Mustang advice.

[michael wilson 1]

Hello and Happy new year!

I have recently purchased a Top Flite Mustang 60 kit and need to make some decisions early on

Which engine to use? I prefer 4-stroke but also like the idea of petrol,

Which retracts? and servo's? I use Spektrum radio,

Any help and suggestions will be welcome,

Thanks Mike.

[Jon H]

you need no bigger than a 90 4 stroke and at that size petrol is not going to be the best option. space will be limited and finding space for another battery/cdi unit etc may not be easy.

you must make every effort to keep the model light, especially the tail end. much of the wood supplied in top flite kits is often very heavy and should be replaced, especially the sheeting.

Servos are easy, any standard servo will do. you don't need anything fancy. futaba 148, hitec 311 etc would all be more than enough.

Retracts are also pretty easy, the 60 size eflight or robart will do, or an equivalent from turnigy if you want something less expensive..

All in all, its a good model and will fly well. just keep it light and don't overcomplicate it. it will only add weight and weight is the enemy of 60 size warbirds

[ChrisB]

Is it your first warbird Michael?

As Jon says keep the weight down, particularly at the back end, but not so light that it fails in flight!

Four stroke is the best option, sound is good as is fuel efficiency. As for petrol, yes its cleaner, but the cost of a FS Petrol will be expensive compared to the overall cost of the model and you have to find space for an ignition unit and battery and switch, for what is minimal fuel saving at that size of engine and slightly cleaner but for a big cost and weight penalty.

I'd go for something like a Laser, ASP, SC or Saito 120 or equivalent. A 91 will fly it nicely, an 80 will be ok but won't give you much performance and a 120 will allow you to throttle back a bit. I'm assuming the aircraft will use a standard nylon beam mount so your engine choice isn't that critical in the early stages, unless you intend to do mods to the Fuz.

I'd opt for electric retracts as air can play up but again electric retracts need a separate battery, therefore weight.

[Jon H]

The engine size debate will rage long and hard. I would consider our 100 absolute maximum as the physical size of a 120 will be hard to squeeze in that small cowl. I am currently flying a 10lb 63 inch hurricane on our laser 80 and have no shortage of performance. If it's 10lbs any 80-100 will give more than adequate performance Further to the question about if it's your first Warbird or not, the setup of the model won't be the same as a sport model. Usually much lower elevator travel is needed than you might expect if you are only used to sport models. Again the debate will go on about that!

Edited By Jon Harper - Laser Engines on 01/01/2017 20:53:59

[michael wilson 1]

Thank you for your replies, Yes this is my first warbird Chris b, I'm just finishing a Top Flite Cessna 182 using a Saito FS 91, Perhaps a similar engine for Mustang? I will look at all suggested options though.

I have seen some Turnigy alloy electric retracts, Would I be correct to get 85 deg. to allow for wing camber?

I'm not such a good pilot yet but enjoy building although have some electric trainers.

[Jon H]

85 degrees sounds right to me but double check with the instructions.

The TF Cessna is a nice model and they fly well. At the flying weight they recommend the 91 will be just fine and I would recommend a 15x6 propeller for maximum thrust with less in the way of straight line speed.

For the P51 a 14x7 or 15x6 equipped 91 will give no shortage of power. I used a 14x6 2 blade on my 80 in the hurricane and it had far more power than was scale. I since changed to a 14x7 3 blade prop for scale looks. Its halved the performance but I still have enough to fly like a hurricane and I am happy with that, I wouldn't recommend most people bother as the loss of performance is really not worth it.

I think saito have discontinued their 91 but I could be wrong, I know OS do a 95 but it aint cheap. Clearly ASP or similar would be an option, and if you wanted something from me our 80 or 100 would fit the bill. I use the 100 in a 70 inch 9lb aerobatic sport model and have more or less unlimited non 3d performance.

When it comes to flying the mustang ignore all the people that tell you it will be difficult as they are wrong. Warbirds are different, but are only difficult if you set them up incorrectly and don't fly them within their limitations. One major thing people screw up is landing as warbirds don't take kindly to just being thrown at the ground. They like to be setup in a stable controlled approach and left to more or less land themselves. One thing I recommend is if you have something like an acrowot spend a little while just doing landing approaches and set yourself a target on the runway. When you can hit that spot perfectly every time, in any weather condition without bouncing the model all over the place then you are unlikely to have difficulty with the mustang.

[ChrisB]

The Cessna is a very nice model and the engine from that would be very nicely in the Mustang.

I have the Blackhorse P51 which is very light! It did have an ASP 91FS and went like stink until one day when the engine shed a crank pin and that was the end of that. I replaced with a very well used OS 70 and it staggers around the air with no reserve at all. I really need to replace it but its those round tewits again!

[Jon H]

I can imagine the 70 being a touch lethargic in there. Also in fairness our 80 is pretty powerful for its size. Only a shade behind my OS91 surpass in back to back tests

[michael wilson 1]

Thank you Jon, I will certainly consider your engines for this project.

[Martin McIntosh]

If it is of any help, my TN 62" Mustang is rather more than adequately powered by a Laser 80. Sounds great and disappears inside the cowl. Electric retracts, separate battery, (it only needs to be small) and the batteries are not in the nose despite a retractable tail wheel.

[michael wilson 1]

Even this glimpse, I can see you have a very impressive model!

[Martin McIntosh]

Thanks MW. Further reading in `Martins i/c Mustang`.