Curare v Magic Which is the better design?

[Sam Wragg]

Which design is better, Curare or Magic?

This question is not as easy answered as first envisaged because after flying both models back to back over the past month has proved to be difficult to determine which is the better model / design.

Initially what threw me was the difference in power plants concerning the two models where Curare utilises the latest electric motor/ battery combination and Magic uses the tried and tested pumped engine & pipe.

The contrast between the two power plants is clearly noticeable and I’m afraid to say that Electric power is the preferred propulsion system based on the fact you have instant power when applied and that power can be utilized during a manoeuvre to take you over the top where with i.c you tend to ‘wind’ the model up to power it through the manoeuvre. I would like to add that using electric power allows the model be more aerodynamic but, all is not lost because to an ‘engine man’ like myself there is still something special about having a well silenced i.c engine up front. Nevertheless once accustomed to this fact I could now begin to assess which is the better model.

Both models have got very similar flight characteristics but fly differently in their own way…………but the same, it really is hard to describe and differentiate between the two design of models. I would say Curare feels lighter on the sticks whereas Magic you have to be more aggressive to get the best out of her, but that said they are both excellent models

Stall turns.. No evident pendulum motion in both models.

Rolls both. models love to roll slow, fast or point rolls.

Knife edge.. Both do this manoeuvre equally the same

Spins.. No issues.

Snaps.. Magics wing makes a whooshing sound when breaking the line and the model really whips round where Curare feels softer and more controlled when performing this manoeuvre

For me, what tilts the balance between models is that Magic feels more ‘Locked in’ than Curare, maybe because this is the more aggressive model of the two but the feedback I receive off fellow enthusiasts/club members when watching the models perform substantiate what I feel in that they all say Magic appears to fly a straight line in any attitude and looks to be unaffected by conditions (more planted) where Curare looks to get bumped about in the air

Personally for this reason only, I believe Magic to the better model of the two but to another pilot they may prefers the softness of Curare…. It really is that close

Finally this bring me to why I believe that Hanno went super simple with his next World Championship winning model Calypso.

I believe Hanno had designed the ultimate F3a models of that era in Curare and Magic, hard as he tried he could not better the designs. So what do you do when you achieve the pinnacle in design? You have a change of direction and start again. Hanno was astute enough to recognise this fact and that’s why he was always one step ahead of the game. Maybe that time has come again with the current era of F3a designs.

 

Sam

Edited By Sam Wragg on 17/08/2014 12:52:42

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Sam Wragg]

Agree with you on that. i was going to mention Wolfgang and deliberately chose not too as i cant comment until next year when i get Arrow up in the air, but what i remember Atlas was equal to Curare.

What i will say is that when i decided to compete at F3a again the models i chose to compete with were....

Saphir ...(1st 1996 place Nationals at Standard Class)

Joker.... (Won promotion to Masters level 1997)

Smaragd ...(Represented England at Triple Crown events with this model and numerous competition wins)

Lazulite (One of the first true competitive Electric models, i also used this model to represent England at Triple crown event, again numerous competition placings)

All Wolfgang Matt designs.

Sam

[Martin McIntosh]

Interesting. I currently fly a copy of the 1977 Curare with pretty much the same power plant as used in the Magic (ST61X RE+pipe and Webra Dynamix carb.); I also had one in the late 70`s.

I have found the Dalotel to be better all round and decided to electrify my smallest one. Whilst the power available is probably greater, the model does not seem to hold a heading as well as with i/c. It just tends to wander off course, which is a trend that I have found with other similarly modified models. Perhaps something to do with gyroscopic forces being different.

I would have expected the Magic to be superior but with such diverse power systems it may not be an ideal comparison.

[Sam Wragg]

I have a Curare ready for painting/covering built off plan fitted with a Redshift/ ED Carb & Pipe. When i get this up in the air it will give me a better like for like comparison.

One thing of interest, in Hanno notes for Curare he recommends increasing the dihedral by 10% when using Electric power

[Slopetrashuk]

I think you have to realise that the Magic was the epitome of everything that was wrong with aerobatics back in the day. A complex model with variable pitch props, extended silencing system, retracts and dive brakes. Too complicated but flown to great effect by a great talent. You also need to realise that the models were built around the schedules. As these changed so did the models.
Nowadays F3A is a turnaround competition with moves at each end of the box. In the days of magic and Curare it was not. It was about screaming engines and accurate moves. I had both and loved them both but the models were better at different things. Both were good at what they were designed for but I was glad when the Calypso came along and simplified everything again.

