Jump to content

Reno Racer

Members
  • Posts

    1,304
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Reno Racer

  1. Lots of discussion about SC and ASP differences, as far as I'm aware that are made in the same factory to the same spec, but just stamped either SC or ASP. SC was the name used for the European market, Magnum used for the U.S. Market and ASP everywhere else. ASP came to acceptance in the UK through HK sales.

    I have owned super tiger, OS, Enya, Saito, RCGF, thunder tiger and ASP/SC/Magnum engines. For value for money, ASP are cracking engines, I've never had a problem with them and they always run strong. No fiddly adjustments like super tigers, my ASP 2 and 4 strokes have run very well with hardly any adjustment needed for years. Yes, my OS looks nicer and gives a few more rpm, but, I can't see the engine in the air and I don't fly completion so for me ASP is a good quality, reliable and cost effective engine for my use.

  2. My usual disappointment again this month. It might be just me but, it seems that unless you are retired, like scale free flight, CL or similar then you only get an occasional line on normal sport scale flying, which I suggest most of the BMFA membership undertake. I find it dull and boring, particular compared to the mag I used to get from the AMA whilst flying in the states.

  3. This is just my opinion. I have owned all 3 of the engines you list.

    ASP never a problem ,rarely do I need to touch the needles; since setting, I have never adjusted my 4 strokes.

    Evo, constant adjustment and low end was a constant pain. Never again. I had 2 glow and the 10cc petrol.

    NGH, had the 17cc, but have since used RCGF and OS petrol. I found them underpowered. I note that just engines stopped selling the 9cc, which is telling. My reasoning for using petrol, apart from cheaper and cleaner, is that it should be fuss free, just flip and go. It should not need to be constantly fiddled with to make it run. Both my RCGF and OS run perfectly and don't need any adjustment, post break in.

    The 9cc is cheap, do it depends what you want. I would wait for the RCGF 10cc or get the OS one, but that's just my view.

  4. I reckon, you have had problems with propellor pitch speed and stall speed been too close, not giving enough thrust to get you airborne. Ironically, a 16x10 on 10s with your setup should produce better results, according to ecalc. This still gives nearly 150 watts/lb and your amps pull is much lower.

  5. Vivian, was your motor propped correctly and did you measure 2700watts. I thought that at nearly 200 watts/lb, that would have been more than sufficient. Theoretically, it should fly scale at 1500watts.

    Edited By Reno Racer on 12/07/2015 20:02:36

  6. If you want something like a pulse, same flying character and build quality, but a bit more robust, why not look at a Great Planes Escapade, either the standard version or the mid wing Escapade MX. Both fly really well and are a lot more robust than a Pulse. I've owned and flown all three and the Escapade MX is really good and precise. I think it's also cheaper than the Pulse at around £125.

  7. There not cool about this in the US, hence impending legislation by the FAA that the AMA is serious worried with significantly curb RC flying. I have made comments on their YouTube site that they might want to consider AMA membership and to not fly in a street with people around, but expect it will get ignored.

    I just hope that these quads rapidly become boring and the next best thing comes along, before those people who have no understanding of the CAA rules, or what the BMFA is cause too much damage for us to pick up the pieces later.

×
×
  • Create New...