RunRyder RC
WATCH
 3 pages [ <<    <     1     ( 2 )     3     NEXT    >> ] 3503 views POST REPLY
HomeAircraftHelicopterEngines Plugs Mufflers Fuel › OS 37 fuel consumption
01-18-2010 01:41 PM  8 years agoPost 21
jschenck

rrProfessor

La Vista, NE.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Another way to increase your fuel economy is to lower your headspeed. Flying around at 1700 will still be plenty for sport flying and fuel usages goes down.

I'm building a Raptor-50 to use as a buddy box trainer. I put the TT-50H in there because I got a good deal on it and that engine uses way less fuel than an OS-50 Hyper or a TT-53RL. If you look around you can still buy new 46 size heli engines that I'd bet have the same fuel consumption as an OS-37.

Don't know much about this engine but the pull start has always intrigued me.
http://mecoa.com/mecoa/46/4612.htm

I also have an older OS-50SXH non-hyper which I know uses less fuel. Saving that one incase this TT50 doesn't work out.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
01-18-2010 01:47 PM  8 years agoPost 22
Mutt

rrKey Veteran

M ca usa

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I get a good 20 to 30 minutes per tank on my 37. I also do not 3d just fly scale and sport. I run 15% powermaster fuel and get great results for my needs. Long flight times plenty of ower a lot more the the old 32 had. A lot has to do with tuning and head speed. Also the higher the nitro the more fuel they seem to use and I feel a lot of that is due to the fact people are running higer head speeds and running richer then you would with the 15%. Also run my 50 on the same fuel and get the same run times.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
01-18-2010 03:24 PM  8 years agoPost 23
Clearance

rrVeteran

Rain Forest of Western Canada

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

On a 6 oz tank, I get 9 to 11 minutes using 30% CP with a OS 32 SXH depending on how hard I fly. With the OS 37, approx. 6 to 8 minutes. I've since fitted my helis with 8 and 10 oz tanks and stayed with the OS 32 using a tuned pipe.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
01-18-2010 05:32 PM  8 years agoPost 24
dkshema

rrMaster

Cedar Rapids, IA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

FWIW -- I initially ran OS 32 SXH in my Caliber 30s. The Caliber 30 with the 32 could typically see close to 30-35 minutes of run time on a tank of fuel, hovering, and some mild aerobatic flight involved.

When the 37's came out and I switched over to them, That same 30-35 minutes worth of fuel was reduced to about 10 minutes per tank. This isn't a fluke, as three helis exhibited the same change in consumption when swapping out the motor.

Horsepower comes from somewhere, and that happens to be from burning more fuel. Higher cu. in. displacement, a larger carburetor throat, and the need to run a high-volume muffler translates to a higher fuel consumption.

-----
Dave

* Making the World Better -- One Helicopter at a time! *

Team Heliproz

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
01-18-2010 10:01 PM  8 years agoPost 25
Aaron29

rrProfessor

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Thanks for the reports, guys. Sounds like some are getting 20+ minutes. This is acceptable. I know you don't get something for nothing.
Horsepower comes from somewhere, and that happens to be from burning more fuel. Higher cu. in. displacement, a larger carburetor throat, and the need to run a high-volume muffler translates to a higher fuel consumption.
This I understand, but you can't tell me that a 15% increase in displacement and a 300% increase in fuel consumption makes sense. The OS 32 has 1.15 HP. The OS 37 has 1.4 HP. This is a 21% increase in power. So why would it not be closer to a 21% increase in fuel consumption?

As for getting an OS32 or OS46 or TT50, if they were still making these engines, I'd have bought the OS32. I won't consider used, because I don't want to be frustrated searching for a liner or obscure part a year down the road.

Honestly, with nitro prices on the rise, I think the engine manufacturers should reconsider bringing back the OS32 and the like. They keep making bigger engines that consume more and more fuel. I'd rather have less fuel consumption. I don't mind having to use collective management. In fact, it's challenging and I enjoy getting the most out of it.

If I want blazing power, high operating costs, and short flight times, I'll fly an electric. Nitro's strong point is good power, endurance, lower operating cost, and fuel and fly capability. People say the engine manufacturers are making bigger engines to try to compete with electrics for power. But in trying to keep up, they are losing some of their best advantages. The cost per flight and endurance is going down.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
01-18-2010 10:07 PM  8 years agoPost 26
Rotowerkz

rrApprentice

Windham, NH

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I replaced my OS .46's piston and ring with parts from Helidirect. I know that there are still parts out there for these engines.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
01-18-2010 10:07 PM  8 years agoPost 27
dkshema

rrMaster

Cedar Rapids, IA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I'd rather have less fuel consumption
If you've flown a heli with a 32 installed, then the 37, there's no way you would really want to go back to the 30. Collective management only goes so far. The power to weight ratio of the 30 helis just doesn't match up to that of the 50 sized stuff. The 37 still requires some care with collective.

