raptormasque

Hello,

Yes this is ok.
I also used a bolt + large washer with the head inside the firewall and a lock nut at the engine side.

Alain

SJN

Just remove the carb and back plate and slide the longer bolts in, and re-install.

raptormasque

Easy solution for the common model flyer

SJN

It is very easy. Removing the engine mount plate on the back does not open up the engine....its just a plate bolted to the back of the engine. The carb is the only thing you can mess up if you put the gasket or the carb the wrong way around so the vacuum ports for the carb pulse dont line up .....then it just wont run right.....but not the end of the world :-)

CK1

My Feedback: (60)

SJN's easy solution definitely does the job . I like my engines to be removeable without having to access the back of the firewall which usually means fuel tank and other items need to be removed first . For me it is more beneficial to me to use the studs which are installed into encapsulated t-nuts with loctite . To remove the engine the only thing I need to access inside the fuselage is the throttle rod , which has easy access .

rcpollo

My Feedback: (6)

Can you post a picture of this? I'm trying to figure this out. when you say "permanently install them", are you gluing them to the blind nut? How do you hold it in place to tighten the lock nut?

CK1

My Feedback: (60)

These are photos from a builder on another sight . Not my build and it doesn't show the capsulation of the t-nut but does show the end result



I install the studs into the T- Nuts with red loctite . The t nuts are epoxied to the inside of the firewall and then I epoxy a piece of 1/4" aircraft ply that has been relieved to fit over the t nut . The t nut can not move or escape and the stud is well attached to it with red loctite .

rcpollo

My Feedback: (6)

Thanks, this explains it. Might not even need the 1/4" ply over the t-nut. Using epoxy to hold the t-nut in place, some of the epoxy would no doubt get on the stud. Between that and the red loctite, that stud won't go anywhere!

CK1

My Feedback: (60)

That should be adequate. I tend to make sure things don't escape and sometimes over build in that area .

rcpollo

My Feedback: (6)

Ended up running a 10-32 bolt with a washer from inside the firewall, going through spacers into a locknut. Easy peasy.

CK1

My Feedback: (60)

Looks good ! . It's hard to see from the angle of the photo if you have enough clearance of the firewall for the carb needle access for tuning.

rcpollo

My Feedback: (6)

Close, but it's accessible!

planenutzz

I have the FG90 back from Ray English:

• master rod bushings mod done
• timing mod done
• prop hub mod to 6 bolt done
• 2.5 hours engine break in procedure done
• 2 quarts of Klotz KL-200 provided as there is none to be had here in Oz
• Biela 20x12 3 blade FW-190 style prop. I thought this would be a bit small but it is the size Ray recommended I use

Ray is very adamant in his documentation to NOT block off the crank case breather / drain nipple, to do so would lead to catastrophic failure of the engine.

There sure is conflicting info on this engine from both of the experts, RE & MMM.
I did get the MMM back plate but have not fitted it. MMM states to block off the crankcase nipple and even supplies a screw to do so as part of the rear plate kit. Says his modified back plate works better with oil distribution. I'm very nervous about fitting this back plate now and inclined to leave it as is.

I have asked Ray if Saito incorporated the back plate induction mods he developed for the 84. If he confirms they did then I definitely will not be fitting the MMM back plate and will sell it off.

My old Zenoahs are so appealing right now.

planenutzz

For those interested. Well some good news, Ray English has confirmed that Saito did incorporate his rear induction plate design on the FG90R3 so will not be fitting the MMM back plate.
Will sell the back plate and timing ring as they can be used on either the 84 or the 90 and I'm sure somebody will want them.

Jaketab

My Feedback: (2)

Hello,
Could someone please post or PM the contact information or website of Ray English ?
I tried an email address listed some pages back and it came back invalid.

Thanks - J Tab

planenutzz

PM me for the details

Jaketab

My Feedback: (2)

Done - PM Sent.

J Tab

planenutzz

Gents,
about to order a battery pack for the ignition on my 90. Was thinking a 2S LiION 7.4V 2500mA/h pack with futaba connector for the Saito ignition module.

Not keen on LiPo in a model if I can help it.
cheers
P

1967brutus

If you don'r like LiPo, 5 cells NiMH of the same capacity are MORE than enough, 1200 mAh will probably allready serve an entire afternoon.

planenutzz

hence why I am going to use LiION. NiMh is not up to the job, this is well documented within the threads.

1967brutus

I have, so far, zero problems with NiMH for ignitions, not even with my 5 cylinder unit.
But most modern ignitions want to see 6V, contrary to the older units of 10 years ago, that were perfectly happy with 4,8V.

planenutzz

good for you, saitos do not like 6v at all but good luck with what you choose to do mate. I will do as I see fit. QED
OUT.

1967brutus

It appears, going by what I read about them, Saito radials do not like to run at all...

Jesse Open

As an owner of several methanol fueled;
They sure liked to run where I fly

planenutzz

so why are you following a saito thread then mate?