Andy Ellison

[John Dean]

I had both a Curare and a Wolfgang Matt designed Super Star about 35 year's ago. At the time I preferred the Super Star as it seemed to do everything at a slower speed if my memory is correct. Building another Super Star now.

[Martin McIntosh]

This is the first I have heard about increasing the dihedral for electric power. It may be because the vertical c.g. is raised due to the lack of a pipe, which would also affect the knife edge. Perhaps this explains why I now get a bit of roll coupling.

They were indeed complex in those days and getting one under the FAI wing loading limit could be a nightmare but everything was there for a purpose. I now only use the brakes to get a short landing where they work well. Later designs normally used a larger wing area to compensate for the extra weight.

See the UKCAA site for further info.

[Bill Michie]

Sam, are you comparing the ARF Curare/elec power, with your "trad" Magic................?

Is, there's a VAST difference in weight/wing loading which will really skew the argument! I have the Dirty Birdy ARF which weighs 8 1/4 lbs with an old ST .61/pipe combo, & is a missile (but tracks like an arrow because of its wing loading); compared to the Schweighofer Curare ARF which weighs significantly less that 7lbs, it's a different class. The Curare ARF is great because you CAN fly it slower, though it also tracks well at high speed, just not as fast as the DB. Still love both models, but they DO fly differently. Also, the Magic's wing is MUCH thinner, & has a sharper L/E, not so? So designed to be best flat-out.

Great thread!

Bill

[Sam Wragg]

I don’t necessarily agree they was bad old days of F3a what you witnessed was models that reflected the technology available at that time. Remember control line was still prevalent at that time and many of the models ran open exhausts.

I would say if they were bad old days this was because of the unreliability of radio equipment at that time. Almost every model I lost in that period was caused by faulty radio equipment and later illegal CB usage.

Concerning noise footprint the F3a fraternity are at the forefront of keeping noise to a minimum, what other discipline would spend in excess of £100 on a quiet mount system to keep noise to a minimum. All this knowledge was achieved by trial and error or as some would call it ‘Evolution’ We see time after time Clubs coming under increased restrictions due to the fact that the everyday modeller is oblivious/ignorant to keeping noise to a minimum with a shrug of the shoulders. What the modeller doesn’t realise is…. You don’t have a noise issue until you have one, by then it’s too late.

Todays technology breathes new life into past F3a designs and now it gives us chance to enjoy building& flying the without upsetting the neighbours

My Magic OS60 RF ABC-P. Apc 12x10 @10200rpm 12% nitro Bolly carbon pipe soft mounted is measured at 80dB and yet club members all comment on how quiet & powerful she is, when I then explain to them that that they could achieve the same noise levels they baulk at the thought of spending money and carry on upsetting the neighbours and then complain the club has noise issues.

In answer to Bill Question, Yes it’s a Schweighofer Curare fitted out with the recommended equipment apart from 6s 5000mA packs and I also utilise a separate Rx pack. All up and she’s about the same weight of Magic.

What I have found that Hanno says use a 12x10e(Apc)… 62A @ 9600 rpm for fast flying or 13x8e Graupner)… 52A @10000 rpm for every day flying. After experimenting I have opted to use an Apc 13x10e….69A @ 9200 rpm. Even though the current consumption (static) is higher the duration is longer because of the greater power developed you tend to use less throttle.

Finally Hanno states that the reason for a 10% increase in dihedral is because you are raising the vertical Cg by removing the underslung pipe /engine.

Flew Curare again yesterday and it cemented my conclusion….Magic is the better design.

Sam

[Martin McIntosh]

I can only wholeheartedly agree with everything you say Sam. The 70`s were the golden days when the Nats. would, if I remember correctly, have about 70 entrants on three flight lines over three days culminating in a top six fly-off in the prime spot with Dave Bishop giving an exhillerating commentary.

Look at it today. Sometimes only one entry for a class. Why has this happened? Now relegated to a single line in some far off corner of the field with few spectators. It is seen as a class which only the very well to do can compete in. This is probably true. Take a prop. for instance. A 13" is say £3 but for every inch increase the price doubles because they are deemed to be for `aerobatics`.

When the strict noise rules were introduced we were indeed at the forefront making up our own quiet pipes and were randomly tested. Contrast this with control line combat which is still allowed unsilenced. Something wrong with the BMFA here.

For various reasons I stopped entering. One was because I had everything stolen and had to start from scratch, another being the turn around schedule which looked then and still does, scrappy. I tried it some time ago and hate it. Spectors, including myself, do not have a clue as to what the model is trying to do.

Bring back the simpler, cheaper models which can be built/purchased/flown by average club flyers and it will regain popularity.

Rant over and sorry about going off thread.

Martin Mc.