If you really want to kill off the fuel consumption and still want to fly the pants off a heli, go with a 500-sized electric instead of the larger 30-sized nitro machine.

One reason I've been getting rid of my 30-sized fleet is that they spend a lot of time on the ground since I started flying a Trex 500.

-----
Dave

* Making the World Better -- One Helicopter at a time! *

Team Heliproz

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
01-18-2010 10:11 PM  8 years agoPost 28
jschenck

rrProfessor

La Vista, NE.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

There is the TT-39, still made. I was fortunate enough to pick up a new TT50H from RHPS on black friday for less than $50

Another way that I know will give longer flight times is to go to 10% nitro fuel. It'll take a bit to tune it but I know that the difference between 15% and 30% on a couple of heli's I have is 11 minutes to 8 minutes on a tank, all else being the same and tuned for that fuel.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
01-18-2010 10:13 PM  8 years agoPost 29
rccarguy

rrVeteran

Boston MA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

My Raptor 30 with OS 37 will go close to 18 minutes before it starts draining the header tank on 30%, my Raptor 50 with OS Hyper is about half that on the same fuel.
Honestly, with nitro prices on the rise, I think the engine manufacturers should reconsider bringing back the OS32 and the like. They keep getting bigger and really, I'd rather have less fuel consumption. I don't mind having to use collective management. In fact, it's challenging and I enjoy getting the most out of it.
Ahh, well then, take a look at the Century Radikal G20. Fuel economy of a gasser with performance close to the older 50 nitro machines, unless you're a hard core 3D addict, you'll like this heli. Easily 20 minutes of flight on a tank of fuel and the cost for a gallon is about $3.00 including oil

XCell Spectra G
Radikal G20
Some obsolete nitro helis too...

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
01-18-2010 10:16 PM  8 years agoPost 30
Aaron29

rrProfessor

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

If you've flown a heli with a 32 installed, then the 37, there's no way you would really want to go back to the 30.
I used to so some pretty good flying with the 32. And I've flown the crap out of a 50. Don't worry. I know what is at stake. When I want to throw a heli around, I'll pull out the SDX 50. I'm not looking for the Raptor 30 to be anything but an endurance machine with some limited 3D capability.

Honestly, I think you can challenge yourself with a 30 enough to have quite a bit of fun.

The thing I've been trying to tell people is that you can do any maneuver with any helicopter. You just have to slow it down. My Raptor 30, on the OS32 would do Rolling Circles, Piroflips, Pirocircuits, flips (albeit slower) tumbling circuits, inverted forward, backward, etc.

The only thing it didn't do well is impressively steep walls of death and steep tic tocs and tailslides. It still does them, but not as steep and quick. When I get an inkling for that I can pull out a 50. Most the time, though, I don't need to throw my heli around and graceful piroflips look just as cool as Szabo style ones, to me.

Some of the best flying I've ever seen was with a 60, that people say can't do anything because it isn't a 90.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
01-18-2010 10:17 PM  8 years agoPost 31
LonR

rrElite Veteran

Macomb,Mi

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

dkshema FWIW -- I initially ran OS 32 SXH in my Caliber 30s. The Caliber 30 with the 32 could typically see close to 30-35 minutes of run time on a tank of fuel, hovering, and some mild aerobatic flight involved.
How come I only got about 8 mins with my Raptor 30/OS32 ?All I did in my videos was forward flight and flips/rolls,theres no way I was getting 15 mins so how in the heck are people getting 30 mins of flight time?

Full tank in this video too,not even in idleup.Maybe the Raptor 30 V1 has a smaller tank than other 30's ?

Watch at YouTube

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
01-18-2010 10:31 PM  8 years agoPost 32
liljalepeno

rrNovice

Dublin, Ireland

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Yeah, the Raptor V1 has a smaller tank than other 30's. The V2 Raptor is something like a 25% increase in size over the V1 (I think I read that somewhere, maybe a Raptor V2 owner can confirm....?)
Still though I was getting a lot more from my V1 Raptor than you are getting.......?

