Whats the benefits of each?
74 forum posts
As the title says whats the benefit of the types of motors?
Im keen to get a 4 stroke for my spitfire build, But interested in seeing if the electric motor would be a better option?
|Concorde Speedbird||01/08/2012 15:45:11|
2157 forum posts
Oh no, not this argument again! The last thread that had this debate had to be closed by moderators!
In my opinion for a Spit you ought to have a Four stroke. An SC one or ASP would do just fine at very competitive prices. It will sound fantastic and you won't need to add so much weight up front.
|Ian Jones||01/08/2012 15:51:52|
2239 forum posts
Oh dear, lots of opinions coming in any time now !
Here's the first one. There's no better option than the one you are happy with so no matter what follows it will still be down to your preference.
Cost will be important too and in working that out it's obvious to think about fuel prices but don't forget to include the cost of batteries and replacing them. A 4 stroker could easily last 5 years though I would expect at least 10 - will the batteries last as long.
For me a silent Spitfire that can exhibit sudden changes in speed and direction like 3D funfly might as well be a 3D funfly. A Spitfire deserves to be more realistic and that would mean an IC engine.
Oh and for the record I have electric and IC powered aeroplanes, watch out for opinions with a strong bias either way.
Edited By Ian Jones on 01/08/2012 15:55:45
800 forum posts
Well I suppose:-
Electric is quiet, clean and there's no change of CoG with 'fuel' usage.
Glow is noisy and mucky but you get longer flight times than electric (or more fly-by's)
Petrol is noisy but pretty clean and also cheap and a 4 stroke petrol Saito sounds superb but they're not cheap.
Fuel costs can be balanced against battery and charger costs.
Electric motors can be run up indoors and power can be analysed with a power meter Oh! and there's no starting problems.
You takes your pick really!
600 forum posts
I'd take petrol.
More realistic, great sound, smell of fuel... No electric can be compared to that.
|Steve Hargreaves - Moderator||01/08/2012 16:36:24|
5422 forum posts
As the guys have said...the benefits are pretty much as you would expect.....
Electric:- less noise, no mess, fewer deadsticks, no need to cut the cowl, need to lay out lots of money on several batteries. likely to need an expensive charger
I/C:- Longer flight times, instant turn around (after re-fuelling), better sound (although it still doesn't sound like a Merlin), needs ground support equipment (starter, glow battery)
It really is a personal choice these days...there is no right or best answer......it's whatever makes you happiest...it's your hobby....
462 forum posts
I think Ian hit the nail on the head, use whatever you're happiest with. Benefit of electric is that it will fit in the cowl. Nothing worse than a beautiful model spoiled by the cylinder head stuck out. Mind you, a 4st sounds nicer.
277 forum posts
What ever you are happy with.
I fly with both and like both equally. I love the lack of fuss and instant throttle response of an electric and love the noise and tinkering that comes with IC.
To fit a model with a new electric power train is still more expensive that the equivalent IC set up. Good motor, good ESC. good UBEC and separate battery and a flight lipo cost a lot more that an SC 70 FS. Once you have the battery then it starts to pay for its self with regards to fuel costs. You can of course use cheaper kit from HK to mitigate the cost, your choice.
Enjoy the Spit.
|Stephen Jones||01/08/2012 18:11:43|
952 forum posts
|Trevor Crook||01/08/2012 21:56:30|
|140 forum posts|
You're bound to get some strong opinions, some above already. I've gradually switched from glow to electric over the years, so I'm biased, but here goes!
I don't really get the noise argument - no glow or petrol engine is going to sound anything like a Merlin or Griffon, so the hum/whistle of electric power is no less appropriate.
I don't understand why Ian thinks fitting an electric power train will make it change speed and direction like a 3D model - the weight is likely to be similar no matter what the power plant, therefore so will the inertia.
The Spit looks truly awful with bits of silencer and/or cylinder head poking out, so you'd have to engineer the installation carefully.
Finally, the cost. I confess I use low cost motors, esc's and batteries, and have had good results. However, for larger models, glow or petrol is probably the cheaper solution.
As others have said already, go with what you prefer, or are equipped for - you don't say whether you already have anything electric.
|Alan Cantwell||01/08/2012 22:07:19|
|3039 forum posts|
well, here will be a surprise, if you are not belssed with lots of glow and petrol motors, as i am, then go for electric, with a bendini sound system, total realism if done properly, to hear that merlin at start up, in flight, and shutting down, is a gob opener,
|Tim Kearsley||02/08/2012 07:57:30|
499 forum posts
Well I fly both IC and electric too and like both, but I must take issue with the post that talks about:
"For me a silent Spitfire that can exhibit sudden changes in speed and direction like 3D funfly might as well be a 3D funfly. A Spitfire deserves to be more realistic and that would mean an IC engine."
