Jesse Open

Glowgeek

Roger all that and I was inches away from buying a TH muffler for my 82 when you stepped in with your custom design. Much more eye pleasing to me and yes, the price was much better too. . I'll bet those 90° pressure fittings are indispensable for certain applications. Great idea.

the Wasp

My Feedback: (1)

wow, listen to this FG 60R3

the Wasp

My Feedback: (1)

Pete, my VQ P-40 is about the same size (62" span), she should come in around 10 pounds, and like the Spitfire she would do well with a FA100 in her, but she should grab some big-air with the 115 in her

Jim

the Wasp

My Feedback: (1)

I'm telling you, if I could find a 100IL Twin NIB for a good price I just may buy it !!!

Jim

Glowgeek

One of the best sounding Saitos I've heard.

the Wasp

My Feedback: (1)

all I know is that it looks cooler than the Bell X1 braking the sound barrier

Jim

Glowgeek

Shouldn't have flown today but did anyway. Gusting winds 5-20 mph and off and on like a light switch. I think I broke my record for go arounds on that last landing.

Gary, I love the way the 65 muffler sounds on the 62 in the air. Cackles and barks.

Jim, I have three huge sets of orings and couldn't find a suitable one to adapt the 100 carb to the 82 intake manifold. Ultra copper fixed the issue but I'll have to wait until tomorrow to run it.

the Wasp

My Feedback: (1)

thumbs up on that one

Jim

Rudolph Hart

Jim what we really need is for saito to design and build a 37 litre v12 that runs on 40% nitro for under two grand,then you'll be flying this.With full drop tanks i reckon you could taxi to at least the down wind end of the strip before she died

I dunno my fg57 has a nice bark on shotgun pipes,there are you tube vids of fg57's flying all sorts of planes,nice grunty crackle from the pipes.

Glowgeek

Arguably, the more cylinders they have the better they sound.

Captcrunch44

Jesse Open

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Speaking of, the pipes look good on the 90-T Thanks again, I need to fire it up, I haven't run it since it's rebuild. I put the pressure tap pipe on the right cylinder so the pressure tap would face inward.

Glowgeek

With compression increase to 10.5:1, upgraded exhaust (Gary's)and upgraded carb (fa100) the pig is spinning an apc 14x6 at 9900 rpm on 15% nitro. Up 700 rpm over the stock config.

Even though I've exceeded my original goal of 9800 peak rpm with an apc 14x6 I'm not done yet. The intake and exhaust ports have a 90° short turn (no radius). Perhaps a little light porting to smooth out those short turns would yield yet a little more umph. I will however first bump the CR to 11:1 and see what happens. At least that mod would be reversible in the event that it spits props or hammers glow plugs.

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

I have an 80 with 15.5 to 1 compression, it only kicks props when leaned to far, like all others. My 150 has 11.24 to 1 compression and my oldest 65 is 12.97 to 1. Keep us posted as it goes up, that's good stuff.

Glowgeek

Thanks Dave. Any idea what was recommended for max nitro content for those three engines? Better yet, what nitro content are you getting away with?

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Turning a Bolly 13.5 x 8, the idle was 1,770.

The early 80 had a lot of 15% put through it but now only 10%, I figured a long time ago the high nitro methane percentage was not necessary. I also used several gallons of 5% which was very smooth running.
The 80 will fire up and run on Davis Diesel fuel, I removed the coil from the glow plug to prove it to my self. As can be seen by the tank, the muffler pressure really dirtied up the fuel.

Glowgeek

Interesting, I would have thought at 15.5:1 CR that 15% would have caused issues. Hammered glow plugs from detonation, overly rich midrange, very wide hsn adjustments etc.

the Wasp

My Feedback: (1)

Jim

the Wasp

My Feedback: (1)

Gary, I received the valves today, thank you very much, but I have to rig up some way to add ARO, these Saitos are no OS 50 and will be taken cared of

Jim

Rudolph Hart

Lonnie if you don't already know maybe you could ask dave's neighbours where the prop sometimes ended up on his old fa150 i usually run 10% for general flying but you can easily go up to 40% if you like more aerobatic performance,but shorter flight times result on the same size tank,there is a noticeable change in the way the engine barks and it's only a two minute re tune richer.There is a massive difference in max rpm.

Rudolph Hart

Sorry i got interrupted and meant to say that the more nitro you add the less return you get in max rpm as you go to a higher percentage,it starts to drop off after 30%.....plus! if you are stuck in a poorly ventilated shed bench running your saito be prepared to get a bit teary eyed,the nitro is like a good hot sauna for your tear ducts,and lastly...enjoy!

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Lonnie, here is Clarence Lee's word on the high compression 80: Saito FA-80

And the HC 150: http://sceptreflight.com/Model%20Eng...20FA-150S.html

Glowgeek

Thanks Pete, yes I get that but nitro advances the ignition timing and you can only induce so much fuel charge into the combustion chamber with any given engine setup. Higher compression also advances the ignition timing and although it also contributes to higher volumetric efficiency at some point the introduction of higher nitro will bring on detonation.
A fella can keep raising the nitro content in his fuel until no further peak rpm is seen and then back off a percent or two for safety but yes, it will drain the tank and the bank.

What my little project is all about is to raise engine hp through volumetric efficiency and hopefully realize some long term cost savings with little initial investment. Besides, I enjoy engine modding as much as flying. I also like slighting the EPA whenever possible but that's another topic, one that I believe nitro users will be discussing more and more in the not so distant future here in the US.