are pretty d--n
smooth. I think a .60 glow engine has more vibration than these big twins.
The GT-80 is a couple hundred RPM stronger than the GT-74 but that figure is
meaningless at this time. These engines have different exhaust systems and the
GT-80 still needs more fuel through it before it will peak. Both run better and
better with each flight. Oh yes, the 74 has B&B non mufflers and the GT-80 has
BME mufflers - both with smoke.
I would highly recommend either of these Zenoah engines. But then, a Brison,
BME, etc would also be a good choice. Maybe a better choice if overall power to
weight is a consideration. As always, you pay your money,make your decision and
live with the results.
Roger S.
rcign
"AT" <at.ko...@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
> Sorry, if some answers upset those who owns that engine!
>
> Personally, if those reported RPM愀 are correct, it means that the
engine
> is one of the most powerful on its size.
>
> So, there are two questions remaining;1) weight/power ratio 2) good
> behavior between low and high end. (yes, price, and longevity as
well)
>
> Jim, I agree, that Zinger paint sticks are good to compare different
> engines,
> however, Menz have very good price/performance, so one can easily
> spare few hundred (name the currency).
>
> AT (without the AMA number, never will)
>
in the mount and put an SDC80 Walbro carb on it..End of
problem......... R C .........
Richard Huffer
carb?
rcign
Richard Huffer <rhu...@indy.net> wrote:
> Is there easy way of telling if it is a sdc80 Walbro. Is it stamped
on the
> carb?
>
> rcign wrote:
>
inlet diaphragm..Retail price is $43.69 ........R C ......
rcign
Richard Huffer <rhu...@indy.net> wrote:
> Is there easy way of telling if it is a sdc80 Walbro. Is it stamped
on the
> carb?
>
> rcign wrote:
>
pulse line from the crankcase...The stock carb comes with it.R C .....