Which is nonsense of course! What power plant you have at the front makes little difference to the way you fly a model, or indeed the way the model is capable of flying. Whether a model can suddenly change in speed and direction is determined by the design and weight of the airframe, not what's pulling it around the sky!
The sound issue that is regularly trotted out is largely irrelevant now as well. Much of the sound from larger models is from prop noise, not just the sound of the engine. And why is a popping glow engine regarded as being in any way "realistic"? As Alan said, if you want a realistic sound, put in a sound system!
|Prop Nut||02/08/2012 10:16:11|
144 forum posts
Isn't Ian Jones just saying that a Spitfire that makes sudden changes of direction whilst it's engine remains silent is unrealistic? With IC, there is a more perceptible change in sound during strenuous changes of flight that accords more with the full-size. Anyone who's seen a full-size Spitfire display will be familiar with the change in sound as it manoeuvres. I'm only asking the question, but given the strength of feeling of some contributors I've donned my steel helmet and taken to the shelter!
74 forum posts
Some excellent replies.
I too am a bit worried about getting everything hidden in the cowling, When using a 4 stroke engine. I dont want anything showing through.
I am very keen to learn more about this sound system for the electric motors. I think alot of people will agree the sound of the petrol engines does have an appeal even if not like a merlin lol.
|Lee Smalley||02/08/2012 10:27:50|
1869 forum posts
I enjoy both electric and ic although some scale models do Benefit from an engine sound and yes I know it is not a realistic sound but it is better than the electric whine, yes you can fit a sound system but I think that is generally the preserve of a more serious scale model and adds extra cost and weight, still I am sure they sound great. Firstly let's put a few ill found comments to bed ic or electric will not make your model fly much differently for the average flier, the costs are about the same until you start getting really big and even then electric prices are comming down, there is an issue with charging batteries for bigger models but even this can (with more cost) can be overcome.
A well silenced ic engine is not that much noisier than electric and is to some ears ( mine included much nicer) my yak 54 with st2300 and 18x8 prop is very quiet!! If you know what you are doing ic is very easy to start and very very reliable, yes there is a bit of mess but a well thought out installation leaves minimal mess at the end of a days flying and I get the excuse that I have HAVE got to go into the shed to clean my models down .....awwwww what a shame !!
So it horses for courses mate I do get very irritated when people come on here and slate one form of propulsion off over the other, and strangely that person has normally naff all real experience of what he is slating.
In short both power sources are brill and you have to experience both to make your own mind up !!
|malcolm woodcock 1||02/08/2012 10:38:12|
|224 forum posts|
Having to try and flick over a recalcitrent diesel on a cold winters day when I was younger, I welcome the electric revolution. You switch it on, it goes.
74 forum posts
Actually reading the info about the sound emulator, It seems a bit involved for what i want.
I think i just have to decide which way to go, i think i would prefere having petrol. But vey much like the ease of the electric motors.
What petrol and electric motors are reputable manufacturers
|Concorde Speedbird||02/08/2012 11:08:07|
2157 forum posts
This plane may be a bit small for a petrol engine, a glow one would be more suitable.
SC and ASP do very good affordable glow engines, their four strokes are very good. OS and Saito are the top end brands for four strokes, but come at a price. This is my Saito FA62A.
Laser do superb four strokes, and they are BRITISH so that will be nearest to a Merlin in that sense! But they are also quite expensive.
Electric motors I am not sure about, OS now do them and Turnigy(?) are also quite good I think.
Arguably IC is simpler to set up, for your spit a 70 four stroke, fuel tank level with the carb, inverted set up and away you go, none of the P=IV etc. In my opinion that is reserved for Physics lessons! And also a Spitty this size will need to be dismantled (unless you have a van) so electric does not save as much time as it can. And glow fuel gets better over time, batteries do not.
But electric is arguably more reliable, and there is the argument about battery usage not changing C of G and fuel does (but in all the models I have flown, electric and IC I have never noticed a difference). It is quieter so that is good if you fly near people's homes, and once all set up simpler, just plug in and go.
I would prefer you to choose IC, it's what I predominantly fly and in my opinion more suited for a Spit, but that's arguable as well. But choose what you feel is best for you, and you will have fun whatever you choose.
That's fair isn't it?!
|Ian Jones||02/08/2012 12:32:09|
2239 forum posts
|Alan Randall||02/08/2012 15:38:29|
416 forum posts
None of the electric models I fly are silent, and the sound emitted does change as you throttle up or down.
I have to say that this thread has gone exactly where I thought it would when I first saw it, with the usual battle lines drawn. The subject seems to get argued over on such a regular basis that its becoming a bore.
Please login to post a reply.