mk1spitfire

How many inches back does my tank have to be (using saito 82) before I have to use a pump or rugulator. And do you just leave pressure nipple??

thanks

Ken6PPC

Perhaps no one knows for a fact what 3 blade prop will work with a FA100?

I have no personal experience with 3 blade props, but I imagine a 13 x 8 three blade prop would work for your application.

mike early

My online warbird buddy uses a 13x8 3-Blade prop on his Saito 100 and is happy.
I imagine the 14x7 3-Blade would be too much for the FA-100. I use that prop on my 125. The 15x7 3-Blade is too much for me.

RC Specialties

cpsdd56,

I have a 1.00 on a H9 Corsair. I ran a Master Airscrew 14x7 three blade for awhile. It flew well. I went back to an APC 14x8 for better performance. The MA 14x7 will work for you. I still have mine.

Here is a pic with the MA 14x7. Actually, it did not load it up. I think the two would be comparable.

Jim

beaver180

My Feedback: (10)

Ta da! There you go... a 13x8 or 14x7 Master Airscrew would appear to do you

http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...&I=LXAA39&P=SM

http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...&I=LXAA40&P=SM

mbrennan1

Can someone please give me the proper part #'s from Horizon for replacement bearings for a FA125? The code for that engine is AG?? and I can not find bearings for code AG.
Thanks in advance for any help.

Michaelh

My Feedback: (4)

I can get about 8800-9000 out of a 18x6w (thats on a good day) about 9200 on the 18x6 xoar and have ran them enough to realize thats about all the prop this engine wants.
BTW thats on 30% and geared towards 3D .

Ken6PPC

I know this isn't what you asked for, but this is where I would buy bearings. (Again!)

http://www.rc-bearings.com/catalog/p...roducts_id=125

Or these, if you wanted ceramics:

http://www.rc-bearings.com/catalog/p...roducts_id=124



OK, HERE are the links to bearings for your Saito 125 from Horizon, if you insist!

http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products...dID=SAI120S20A

http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products...odID=SAI120S22

The 125 uses the same bearings as the older 120 did. (code for the FA120 is L)

beaver180

My Feedback: (10)

Not sure on the max distance away from the carb the tank can be... the guys have said the saito has great suck tho. I've gone way back to the CG with my tanks and am using the Cline regulators ( awesome they are ) and this way the height of the tank can also be higer or lower too.

I'd use the muffler pressure.

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

If four-strokes (or any strokes) produce more torque, then they also produce more horsepower.

The limiting factor with pushrod actuated four-stroke engines is the reciprocating mass of the valve train and the usually low compression force springs that are being used to pull the valves back up and into their seats. Much over ten or eleven thousand rpm and most hobby four-strokes begin to have valve striking problems (by the piston). You might be able to add a couple of more thousand rpm with some four-strokes, but not with all of them. The Chinese four-strokes are known for having weak valve springs, thus permitting valve strikes at lower rpm.

An overhead cam model four-stroke, properly designed, could probably be revved to 20k rpm plus without a problem.

Honda of Japan sells a 250cc in line four cylinder motorcycle that redlines at 17k rpm, so we know it can be done. The ancient pushrod valve actuating system coupled with weak valve springs prevents our hobby four-strokes from revving up very high. Of course, most of us probably wouldn't want the high revving kind of an engine four our models anyway.

My point is that just being a four-stroke does not mean that an engine must remain a slow turning "torquey" engine. Revvers are quite easy to produce. I just doubt if anyone would want to buy them. <G>

And yes, with today's design philosophies, an equivalent displacement two-stroke will generally out perform a given size of four-stroke model engine.


Ed Cregger

Michaelh

My Feedback: (4)

Does not mean they produce more HP just because they produce more toque.

Rudolph Hart

You're still talking about ehgines??

beaver180

My Feedback: (10)

LOL

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

If they produce more torque at the same rpm, there isn't any way that it cannot produce more horsepower. This applies to any engine type, not just four-strokes. I knew I shouldn't have left that qualifier (same rpm) out, but I forgot it before posting.


Ed Cregger

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

That was a good one, OF. You jump started my heart before the coffee got there. <G>


Ed Cregger

full-throttle

My Feedback: (35)

Hi Ed, do you still have the Saito 325 package for sale? If so, I will take it. Thanks, Mike

Paul_BB

Thanks Andy,

So considering the engine is upside down, what's the correct vertical position of the bottom of the fuel tank relatively to the engines high end needle ?

Best,

Paul

beaver180

My Feedback: (10)

The same as if the engine was upright... middle of the tank should be level with ( or slightly below ) the HS needle position.

CFN, Paul

retransit

My Feedback: (18)

Hey Ed, how about diesels? Low RPM, low horsepower, high torque.

Bob

c550

My Feedback: (16)

Does anyone have any fuel consumption estimates for a Saito 82?

Thanks,

Dave

sodbuster 1

Jim,
What is the right size to use with your muffler?
1.00

Capt Lou

My .91S burns about 1-1.25 ounces per minute

RPMcK

My Feedback: (1)

Ed - I thought we were talking about prop applications for different engines. Of course you're discussion of engine theory and design was impressive and interesting. Thanks for sharing that information with us. I'm looking forward to seeing the results after you compare preformance between you're 140 two stroke and Saito 180. Be sure and put some numbers out here. I would really like to see the difference even though it is kinda' apples to oranges. But interesting never the less.

Have a great day,

Ron

Paul_BB

Thanks Paul,

Paul

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Saito typically burn about one OZ of fuel per cu. inch, the .82 would under one OZ per minute, Caps .91 figure is a little excessive unless he's under propped or over rich.