Martin Harris - Moderator Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 Some posts deleted. Swearing is not tolerated - even though we probably use worse at the flying field, this forum is not the place for it. Likewise, personal attacks and bad tempered replies will be deleted. Let’s respect other people’s right to their opinions while reserving the right to post reasoned counter arguments. It’s provocative to state that your own viewpoint is the only one that can be right so perhaps prefix such opinions with, “in my view” or “I’ve found that” etc. 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaun Walsh Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 20 minutes ago, Chris Walby said: What about the pimp my RIOT brigade. RIOT perfectly good trainer with a 3S2200, but people have to go 4S and change the motor, then the ESC and then wonder why the control horns fail and things fall off. I bet the insurance companies would love an accident with one of those...all those departures from the manufacturers design as a get out clause. Its a trainer, if and when you want better performance, upgrade to a model that is designed and constructed for better performance. Actually, the Riot is pretty robust and can easily handle a 30% power upgrade. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 Perhaps not the best example (although I broadly agree with the point) as I seem to recall that the Riot instructions detail removing a ballast weight from the nose if the owner wished to upgrade to 4S and make it reflect its name rather more accurately. The downside to this is where the owner forgets about this and reverts to 3S. He found it rather too much to handle with a rearward CofG and we ended up retrieving it from a tree for him… 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaun Walsh Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Martin Harris - Moderator said: Perhaps not the best example (although I broadly agree with the point) as I seem to recall that the Riot instructions detail removing a ballast weight from the nose if the owner wished to upgrade to 4S and make it reflect its name rather more accurately. The downside to this is where the owner forgets about this and reverts to 3S. He found it rather too much to handle with a rearward CofG and we ended up retrieving it from a tree for him… I fly mine on 3s batteries with the weight removed and it's fine. I think the caveat regarding the use of 4s batteries was to drop the prop size to avoid over stressing the motor/esc but I could be wrong. Edited August 12 by Shaun Walsh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Walby Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 Missing the point, I am not talking about what the manufacturer says is acceptable, e.g. remove weight due to heavier battery or using 4S with a smaller prop. Its the people that fit non standard motors and larger ESC's to gain more performance and I don't remember seeing in the manual that adding 30% more power beyond the manufacturers recommended set up as being acceptable. If that's your opinion then ok, but its not the manufacturers recommendation beyond their 4S/prop upgrade. In the event of an accident then I am sure the lawyers will ask you for your evidence and design calculations to prove it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaun Walsh Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 10 minutes ago, Shaun Walsh said: I fly mine on 3s batteries with the weight removed and it's fine. I think the caveat regarding the use of 4s batteries was to drop the prop size to avoid over stressing the motor/esc but I could be wrong. I've just checked and I've also added 20g of weight to the tail and even then a spin is more like a vertical roll downwards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaun Walsh Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 10 minutes ago, Chris Walby said: Missing the point, I am not talking about what the manufacturer says is acceptable, e.g. remove weight due to heavier battery or using 4S with a smaller prop. Its the people that fit non standard motors and larger ESC's to gain more performance and I don't remember seeing in the manual that adding 30% more power beyond the manufacturers recommended set up as being acceptable. If that's your opinion then ok, but its not the manufacturers recommendation beyond their 4S/prop upgrade. In the event of an accident then I am sure the lawyers will ask you for your evidence and design calculations to prove it. I wonder how many scratch built models (aside from LMA models) have any design calculations to back up the structure and method of construction? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaryW Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 (edited) On 10/08/2024 at 16:42, Jason Channing said: My Junior 60 has a os 52 running on 30% nitro and flys much better than a 25 size engine. My Jumior 60 was flying on an OS 25 FSR & now has an sc 30fs running on Model Technichs Contest 10 and takes off on less than half throttle then plods around at just above tick over Edited August 12 by GaryW 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Gates Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 Back to the OP question, yes I believe we do over power our models. As some have stated, sometimes there is a good reason for this - extreme aeros being one that comes to mind. However if we go down the line of scale machines, then a warbird that has to be dived to gain momentum is possibly about right depending on the machines original characteristics. With a trainer machine a little extra for the instructor to get the machine out of trouble is about right. Unlimited verticals probably a bit too much. As to structural strength, I think most of our machines are built like brick outhouses - to excess. I fall under the thinking of "build in lightness". My recent build - an electric powered TN FW190 from the free plan, current weight just over 4lbs with no battery but requiring more paint. Flies beautifully and scale like. A beginner I teach is currently going through a phase of thinking about lightness on his Boomerang EP. Changing ESC and servos has saved over 1/2 lb already, which means less power needed giving longer flights, or smaller battery reducing weight further. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrumpyGnome Posted August 13 Share Posted August 13 11 hours ago, Chris Walby said: What about the pimp my RIOT brigade. RIOT perfectly good trainer with a 3S2200, but people have to go 4S and change the motor, then the ESC and then wonder why the control horns fail and things fall off. I bet the insurance companies would love an accident with one of those...all those departures from the manufacturers design as a get out clause. Its a trainer, if and when you want better performance, upgrade to a model that is designed and constructed for better performance. Remove the nose weight, get max throws and it is a perfectly good sports hack on 3s2200 without changing any power train components. Can't do unlimited vertical or prop hang, but is nice to string some aeros together using its momentum..... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan M Posted August 13 Share Posted August 13 (edited) 3 hours ago, GrumpyGnome said: Remove the nose weight, get max throws and it is a perfectly good sports hack on 3s2200 without changing any power train components. Can't do unlimited vertical or prop hang, but is nice to string some aeros together using its momentum..... I don't disagree, especially if you're going to use it just as a trainer or a pootler with modest aeros, but you really can get a lot more out of the Riot on 3s simply by fitting a decent motor. See here: https://forums.modelflying.co.uk/index.php?/topic/57727-max-thrust-riot-replacment-motor/&do=findComment&comment=1014998 I don't count this as massively overpowering a model. In fact the Riot is a bit unusual in that it is a dual-function model: on the factory setup its a good, robust flyer and advanced trainer (I learnt on one from scratch 11 years ago); but with a decent 3s powertrain it is also a very capable aerobatic model (which I'm currently enjoying flying B Cert aeros). Going mad with 4s etc would in my opinion count as overpowering it. Edited August 13 by Jonathan M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel R Posted August 13 Share Posted August 13 What is "enough" power is down to the individual, I'd say. My own stuff, I have airframes from an electric trainer which just about loops from level up to 3d. Make sure it won't fall apart, have at it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Lee Posted August 13 Share Posted August 13 I defiantly and deliberately overpowered this one! ST models Discovery with Axi motor, digital servos, uprated ball linkages. It takes off in its own length & accelerates vertically for ever. I just did it for fun - that's what the hobby is all about isn't it? I've plenty of others that just plod about. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.