Aslan

Jeez Adrian, what a shame. All joking aside really sorry about that. I'm sure that they will replace it, or at least offer a refund considering the age of the engine. On the Saitos the nipple is  quite easy to check the oil flow when running them in. Obviously no help to you, but maybe other O.S. owners will learn from your unfortunate circumstance and carry out Brians advice. Still having said that, you did it by the book and it should not have happened in a million years. Go on Ripmax,do the honorable thing and replace or refund the guy. Sounds to me like it was faulty from day one. Edited By Aslan on 26/02/2010 19:04:57

Bookmarked Timbo.  Will bet my own Capiche that the Optifuel will get ye back on track Adrian, if it doesn't, then the bets off............Edited By Aslan on 26/02/2010 08:11:45

  just noticed the whole address didn't show so this is the end of it Adrian        _/anchor/tm.htm#7344309

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_6314745/anchors_7344309/mpage_2/key_/anchor/tm.htm#7344309 Have a look at his thread  Adrian, it might be of some help.  Edited By Timbo - Administrator on 25/02/2010 09:02:03 Edited By Timbo - Administrator on 25/02/2010 09:02:37

If there is any chance you could get a tank of a different fuel through it Adrian, I would give it a go. Having said that,I am probably a bit biased because I think,and stupid as it may sound,that Model Technics is a very oily fuel when it comes to using it on four strokers, and ceased to use it a long time ago to my happiness. The Optifuel option sounds like a good path to take. some of the lads use it and swear by it. As soon as I run out of my Coolpower stock i will be giving it a go for sure, also more fuel for less money. Those bearings should be spot on,but as Martin suggests,worth having a look at........... and my final thought is the fuel is the problem and effecting the pump. Good luck with it. P.S. Give it more Nitro to get the engine and Capiche really happenin' ....(10% seems low to me,imho) Edited By Aslan on 24/02/2010 13:52:10 Edited By Aslan on 24/02/2010 14:01:13

 Oh cruel world,why do you mock me? Whyyy?.........O.K...... It's a draw then............ until next time.......... next time........ revenge........ sweet revenge.....(sorry Roger,been watchin'  too many Simpsons/Family Guy over my latter  years)

Yep...... it must be a 3 line set-up. Well spotted Bruce. Shame on you Roger 

Forgot to add that agree 100% on the valve thingamabobs. Have tried a lot of them to my doom and frustration...... even the expensive ones. 

(Note to self......... Me 1   Roger 0!!)

Double clunk two of the the 3 line. One on the carb feed(as usual) and clunk the filler line also. Have done this on all my models and it's bullet proof. The filler/defueler line can go anywhere on the model and no messing with turning the model upside down,and it drains the tank practically dry. 

Hello John, just to add my vote to the rest of the lads, don't fly this model. If you still have the box,put it back in it, and go for a high winger. ST models do a great Cessna,and cheap too. Maybe the shop who sold you the model will exchange it for something more suitable. You also need to do some research on Lipo batteries,potentially very dangerous lads. There are great threads on the site that you should check out for "newbies". Welcome to the hobby.... but be careful and if you can,join a local flying club. 

I don't think you will have to deviate from the thrust line,is it not the mount that will move to keep the shaft in line? then it depends whether the rest fits in the cowl,assuming you want to centre the prop shaft with the cowling.

Came across this thread by accident 'cos I like Extras. Had one of the Top Gun ones also, but I think I'll keep my thoughts to myself,but will say it was the only model I ever had to add lead to the tail to balance it for the initial flight......ever. In all fairness to Yakmad, he did apologize for one of his comments but "why don't you put some pics of your planes  for us to see what you fly?????????? " comes across a bit defensive to me. He's also on the button with the pushrod thing. Anyway good luck with it Mark, and you are right not to push the envelope with it.

Never even entered my mind........ And now that you've proved it, I'm gobsmacked

Don't know if they still produce them, but had the Kyosho Stearman, and it was a beauty to fly with the usual Kyosho quality.

Sorry mate you lost me here,what have you done? That's a two piece wing,mounted with a wing tube and bolted to the fuse,as per normal......but you joined it together to make it one piece?....... or...... its a one piece wing that comes in two halves and you joined it together as per normal?.....I've no idea what you're point is. But I will say this it is "generally" impossible and way too much trouble to join a wing to make it one piece when it has been designed to bolt on to the fuse........ now obviously a high winger is a different kettle of fish altogether and eezy peezy,and imho unnecessary 'cos they are not "generally" something one would be goin' bananas with. Now let's get back to the dodgy (and dangerous) Hangar 9 RV-8. Final word-You should NOT have to join a wing together to make safe a manufacturers bad design.

You came across to me as though I was getting at you for some reason or other,which is complete rubbish from your part. I simply pointed out that in general, in fact all of the two part wing models that I have, bolt onto the fuse in some way or other with  wing tube. Why was it much better having to lug around a large wing on the Mentor,when there was no need to do so whatsoever...... Please don't say the flight characteristics improved....... You have 2936 forum posts..... How am I to know you are not very experienced. Simple,take it like a man and say perhaps you are right Tubby lad(me),they should not have needed to be glued together (not sure what the question mark means,so I'll leave it out ) Make sure you use 30min. epoxy and roughen up the ply joiner for a good bond. Baby wipes will work great for wiping away any excess glue and it would do no harm to run Masking tape around the airfoil at the root before applying the epoxy. I'll get me coat now.

You suggested the wing halves on the RV-8 be glued together,Impossible and not recommended......so chill.... Obviously, unless I'm missing something here, with a one piece wing that arrives in two halves, you glue both halves together (about 99.9% of them) and I've glued many a wing together..... So what point are you making Stephen?

Sounds to me like the wing retainer wasn't tied/glued,to anything other than the root rib??? If this is so,then that is a major fault with the wing design and should be corrected.... as was stated before,this is actually a danger to everyone. I don't see the point of even attempting to glue wings together that are meant to be joined using the usual wing tube set up........ defeats the whole purpose surely. In fairness to Sussex they did replace the model, a bit too easily for my liking,and I'm not getting at Sussex here at all, before anyone starts at me, have dealt with them many many times,but is this a known fault with RV-8,and Hangar 9 didn't bother to correct it. Any pics. Yakmad? 

How did I forget this site. Google "Wings Palette"  Phil, I can't remember full address,great site for schemes.... all that a modeler needs is here. 

Nah...... forget it Phil, the red lad was a reno racer.

The Canadians produced  a version of the AT-6 Texan and called it a Harvard.I think the RAF had a desert scheme,which could be interesting.Google Harvard using the images tab and you might find some interesting schemes...... in fact I think there was a red one also.

Ah lads....the grief of having to take it all apart for 2mm.... just move the cowl back........... maybe I'm just  feeling grumpy...

True enough Ernie, fair point,just thought it was a small light model to be using 3mm bolts on the undercarriage, and even nylon bolts seem to stay put when the dreaded heavy landings occur.

What about filling the existing holes in the  blocks with epoxy,then move the cowl back,and re drill them through the existing holes in the cowl.