Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Pete, If you have a Cline regulator already bench the engine and give it a whirl. When I had my 2.20 I could richen it down about 200 rpm. That's more than you need since it won't go lean as the fuel level changes.

hsukaria

I'm sure this question came up many times before, but I have to ask: Are the Cline and the Iron Bay fuel regulators similar in performance, durability, ease of use, etc...? The Iron Bay regulator is slightly less expensive and has a metal enclosure, other than that, any other differences?

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Owning both I can say that they perform exactly the same but internally they work almost opposite from each other. I have tried both on Saitos from the little .30 to the 2.20.

hsukaria

I am just toying with the idea of putting a fuel regulator on one of my planes that has a 2-stroke engine. The issue is not fuel draw, but the plane seems to be very sensitive in pitch even though I balanced it according to the manual. As the tank empties during flight, I have to add down elevator trim. I thought of moving the fuel tank to the CG and to put one of these fuel regulators.

Rudolph Hart

Ok thanks dave that put it back a bit as i was trying to avoid removing the engine and hoped somebody here had been down this path already.Cheers

Rudolph Hart

ps i should have added i can be a lazy so and so sometimes and besides..that engine took hours of squeezing to get it in there without cutting the cowl.Thats my excuse and i'm sticking to it

Huk i think the instuctions i read for the cline regulators i have stated that the fuel tank should not be more than 300mm(one foot,the other one's in my mouth)away from the engine but i'll go and check.

Rudolph Hart

Ok i've just been out to the shed and had a look at the two page instruction sheet you get for the cline.Basically you can put the fuel tank wherever you like,there is no minimum distance.You may have to drill the crankcase on your twostroke(6/32 thread)so you can run the pressure line with oneway checkvalve to the fuel tank,thats easy.Fourstrokes use exhaust pressure which is easy to tap into.

hsukaria

Thanks O.F. I flew that plane yesterday and the pitch varies quite a bit with fuel tank level. So, I will add this fuel regulator to my "wish list".

FNQFLYER

Years ago we were using Enya 53's for vertical drag racing (O/T Duration). To get the best performance with the engine leaned out to the max we had to use perry pumps and the dammed things went like scalded cats. The cockaroaches didn't like their McCoy 60's getting thumped so they legislated that mod out of the comp. The answer was to graft the pump of the back of an OS 120 (I think) and because it "was attached to the engine" we got away with that until the Ys's came along. There are a few examples of "pumped saitos" around and that mod wass usually combined with dry sumping the engine. Yes with reduced oil content actually in the fuel at least 200 rpm was extracted. This was back in the days when that dreaded pollutent caster was all the rage. I am beating the keyboard crap by employing a dragon lot better idea for now. Catch ya

Rudolph Hart

Huk does it worry you when it gets tail heavy towards the end of the tank? i have heaps of expo dialled into the decath so it can be fun too

Rudolph Hart

(north east south west)shizzweinenfluger(fnq, because he's not really there anymore)good to hear you are up and about mate.Thanks for the info about perrys i was about to throw the two i have in the bin.Do you have some info on adjusting the pump if you need to?..dave reckons when you fit the cline regulater you should tune the engine normally then fit it.Sounds ok but i don't like broad main needle adjustments and i think the perry does the same can anybody advise??????????that especially includes you mate.

hsukaria

The CG is right on now, so I don't have stability issues when the tank is near empty. But at the beginning, during and after takeoff can be uncomfortable because I have to hold UP elevator continuously or add UP elevator trim. So if I move the CG aft just a bit, it might reduce the heavy nose at the beginning and increase the tail heaviness at the end, but I would still have to adjust the elevator trim every flight. That is why it is making sense for me to put the fuel tank at or near the CG by using a fuel pump/regulator. I plan on doing that this coming winter because I plan to swap engines on it then.

spaceworm

I am guessing here so please forgive any misconstruing of conditions. I am thinking that the extreme sensitivity in pitch due to fuel being used might point to an issue with the decalage. Could it be that the decalage is off? Perhaps easier to adjust the wing incidence than the horiz.stab., depending on the model? Good luck.

