YS Engines

Mon Mar 29 15:10:45 AKST 2004

Control yourself.... they are both married.... :-)

-----Original Message-----
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
[mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of David Lockhart
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 6:41 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: YS Engines

Ed M and Dean,

Thanks for the nice words.  I loved my YS61 short stroke (1990) and think a
rear intake rear exhaust YS 160 might be killer - but it doesn't seem that
is on the YS agenda.

Dave

PS - Ed M, your check is in the mail!!!  <G>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dean Pappas" <d.pappas at kodeos.com>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 5:45 PM
Subject: RE: YS Engines

No, no, no, ... rear intake and rear exhaust.
Oh yeah, I'll vouch for the nice slow downlines, I fly that EMC fairly
regularly.
Dean

-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Miller [mailto:edbon85 at optonline.net]
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 5:39 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: YS Engines

I am fortunate to call Dave L. a friend and have blatantly copied much of
his hard work on an Elan and now an EMC I have. In both cases being able to
use what Dave has developed has been a big advantage and certainly saved me
countless hours experimenting. I flew Dave's EMC with the APC 2 blade (
17x12N or 17x12 if I remember correctly ) and yes, abundance of power and
the package could begin to travel at a good clip in any attitude unless
properly throttle managed. I've also flown Dave's EMC with his modified APC
3 blade and I can tell you downlines are literally a crawl, in fact at times
I felt I should be adding power. The constant, relaxed speed the 3 blade on
the OS affords I have never experienced in a model airplane. That same 3
blade prop works wonderfully on a 10.25 lb Hydeway and an under 10 lb Vivat.
I have also seen Dave's 3 blade in 10 and 10.5 pitch on a YS 140DZ and it
just couldn't turn the prop in the rpm range where the DZ was happy.
If you look at what is happening in dirt motorcycles now, the transition (
mostly for environmental reasons ) from 2 stroke to 4 stroke, the 2 stroke
still has a power advantage over the 4 stroke. Our model 2 strokes use tuned
exhaust systems, the YS 4 stroke is supercharged. You cannot get away from
the additional internal drag a 4 stroke engine will have over a 2 stroke and
the increased heat and power loss caused by that internal drag of camshafts,
lifters, pushrods, rockers and valves.
I believe it is true that Yamada's true focus is on the small pattern
market, too bad in my opinion he has placed all his efforts in the 4 stroke.
I know there would be a bunch of us that would love to see/own a YS 160
front intake, rear exhaust 2 stroke.
Ed M.
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Lockhart" <DaveL322 at comcast.net>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: YS Engines

