Tiger Moth "powerplant" question... - RC Groups
Thread Tools
Sep 05, 2001, 01:46 PM
Registered User

Tiger Moth "powerplant" question...

I have a Wattage Tiger Moth on order and was wondering if it has the same Motor/G.B./Prop combo as the Lite Stick? I'm hoping it is a little bit more powerful...R/L
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Sep 05, 2001, 03:20 PM
Registered User
mattk17's Avatar
It comes with the same size motor but is the carbon brushed version. Some people say it is more powerful than the regular version but I've not observed any difference in thrust. The big difference is prop selection in my experience. 9x7 gws comes with tmoth and works great but is very fragile. 10x4.7gws is much tougher but also slower. You can upgrade to a 280 size motor but I haven't so can't comment on it. I think some others have made the switch so maybe they will share their experiences.
Sep 05, 2001, 03:28 PM
Registered User
From everything I've seen about the TM, I'd say that lighter is better. I'd think a 280 would turn it into a different aircraft, for better and for worse. On someone else's recommendation here, I'm flying now with a GWS 8x6 prop. It seems to me to be every bit as good as with the GWS 9x7. I also have APC 9x6 and 8x6 props to try, and I'm sure they will be more durable.
Sep 05, 2001, 03:39 PM
Registered User
mattk17's Avatar
We think alike when it comes to airplanes. That is exactly why I haven't tried the 280 on my tmoth. I'm afraid it would become too heavy which means reinforce landing gear, reinforce wings, bigger battery, etc...

If you look at the 10x8 gws prop, it seems very sturdy compared to the 9x7 or the 8x6. Why not chop one down to 9x8 or even 8x8 and give it a whirl.

I like the idea of an 8" prop for ground clearance and the extra pitch might help make thrust about a wash. Just cut about an inch off each side. Simple right? Should we round the edge or just cut it off square?
Sep 05, 2001, 03:59 PM
Registered User
I'm waiting for a prop modification expert to speak on the subject of cutting down props. I think it would be critical to get just the right shape on the prop tips for optimum performance, because a prop blade is an airfoil designed to a specific shape. I'm not sure that many people could do it right without a lot of trial and error. A beefy 8x8 prop does sound intriguing. But I have a gut feeling that the APC 8x6 prop that I just bought is going to do the job just fine. If not, then I'll try the APC 9x6.
Sep 05, 2001, 07:14 PM
Registered User
Thanks guys...trimming the tips down on a 10-8 should work fine, I would think. I would probably round the tips off and taper them to the tip for about the last 1/4" or so. OTOH, I have some grey Cox props and the tips are basically squared of with very little taper at the ends, so perhaps in our scale it's not all that critical? R/L
Sep 06, 2001, 10:45 AM
Registered User
aeonaero's Avatar
I have flown my moth on a no-name 280 motor. It most definately had more "ummph". The added weight definately bent the wings a lot more on loops and the like.

My biggest problem is keeping the upper wing attached to the struts. I tend to get a little rambunctious with the plane and it tends to want to pull loose. A spot of CA and it's fine.

The only problem is now I have 4 large "clumps" of CA with bits of foam embedded in them and it looks rather unsightly.
Sep 06, 2001, 08:00 PM
Registered User
mattk17's Avatar
OK, I tried cutting down the GWS prop. It seems to spin pretty well but I can't really tell much from bench testing. I'll have to actually fly it to see and wind has been too high. Hopefully this weekend I'll see if it works better or worse. The blade is certainly sturdier near the hub.
Sep 07, 2001, 05:55 AM
Here's My 2
Hitec-Redneck's Avatar
I flew mine on stock setup and was thinking about changing props. I then went to 6 720nimh batteries and now won't change the prop because it flys fine stock. The only beefing up I did was to add 1/16 inch balsa to the wing struts, which stiffened them up quite a bit. I read about using alphatic glue on foam and it sure does work. Holds better than any other glues I've tried.

Also the 720 batteries increased my flight time from 3 min (110mah) to over 25 minutes.
My 2

[This message has been edited by Hitec-Redneck (edited 09-07-2001).]
Sep 07, 2001, 09:35 AM
Registered User
Darn, a 6-cell 720mAh NiMH pack is awfully tempting. I just hate the idea of almost doubling the weight over a 270mAh pack on the TM, which floats so well on a light pack. Let's see, 270s are .27 oz. each, so 1.62 oz. for a 6-pack vs. 720s at .46 oz. each or 2.76 oz. total. Hmmm, not really doubling the weight, but just adding a little over an ounce. Hmmmm ......
Sep 07, 2001, 10:19 AM
Registered User
mattk17's Avatar
I would think 6 cell nimh would not be enough to really drive the tmoth. I thought you'd want 7 cells if using nimh and that would put the pack weight at over 3 ounces.

I assume you are referring to the sanyo AAA numh cells? How much did the pack cost and where did you get yours? Also, where would that bigger pack fit in the tmoth?
Sep 07, 2001, 10:30 AM
in persuit of low wing loading
Gordon Johnson's Avatar
I'm flying the TM with 7x110 Nicads and just recently with 8x270 NiMH. So far I haven't burned out the motor, but it could still happen. I have a couple of spare motors coming in case this proves too much. If I burn out the motor on the 8x270 then I'll remove one cell from the pack. I also have a couple of heat sinks coming, as this is supposed to really help motor life according to GWS. I'll let you know. The 270 seems to be a nice trade off between more flying time without too much additional weight.

[This message has been edited by gjohnson (edited 09-07-2001).]