<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">The two I have are both using the recommended A5 plug in both positions. This saves a few bucks over the OSFs. With about 2 gallons through each, 3 of the 4 plugs are still working (one had an early life failure after only a short time). The engine with only one plug working is still running fine. I never replaced the plug, because I'm still being Mr. conservative and running the engine in. On the ground the only difference I can see between the 2 vs. 1 plug is the achievable low end idle. I agree with Jim's observations about the carb. It does not have the same midrange sensitivity that other engines have. I've run a Bolly 120N, AeroSlave, Macs quiet pipe and Mintor pipe and found it tolerated pipe changes easily without affecting midrange.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Testing with other plugs seems unecessary since the A5s produce the power and idling. However, long term life of the plug and cost are also important factors. The Bully 145 two plug head works great with KB1L plugs. One set lasts me several months. This is an inexpensive package, but don't try in on the Webra 145. It seems to benefit from the OSF, but it is a single plug head.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> The only problem with the 170 so far is that at this kind of power, the exhaust seems to be much hotter. I've blown 2 couplers when a gap exists between the header and pipe. But I guess the 4c engines are probably still hotter.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">I'll bring one to the Waco contest in 3 weeks for all you D6 boys to oogle over. I'm painting my Aries#2 now so if it's done I'll have another 170 mounted in there too.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">--Lance</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>"Woodward James R Civ 412 TW/DRP (Test Ops)" <James.Woodward2@edwards.af.mil></b></font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Sent by: discussion-request@nsrca.org</font>
<p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">04/01/2003 12:01 PM</font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Please respond to discussion</font>
<br>
<td><font size=1 face="Arial"> </font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif"> To: discussion@nsrca.org</font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif"> cc: </font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif"> Subject: RE: 3M 170 Flight report</font></table>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 color=#000080 face="Arial">I need to check Eric. There were some I had handy. I was certain that two OSFs were overkill, so in went the A3. The instructions recommend the "OSA5". I'm going to try a number of different plug combinations and check rpms and make other observasions. I have some A5s on order now.</font>
<br><font size=2 color=#000080 face="Arial">Jim</font>
<br><font size=2 color=#000080 face="Arial"> </font>
<br><font size=2 color=#000080 face="Arial"> </font>
<br><font size=2 color=#000080 face="Arial"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Tahoma">-----Original Message-----<b><br>
From:</b> Henderson,Eric [mailto:Eric.Henderson@gartner.com] <b><br>
Sent:</b> Tuesday, April 01, 2003 9:41 AM<b><br>
To:</b> discussion@nsrca.org<b><br>
Subject:</b> RE: 3M 170 Flight report</font>
<br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">How were the plugs after the break-in? My 1.60 with two plugs started to kill the OS F's</font>
<br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">E.</font>
<br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font>
<br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Tahoma">-----Original Message-----<b><br>
From:</b> discussion-request@nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request@nsrca.org]<b>On Behalf Of </b>Woodward James R Civ 412 TW/DRP (Test Ops)<b><br>
Sent:</b> Tuesday, April 01, 2003 11:37 AM<b><br>
To:</b> discussion@nsrca.org<b><br>
Subject:</b> 3M 170 Flight report</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Arial">Hi All,</font>
<br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Arial">This last weekend I installed a 3M 170 in my Alliance. The header attached to the engine with a dual o-ring system that allows for some adjustment. I did not have to bend the header to make it fit correctly. I also used the 3M carbon pipe with header at stock length and ¼" gap between the pipe and header. Saturday afternoon I was ready to break it in: 25% Cool Power Pro-Pattern, OSF in rear, OSA3 in middle, APC 17x10. I primed the engine with 3 flips of my finger over the carb at full throttle and reduced the throttle back to idle. I attached my glow driver to one of the plugs and hit it with the starter. The engine started IMMEDIATELY. I raised the throttle to about ¼ and let it warm up some. I ran it 3 times, 5 minutes each, alternating between low, mid, and full throttle. During the first 5 minute session, the engine seemed to run just fine. It would idle well, has as perfect of a mid-range as you could ever expect from a new engine, and accepted full throttle just fine. The second session performed a little better. At the end of the third 5 minute session, I decided that any more ground running was nonsense, and that this setup was ready to fly. </font>
<br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Arial">Sunday morning I flew 5 flights. Flight one could have been a contest round. The engine flew very nicely and was producing a thick smoke trail. Flight two I leaned the high speed needle a couple of clicks (still producing a thick smoke trail). I tached the engine before flight three, it was turning 8500 rpm (17 x 10) the flight still had a thick smoke trail. Flights 4 and 5 were a pure joy and if it wasn't for having to pack for a move to a new house, I would have stayed at the field.</font>
<br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Arial">In between flight 4 and 5 I forgot to fuel the plane as I was talking about the engine to other folks and such. It took me a second to figure out why the engine stopped. I figured out that the plane was out of fuel pretty quickly, and refueled and resumed flights 4 and 5 without problem. </font>
<br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Arial">I chose the 17 x 10 propeller because I did not want to load the engine too heavily during initial runs (my preference). The plane had unlimited vertical - continuous rolls and snaps on uplines were easily done. Thus far, the most remarkable/impressive thing to me is that the low-end has needed NO adjustment from break-in to flight. Besides running out of fuel, the engine has NEVER quit from break-in to flight unless commanded to by the pilot. First flight was the masters pattern - then some vertical stuff. All positive or negative G, power-on or power-off, inverted or upright, maneuvers, I never heard the engine pop, hesitate, or puff-smoke. The engine was "on" the whole time. For instance, bottom of the center humpty, or bottom of the reverse Cuban 8 with 2/4, bottom of the 3 turn spin - all had smooth throttle when you were ready to advance. The pipe seems to perform very well without obvious jumps onto power or such. I have not checked it with a sound meter, but it seems similar to the ES carbon pipe sound level, but with sort of cross between carbon and AL note to it. </font>
<br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Arial">Everyone that has seen these engines remarks at how beautiful they are, or that "they are a work of art" and this may be an initial selling point. However, I think that as more flight reports emerge, we will see that their performance is what gets them moving. </font>
<br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Arial">Jim W.</font>
<br>
<br>