Q-500 Pylon Racing -- Which Engine Do I Use?
Kimberly Roberts
they aren't using the current AMA rules. The club I fly with uses the
Supertigre GS40 with the factory supplied muffler for the sport class and the
really hot Nelson .40's for the open class.
Kimberly Roberts
Kj...@gnn.com
Randy Smith
Our racing district in Canada has been flying Quickie for a number of years.
The popular engine of choice here right now is the Webra Q sport racing
engine. Make sure you know which carb comes with it. It can be ordered with
an A235 carb which is high speed needle only - no idle needle therefore you
can only shut off the engine to land. You would probably want the regular
large bore Dynamix carb with low speed needle in addition to high speed. I
think the bore size is about 8mm. I don't know what rpm it would turn a 9x6
prop but 16,500 would be pretty close. You could play around with prop
manufacturer, wood vs composite, and blade shape. A standard sport flying
wood prop with wide blade will load it down. An APC racing prop will let her
wind up. What prop do your club rules allow? No, this prop is not too tiny.
We run the Webra Q with a 8.75 x 7.0 APC narrow blade racing prop at 17,000+
on 15% fuel. To get the horespower out of the engine they have to spin up
near 17 - 18,000rpm.
As for other engines, I am not that familiar with the OS line but likely one
of their schnerle ported ABC .40s would be good. Make sure the muffler is
not too restrictive. The exhaust hole diameter in a Webra Q muffler is .572"
(quite large and kind of loud). The smaller the hole, the more back pressure
and lower rpm you will get. Jett Engineering and Nelson Competition engines
make SUPER Quickie engines but they are mean't more for AMA428 rules and
would likely exceed your 16,500 rpm limitation (expensive too). A Super
Tiger S40 would be good, as well as a standard Webra Speed 40 or Rossi. Any
ABC engine with reasonable reputation for quality and carb would be good for
club racing.
Good luck with your club racing. It's good to see interest in "Going fast,
and turning left".
Randy Smith
NMPRA District 3 VP
Mark Lipsky
rules which allow any stock .40 with side exhaust muffler which will
not turn a 9-6 prop faster than 16,500 RPM.
In the real world, without going totally nuts, what would be a
competitive engine for local racing. Am I looking at an OS .40 or
something else? Also, which prop should I start with? A 9-6 seems
awfully tiny.
Any help would be appreciated.
Mark
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Lipsky, San Diego, CA
EFFECTive ENGINEERING ****IF YOU CAN DREAM IT, WE CAN BUILD IT****
E-Mail: mli...@effecteng.com
Fstelecrcr
be giving the best performance in the stock class although some guys have
been using the super tigers.
Jeff Vasquez
fstel...@aol.com
"Go fast, turn right!"
David Carriker
Lipsky) wrote:
> My club is starting a Q-500 racing association. They are using the AMA
> rules which allow any stock .40 with side exhaust muffler which will
> not turn a 9-6 prop faster than 16,500 RPM.
>
> In the real world, without going totally nuts, what would be a
> competitive engine for local racing. Am I looking at an OS .40 or
> something else? Also, which prop should I start with? A 9-6 seems
> awfully tiny.
Mark,
I live in Southern California and race Q-500 here as well as Las Vegas and
Arizona.
We use the AMA rules, as well as requiring the stock motor to retail for
under $100 dollars.
By far the most popular motors are the Thunder Tigre Pro40 and the Super
Tigre 40. We use APC 9x6 props and turn between 16,000 -17,000 rpm.
To be honest the OS is not a competitive motor.
--
David Carriker
carr...@primenet.com
Terrantula
carr...@primenet.com (David Carriker) writes:
>> In the real world, without going totally nuts, what would be a
>> competitive engine for local racing. Am I looking at an OS .40 or
>> something else? Also, which prop should I start with? A 9-6 seems
>> awfully tiny.
In the real world, "not going totally nuts" and "racing" can't be used in
the same sentence.
Terry Gamble (terra...@aol.com)
Phoenix, Arizona
Doug Brindle
>By far the most popular motors are the Thunder Tigre Pro40 and the Super
>Tigre 40. We use APC 9x6 props and turn between 16,000 -17,000 rpm.
