I am considering using these instead of standards in my .40 P-51 kit.
Instead of (4) 311's I will use (4) 225's for a weight savings of 2
oz. For the throttle I will use an HS-81 instead of a 311 which will
save an additional ounce. My question is: Is saving 3 ounces going to
make much of a difference at all? Are there any other ways to save on
weight?
Mike Norton - 31 Oct 2003 05:04 GMT
Not many that are as easy. On .40 size models, I usually use "mini" servos,
which saves 2 oz or so.
-- Mike
> I am considering using these instead of standards in my .40 P-51 kit.
> Instead of (4) 311's I will use (4) 225's for a weight savings of 2
> oz. For the throttle I will use an HS-81 instead of a 311 which will
> save an additional ounce. My question is: Is saving 3 ounces going to
> make much of a difference at all? Are there any other ways to save on
> weight?
Andrew Richard Jary - 02 Nov 2003 06:16 GMT
Don't skimp for a measly 3 oz. Any decent 40 size model will take ordinary
sevos which are also cheaper. What proportion of the AUW is 3 oz anyway!
Andy from Oz
> Not many that are as easy. On .40 size models, I usually use "mini" servos,
> which saves 2 oz or so.
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> > make much of a difference at all? Are there any other ways to save on
> > weight?
Six_O'Clock_High - 31 Oct 2003 06:41 GMT
An ounce here and an ounce there and pretty soon we are talking pounds.
Yes, that IS signifficant for a .40 sized kit.
> I am considering using these instead of standards in my .40 P-51 kit.
> Instead of (4) 311's I will use (4) 225's for a weight savings of 2
> oz. For the throttle I will use an HS-81 instead of a 311 which will
> save an additional ounce. My question is: Is saving 3 ounces going to
> make much of a difference at all? Are there any other ways to save on
> weight?
A.T. - 31 Oct 2003 10:15 GMT
Saving weight is good, but use metal gear servos in a .40 + powered model.
Very powerful servos, but whilst the resin gears will handle a diving glider
with ease, please visit your LHS and view a packet of gears for a HS225
beside those for a HS422, HS300 or similar which are recommended as standard
servos for models up to say a.60 combustion powered model.
One of the weight savings of small servos is through use of thin small
gears, a quick back lash will simply shear the teeth on the resin gear
trains, as is intended. Even large gliders with flaps down can easily shear
the teeth on those servos on a hard landing as the flaps "flap" on a spot
landing impact.
.
regards
Alan T.
Alan's Hobby, Model & RC Web Links
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~atong/
..............................................................
> I am considering using these instead of standards in my .40 P-51 kit.
> Instead of (4) 311's I will use (4) 225's for a weight savings of 2
> oz. For the throttle I will use an HS-81 instead of a 311 which will
> save an additional ounce. My question is: Is saving 3 ounces going to
> make much of a difference at all? Are there any other ways to save on
> weight?
Mike Wizynajtys - 31 Oct 2003 19:51 GMT
The centering on HS 225 is terrible. I had 4 I bought for a Modeltech Magic.
I ended up using something else because with large control surfaces the
error made it hunt for straight and level.
I wasn't too happy with spending all that money on such poor performance.
I'd have been better off plain old HS 425 and a couple ounces of extra
weight.
Wiz
> I am considering using these instead of standards in my .40 P-51 kit.
> Instead of (4) 311's I will use (4) 225's for a weight savings of 2
> oz. For the throttle I will use an HS-81 instead of a 311 which will
> save an additional ounce. My question is: Is saving 3 ounces going to
> make much of a difference at all? Are there any other ways to save on
> weight?
Morris Lee - 01 Nov 2003 16:29 GMT
I'd like to hear some more on the HS225, as I was thinking of using these
servos in a Dave Patrick Ultimate 40. If that's the case, perhaps I should
find a different servo!
Morris Lee
> The centering on HS 225 is terrible. I had 4 I bought for a Modeltech Magic.
> I ended up using something else because with large control surfaces the
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> > make much of a difference at all? Are there any other ways to save on
> > weight?