Sincerely, Richard, Club Saito #635/ FA-100, 120abc, 130t, 180.

hsukaria

Hmm, this is getting off topic here, but I will pursue your idea even though this is not a bipe. I did mess with the aileron reflex, but it did not change the sensitivity noticeably. I will pursue the aileron reflex some more. This is on a Phoenix Extra 330S, a 60-size ARF and it also glides forever when I want to land it.

FNQFLYER

Spaceworm, I agree with you in this case. People mistake other things for what is really a decolage problem. Fuel tank quantities (full or empty tank) are not generally a problem unless placed at the extremes of the model all other things being correct). Flying Old Timer models teaches you heaps about aeronautics and at times I actually transferred that knowledge to full size in particular an RV4 that I built with a mate.
Back to point with problems like this I resorted to an old racing fix. Put main tank in a suitably accessible position and use a header tank close to the engine and use engine exhaust pressure to the main tank to get it (fuel) moving.
Final thought a/c of all sorts will perform differently at different ranges of power setting. In a well set up a/c you just don't realise it.

FNQFLYER

Old Fart, re perry pumps. We used to just "use them". We hooked them up fired up the engine with a known prop and checked for improvement with a tacho. If they didn't give the desired result we fiddled at bit but usually junked them (read on sold cheap). I was fortunate to have a lot on hand (about 50) which were part of the stock from a bankrupt business I bought. I still have a lot of old engine bits and old dubro (amongst others) bits around as well. We won't talk about kits here.
We used Perry and Robart pumps in those days as well as short stack inlets vertical carbies etc all to extract performance and in the end it all came down to careful runnning in (the most important bit) correct prop selection and fuel mix and finally tuning. Have a look at my last post on header tanks, it was for me usually cheaper option in the end and more effective.

FNQFLYER

Old Fart I didn't answer the question, yes, tune engine normally, then hook in the pump. As I remember we had the same problem with the wide adjustment range. Usually we just accepted it as long as it was at the top of the rpm range as measured by the tacho. My mate actually made up a range of needle valves but from memory they weren't worth the effort. One big problem we had was airleaks which really played hell until we figured that one out. great on the bench under ideal conditions but a bugger in a model. And that was why there was a great cheer when the YS engines arrived, I still have my 53's and 63's and I still wonder why Saito didn't build an equivalent.

Tarasdad

I can fully sympathize with you folks who had recent orthopedic repairs. I only have 2 screws in my left shoulder, although the surgery did have to be done twice because they pulled out the first time. I also have a plate and 6 screws on my collarbone and a plate and 4 screws on my thumb, again both on the left side. All this was the result of a motorcycle accident in September of 1999 - car turned in front of me, I took a short flight over it with a hard landing at the end.

Going to try and get my 80 and one of the 91's ready for flying here in the next week or so. Both basically need to be run and tuned. The other 91 is disassembled and waiting for new bearings, maybe a new ring.

Rudolph Hart

Fnq thankyou very much for the thought provoking replies i re read your posts a few times and have previously researched header tanks,thank you mate.

ps barry i hope the heart condition has sorted itself out and you are well.The rest of you titanium screw recipients should all agree to get melted down at the same time,so the rest of us can build a nice exotic titanium twin overhead cam tribute..any thoughts ****zzunfluger?

hsukaria

I guess you could say that some of these guys are "screwed up". Heh heh, just kidding, couldn't help it.

Tarasdad

"He's got a screw loose" definitely has more than one meaning for some of us....

hsukaria

I guess this is a statement to the goodness of Saito engines, we are talking about loose screws and not in our Saitos.

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Saitos have been super good to me, only one problem in 23 years and that was a .50 the had a fault in the head casting that let the compression leak ever so slowly. Not only did Horizon replace the cylinder but I shipped it on Thursday and had it back on Tuesday. That was almost magical.

I have four titanium screws and three stainless steel stents.

RC_Fanatic

My Feedback: (1)

I'll see your screws and stents and raise the bet with four titanium screws, 5" of titanium channel and a replacement knee (chrome-moly steel, titanium and a plastic hockey puck).

And my FA-100 is treating me very well, much better than this advanced message editor!

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

The 1.00 is a fine engine, I wish I still had one. I'm resurrected my Tigre 60 and installed an early High Compression Saito .80, it will fly just fine though. It flew great with a Fox .74 for a long time.