>To be honest the OS is not a competitive motor.
>
Dave, We also fly mostly the TT .40 Pro here in Indianapolis. We have
also found the OS to be too 'fussy' for Q500 racing.. too sensitive to
needle valve adjustment. Try a 8.5 x 6.5 APC propeller... you'll be
surprised. I've found it accelerates a little quicker than the 9X6.
-d
Robbie and Laura Reynolds
Wouldn't it be more fun to set up a race with a uniform plane
and engine? That way you could avoid spending big bucks on
gourmet engines. Why not something inexpensive and uniformly
accepted, such as a .40 with bushings? If the race had such
rules, it would be more a test of pilot skill than a test of
how much money everybody has.
If you wanted to put an element of engineering into it, why not
stick with the uniform (inexpensive) engine rule, then make
rules about minimum plane weight, wing area, etc., then see who
can come up with the best plane?
If I were writing the rules, I would have one race in which
everybody had the same plane and the same engine, such as a
40 FP and one of those new Tower planes that cost 50 bucks.
A .20 or .25 class would be even better because of the lower
investment. For the builders' race, I would require a 25 FP,
and the plane would have to have 350 square inches and weigh no
less than 40 ounces ready to fly. And maybe you could even
have an FP .10 or .15 class, so that you could build several
race planes without breaking the bank or taking all year.
Seems to me that this type of thing is a lot more sporting
(probably more fun, too) than an unlimited race.
Robbie
Randy Smith
I agree with you on your thoughts on Q-500 racing. The problem with us pylon
racers is that no one is ever satisfied with what's fast enough. The
inherent tendency in a pylon guy is to go ever faster and faster. As a
result, some guys can never leave well enough alone when it comes to rules.
Also, there are those guys that fly in the standard events and become quite
good. In order to satisfy their need for speed, instead of stepping up to
the expert class and getting their butts kicked, they stay in the standard
class and dick around with the rules to make it faster (less boring for
them). However, this has a negative effect on the beginner racer.
Actually, AMA424 rules are quite good for a beginner racing event. They
disallow any schnerle, ABC, AAC, or similar ported (performance) engine.
This essentially leaves a pretty simple, affordable engine for this event and
allow guys to pick their favorite or what might be available to them locally.
The problem with specifying an exact engine and airplane is that you will
never get one that is uniformly accepted. Personal preferences, local
availability, scratch builders, tweakers, etc all play a part.
My view is to have a standard, entry level event, which provides a good
framework for rules to allow some flexibility. ie. specify wing area,
weight, etc so that guys can be innovative. Engines are a little more
difficult, but basically disallow specialized Quickie engines in the standard
event. Then have an expert event which is more wide open an allow for the
special stuff and stuff that pushes the edge of technology.
SCOMFEE
must admit Form 1 is more fun than Q500. Otherwise you wouldn't do it. I
think even the entry level class should go reasonably fast. A Thunder
Tiger Pro 40 with a 9-6 APC is a reasonably fast plane but as a racer is a
slug. Put a Nelson on and now you're talking!! We need the class however
as we need more racers. I work pretty hard to recruit and encourage
newcomers into the class and as they get good at it they naturally want to
run with the "big boys" in the Nelson class.
Scott
Randy Smith
I think we're on the same page here. As an experienced racer, yeah, F-1
is much more fun than Quickee. And a Nelson Quickee engine is makes the
quickie class much more exciting than my Webra Q. However, as
recruiters, we must ensure an entry level event. Entry level racing
should be relatively cheap, easy and fun to participate in. AMA428 does
not satisfy this - except for the fun part for the experts.
Think of what it was like when you were at your first pylon race.
Pretty intimidating no doubt. An entry level, standard quickie, event
helps to level the playing field a bit and keep the cost down. Most
guys, once hooked, will move the the 428 event with Nelsons.
Go mean, not lean.
Randy
bobad@usa
You're missing the point, Scott. Not everyone has the reflexes or the
$$$$$ to race at world-class level.