> Nat,
>
> Yes and no.
>
> No - given same prop and same idle RPM.  However, given the different
nature
> of the engines, it seems pretty logical to me that the best 4C prop is not
> going to be the best 2C prop.  Idle RPM - the average 140/160 DZs I've
seen
> idles faster and rougher than the average L or FZ (the DZs of course make
> much more power than the L or FZ), and the big 2C happily idles slower and
> smoother than a DZ, L, or FZ.
>
> Yes - using a setup oriented for the 2C.  The last 2 years I've run an APC
> 15.75-11 3 blade (repitched from the 15.75-13) with the idle set at about
> 1700 on the OS 140 EFI (same idle speed when I ran the 140RX).  I believe
> this setup provides better downline braking than the average 4C setup
> (especially a DZ).  And if I choose, I can lower the idle to 1500 and it
is
> still reliable and doesn't shake apart the plane.
>
> The past 3 years, I flown a pair of EMCs that are 10.75 pounds and very
> clean (all servos, switches, fuel lines, fasteners, etc are mounted
> internally or flush).  The first year, a couple people thought I was
> constant speed - but too fast everywhere (too much power is such a
terrible
> problem to have.........).  The past two years I've used the 3 blade, and
> many people at the NATs and locally (D1, D2, and D4) have remarked how
slow
> my plane is in a downline, and how constant speed the plane is - which is
> nice to hear - because that was my goal after the first year.  Several
> others have tried the prop and plan to run it for 2004 - I think that in
> itself speaks volumes.
>
> Dave
> DaveL322 at comcast.net
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Nat Penton
> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 2:05 PM
> Subject: Re: YS Engines
>
>
> Dave can you get the downline braking with a two stroke you can get with a
> four ?          nat
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: David Lockhart
> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2004 11:18 PM
> Subject: Re: YS Engines
>
>
> Ed,
>
> I took a quick look at the 2003 Nationals results for Masters and FAI.
> Looks like 1st place in Masters was a 2C, and 5 of the top 10 in Masters
> were 2Cs.  FAI was won by a YS4C, and 4 of the top ten were 2Cs.  If
memory
> serves me correctly, all 6 of the 4C fliers are sponsored by YS and one of
> the 2C fliers might be sponsored.
>
> I've been flying FAI for 5 seasons and used 3 different 2C setups and
don't
> feel that I am missing out on a warm fuzzy feeling.  Maybe that is because
> my 2C is cheaper, vibrates less, requires less maintenance, and is more
> reliable than a 4C (parts is parts).  And I've not yet found a 140DZ or
> 160DZ (w/ 30% nitro) with enough power to spin the prop I am running on my
> 2C (w/ 20% nitro) - and yes, my 2C has plenty of torque and a linear
> throttle.  Oh yes, it is also quieter and uses less fuel per flight than a
> 140/160DZ.
>
> 4Cs became very popular in pattern when the rules changed to allow a 4C to
> have 2x the displacement of the 2C and YS very successfully exploited that
> rule change and designed and produced some very powerful competition 4Cs.
> Had it not been for that rule change, I doubt the 4C would have ever even
> become popular in pattern.  As the current rules do not give an advantage
to
> a 2C or 4C, the 2Cs will return to dominance - unless the electrics take
> over first.
>
> But then again, as others have pointed out, some pattern guys just like to
> buy the most expensive toys and spend endless hours
tinkering..............
>
> Regards,
>
> Dave Lockhart
> DaveL322 at comcast.net
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Troy Newman
> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2004 11:16 PM
> Subject: Re: YS Engines
>
>
> Yamada the company that makes YS motors is dedicated to the support of F3A
> (pattern on the international scene).
>
> The main reason YS motors dominate is because of their performance. The
> problem is there are limited sizes of motors....The YS 160DZ is now the
> biggest motor produced. It can fly about a 13lb plane and still have
enough
> power to hover it. So a 100" IMAC model just isn't in the realm of the YS
> motor. If YS made a 100cc gas motor man alive would everybody want one.
Mr.
> Yamada knows how to make Horsepower!
>
> It is my understanding that Mr. Yamada used to work at Honda back in the
old
> days when the small Honda motors were revolutionary in motor cycles,
smaller
> compact cars and so on.
>
> As for Fun fly planes the YS 63 is probably the ultimate power plant for
any
> 46 sized model. Its got tremendous power and without a weight problem. The
> Flip 3D's, Madness, and other 3D funfly planes like the Hover Cobra,
Magic,
> Razor, and UCD 46 are perfect models for the 63
>
>
> I have seen YS 140Sport,s and 140L's run scale models up to 15-17lbs and
> depending on the plane it will fly them but you will not have the extra
> power.
>
> Now Heli's YS has a good foothold with the different motors they offer
> including a 91 4stroke Heli motor.
>
> YS engines are probably the best model motors produced today.
>
> I can choose any motor I want to run and I choose the YS motors above
others
> because of the quality and performance. Here in recent years the 2cycle
> motors have taken a foothold in the lower classes of pattern flying. They
> make tons of power and tend to give a less experienced flyer a warm fuzzy
> feeling. They will make good power on 15% nitro and even not setup
correctly
> they will make big power....I have run them from the OS EFI, to the Webra
> with mixture control carbs. With other in between.
>
> I prefer the YS 4 strokes because they perform better. So the main reason
YS
> dominates Pattern and not other forms is because they focus on pattern
> models and pattern type setups. Because of this focus the motors do the
job
> the best....The bigger models just will have to wait for YS to produce
> bigger motors if ever.
>
>
> Troy Newman
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Edward C. Hernandez
> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2004 8:55 PM
> Subject: YS Engines
>
>
>    Ok, time for another newbie question: it seems to me from the
discussion
> and contest results and a few copies of the K factor that Kane gave me at
> the D4 contest last year that pattern pilots prefer YS engines, yet YS
> engines don't seem to dominate in other kinds of flying(IMAC, scale, fun
> fly, etc). Um, why?
>
> Ed Hernandez
>
> =====================================
> # To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
> and follow the instructions.
>

=====================================
# To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.

============# To be removed from this list, go to
http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.

=====================================
# To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.

==================# To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.