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
01-18-2010 10:36 PM  8 years agoPost 33
Aaron29

rrProfessor

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I replaced my OS .46's piston and ring with parts from Helidirect. I know that there are still parts out there for these engines.
Did it take some searching? How about OS 32 parts?

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
01-18-2010 10:48 PM  8 years agoPost 34
Aaron29

rrProfessor

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

jschenck, thanks for the awesome posts, I did notice them.

I plan on running the OS37 on 15% at lower headspeeds to start. With some judicious leaning it ought to have the balance of power and endurance I'm looking for.

I didn't know the TT39 is still made. The online shops I frequent didn't list it.

Quite honestly, I have an OS37, and if I can make it work, I will. I don't even have the receipt for it so I couldn't return it if I wanted to. If it ever tanks, I'll consider the TT39 or a used OS32.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
01-18-2010 10:51 PM  8 years agoPost 35
oldfart

rrProfessor

Vancouver, Canada

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

All things being equal, when comparing ounces of fuel burned per minute, between any too engines, in the SAME helis (same size tanks etc.), the biggest thing that should be insured, is that you are comparing at the SAME rotor speeds. Of course I am assuming that you have optimised the needle settings for each also.

It is important to insure you have reset your throttle curve to insure the same rotor speeds.

In that case you will not see a 15% increase in displacement require a 100% increase in fuel burn per minute.

If you set for a trainer or sport or scale type of rotor speed of just 1600, you will fly a lot longer on the same tank, with the same engine, as having it set for a 3D head speed of 2000 or 2100.

A good rule of thumb is to know that a 10% increase in head speed in a hover (will require less pitch) will result in about a 30% increase in fuel burn.

So going from a 1600 head speed, to a 1760 (+10% of 1600) head speed, will mean you go from a 1 oz./X minutes fuel burn, to a 1.3 oz./X minute fuel burn (+30% of 1.0 oz.).

Now to go to a 1936 (+10% of 1760) head speed, will require an additional 30% in fuel consumption from the 1.3 at 1760, for an increased consumption to 1.7 oz./X minutes.

As you can see, setting your heli to fly 3D with a head speed of 1936, will consume 70% more fuel then to fly at a more sedate 1600 head speed.

It takes the same power to hover a 7 lb. heli on a 32 at 1600 as on a 37 at 1600. So the fuel burn difference will be rather negligable. But if you have not changed your throttle curve when you went from the 32 to the 37, the head sped will be higher, so even in the hover, it will burn more fuel as the rotor speed will be higher.

Of course, now with both carbs opened full, even set to maintain 1600 (or 1760 or 1936) as before, the 37 will now burn more fuel as it will be developing more power and turning the rotor with more pitch at whatever rotor speed you select.

Just some food for thought.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
01-18-2010 10:53 PM  8 years agoPost 36
Aaron29

rrProfessor

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

That may explain A LOT of what people were reporting.

Thanks!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
01-18-2010 11:26 PM  8 years agoPost 37
Clearance

rrVeteran

Rain Forest of Western Canada

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The Oldfart (Phil) knows what he's talking about, having flown as long as me :=) Decades. But admittedly he does do a lot of testing.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
01-19-2010 01:49 AM  8 years agoPost 38
bopshi

rrApprentice

greenport ny

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I had a hawkpro with a 32 engine and it got great flight times but would go tru a glow plug about every gallon it seemed. Any ideas about that? Now I have a trx 600 with hyper 50 it is a fuel hog but glow plugs last for ever. As for the 37 it probably has oversize carb and 32 has small size, smaller then it can handle as the 37 probably is maxed out carb wise .

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
01-19-2010 02:32 AM  8 years agoPost 39
Rotowerkz

rrApprentice

Windham, NH

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Did it take some searching? How about OS 32 parts?
All you need are the part numbers, and a little googling. For example,
the carb screws for a .32 sx-h might be listed in the OS manual using
an 8-digit number; they might be cross-listed using another number. Kind of annoying, but it works.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
01-19-2010 03:14 AM  8 years agoPost 40
ShuRugal

rrKey Veteran

Killeen, TX

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

hmm, how about an OS .37 with a .32 carb on it?

AMA 700159

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
WATCH
 3 pages [ <<    <     1     ( 2 )     3     NEXT    >> ] 3503 views POST REPLY
HomeAircraftHelicopterEngines Plugs Mufflers Fuel › OS 37 fuel consumption
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 10  Topic Subscribe

Monday, August 20 - 2:11 am - Copyright © 2000-2018 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online