I'll bet we have as much fun with our $60 engines as you have with
your $300 engines!
Also, crashes into the hard ground at under 100 mph yields some
salvagable parts. But at over 100 mph, well, you tell me! =:-o
$$$ does not equal fun! (Although I admit it can help!)
Bob
bobad@usa
<rob...@hiline.net> wrote:
>Wouldn't it be more fun to set up a race with a uniform plane
>and engine? That way you could avoid spending big bucks on
>gourmet engines. Why not something inexpensive and uniformly
>accepted, such as a .40 with bushings? If the race had such
>rules, it would be more a test of pilot skill than a test of
>how much money everybody has.
>Robbie
Robbie,
We dit something similar at our field. Rules: any plain-bearing .40 or
smaller engine. Any mufflers, pipes, or mods allowed. The planes are
unlimited!
This resulted in some really interesting designs and modifications.
Hey...you would be surprised what an anemic FP .40 will do on a 40 Oz.
airplane with razor thin wings and no landing gear!
I think it's lots more interesting to limit the engine cost / type and
make the aircraft unlimited just to see the wonderful variety of
racers that develop. No cookie-cutter planes around my field!
Bob
Chris Sorgatz
In my club we are going to be doing just that. With a little twist! <GRIN>
Though we've not offically chosen the engine yet, it will be a bushing
engine. The planes will all be Scat Cats. This is going to be alot of
fun for us because the lower cost will get more interest. We will start
using the planes as Q-500's. The twist is that we will be using the
planes for combat at our annual Air Show. Last year there were only acouple
combaters and the crowd loved them. So this year we'll probably make the
crowd SICK of combat.
Have fun and fly high!
In article <4j4ipu$h...@mercury.hiline.net>, Robbie and Laura Reynolds
<rob...@hiline.net> writes:
> Wouldn't it be more fun to set up a race with a uniform plane
> and engine? That way you could avoid spending big bucks on
> gourmet engines. Why not something inexpensive and uniformly
> accepted, such as a .40 with bushings? If the race had such
> rules, it would be more a test of pilot skill than a test of
> how much money everybody has.
>
> If you wanted to put an element of engineering into it, why not
> stick with the uniform (inexpensive) engine rule, then make
> rules about minimum plane weight, wing area, etc., then see who
> can come up with the best plane?
>
> If I were writing the rules, I would have one race in which
> everybody had the same plane and the same engine, such as a
> 40 FP and one of those new Tower planes that cost 50 bucks.
> A .20 or .25 class would be even better because of the lower
> investment. For the builders' race, I would require a 25 FP,
> and the plane would have to have 350 square inches and weigh no
> less than 40 ounces ready to fly. And maybe you could even
> have an FP .10 or .15 class, so that you could build several
> race planes without breaking the bank or taking all year.
> Seems to me that this type of thing is a lot more sporting
> (probably more fun, too) than an unlimited race.
>
> Robbie
Chris
Real planes don't have to have 2 wings and a round motor!
Though it seems to help them glide better!
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<> Christopher D. Sorgatz <> csor...@ford.com <>
<> Product Design <> Livionia, Michigan USA <>
<> PTO, Ford Motor Company <> Phone #(313) 523-6454 <>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
These are NOT the views of Ford Motor Co.
Paul Landels
>>In article <carriker-220...@ip083.lax.primenet.com>,
>>carr...@primenet.com (David Carriker) writes:
>>
>>>> In the real world, without going totally nuts, what would be a
>>>> competitive engine for local racing. Am I looking at an OS .40 or
>>>> something else? Also, which prop should I start with? A 9-6 seems
>>>> awfully tiny.
>>
>>In the real world, "not going totally nuts" and "racing" can't be used in
>>the same sentence.
>>
>>Terry Gamble (terra...@aol.com)
>>Phoenix, Arizona
>
a very good racing engine (and it also throttles so you can use it in a
sports model). We have them on special at the moment inc. mini pipe and
radial mount for £105 (approx $155) + shipping
Rgds
Paul
Just Engines UK / MVVS UK