Reverend Russ

My SX is running at 720 temp @125,000 rpm

Russ

Tom Antlfinger

My Feedback: (24)

Hi Russ:

Did you record any slam throttle temps from idle to full throttle?

Gordon Mc

My Feedback: (11)

From my discussions with Bob, the 160 SE and the 160 SX are not the same motor by another name - they are different motors.

Reverend Russ

No, but I was watching the GSU during throttle up and don't recall it going over 720 and dropping down to it. I do remember at full throttle it getting to about 715 and slowly crawling it's way up to 720 over 2 or 3 seconds.

Hope this helps,

Russ

GSR

My Feedback: (145)

Right Gordon, The 160 SE and 160 SX are different motors. OTOH the 160 SE and the Titan SE are the same motors, just different names for EU and US. Scott

Tom Antlfinger

My Feedback: (24)

Thanks for the info Gordon.......I thought the 160 SE listed on the German site was similar or identical to the USA Titan SE, but never saw 125K listed as the max RPM for a JetCat USA Titan SE, so wasn't sure if they were referring to the 160 SX......

Anyone know why USA versions of Titan SE are limited to 123K if Germany lists their 160 SE at 125K? Are they or are they not identical motors? Any reliability/longevity/temps data comparing 123 vs 125 vs 128K available?

Just wondering since both my experience and several other guys in the area with both Titan SE's and Standard Titan's serial #896 and newer have been very solid motors at max 123K.....

Reverend Russ

The 160 and the Titan are the same turbine. The Titan is limited to 123k for EXTRA reliablity. Thrust is not everything...reliability is! Although the P160 has been very reliable, the rock solid Titan will continue to be sold limited to 123K. This is why the Titan SX is coming out, for those who are looking for the same basic size, weight, reliablity with a few more ponies. Not every jet suited for a Titan needs a SX but the option is here for those who need a little more grunt.

Russ

Tom Antlfinger

My Feedback: (24)

Thrust and reliability is what I want as I fly heavy jets off a grass field.......I am very familiar with JetCat, having owned them since 1999 with my first P-80...I still own 2 ancient P-120's, the most reliable turbines in existence, IMO...I had a substantial period of irritation......burned up motors, long service intervals, etc. with the P-160 fiasco a few years back......it was then that 128K was first authorized, then down to 125K, then down to 123K, and then down to 121K for reliability.....then factory conversion to Titan with continued problems......throughout these several years, Bob Wilcox has been outstanding in his service and now I have that old 160/Titan, serial 364 running beautifully at 123K in my new BVM F-100D....so I trust it....

I just get a little anxious when I hear 125K or even 128K to get those "extra ponies"......everyone knows the RPM vs Temp curves start going exponential much above 120K......and then you better have a rear end(wheel and NGV) and combustor ready for the hots......

My questions......what exactly are the differences between 160SX and Titan SE other than updated kero start that would allow them to run at 125K or even 128K to get the extra ponies.....same diffusor, compressor, combustor, wheel and NGV or not.....same bearings?.....what is thrust comparison of SE and SX at 123K?......

I fully understand JetCat USA's limit on Titan SE to 123K on U.S motors......they are responsible for that long warranty now......but it does beg the question...."Does reliability really deteriorate that much by going to 125K on an SE, picking up at least 2 more lbs of thrust" and bringing it solidly into the 160N class of motors.......or phrased differently, "Is JetCat Germany selling less reliable motors to the European flyers at 125K?

Gordon Mc

My Feedback: (11)

Tom - my understanding is that the important parts such as the turbine wheel are manufactured a bit differently, to allow them to be run that bit harder without sacrificing reliability. If I recall correctly, there's more machining and less casting, or something like that. Sorry if that's a bit vague, but I'm going from a hazy memory and don't want to pass on misleading info. A call to Bob might be your best bet if you want more details of the diff's.

patf

My Feedback: (4)

Tom

like gordon i seem to remember reading something about JC using a new 4 axis mill for components in the SX.

Harley Condra

My Feedback: (4)

Tom,
As Bob explained it to me at FJ, the new P160-SX has numerous differences from the Titan SE.
It is an enhanced vesrsion of the P160-SE.

The new P160-SX has an all new 5 axis machined aluminum compressor wheel with a higher pressure ratio than the Titan SE. The machined compressor is the reason the P160-SX is safely capable of higher RPM's.
It adds a little more safety margin.

It also follows the throttle commands almost without any delay.

The new P160-SX features an all new axially mounted kerostart hot surface element that is mounted in a cooler place in the combustor for added service life and relaibility. There is no external glo plug, cable or hole through the case.

The new V6.3 ECU features an "Auto power down" function, that allows you to switch the engine power off after landing without disturbing the cool down cycle. The ECU will stay powered up, and finish the cool down cycle and then auto power down.
It's a pretty impressive engine, and if it has the same reliability that JetCat is famous for, it should be one hell of an engine.
I looked at one at FJ, and plan on getting one very soon.

Tom Antlfinger

My Feedback: (24)

To change the drift abit......how did the kero start work on the UL.....I presume very well since no negative comments heard so far about it.....that is why I asked about the G-Booster since it seems they have had good luck with a similar kerostart system with the relocated igniter.....what battery were they shipping with the SX?

Don't like to bother Bob.....he's busy and Matt and the rest of you Cali guys often have the skinnies on the early production models.....

I probably could have had all my questions answered at FJ, but had to miss this year.....all info is from my buddies who were there and were impressed enough to order 5 or 6 160SX total so far......

seanreit

My Feedback: (60)

This is not cheap to do, and it takes a really long time. Kudos to whoever put it together, someday if I have access to a machine like this, I am going to try to make one, there are some discussions related to it at cnczone.com for those that have interest. If turbofan is going to be achieved for us, I would think this might be the way to go about it (5 axis).

Tom Antlfinger

My Feedback: (24)

That's good info Harley.......lots can be gained by improving the front end........Wren has proved that with their Compressor/Diffusor technology on the 54 SS which rockets my BobCat ARF around......

Looks like they still have a localizer bolt thru the old glowplug hole to locate the can

Kelly's masterpiece Rainbow Hun may be getting a new flamethrower before long.....

mr_matt

My Feedback: (10)

You should bother Bob!

Most (AFAIK) of what has been said on this thread is correct, the P-160SX is a new turbine, but getting into the detail behind every nut and bolt can be troublesome. Also, the exact production price has not been finalized. 2 spec'd units are flying in the US now, and maybe another 2 or 3 "hybrids" (converted Titans) are running as well. The demand for this turbine will be huge, I have already warned Bob and the Germans as well.

Just to clarify the lineage, the original P-160 morphed into the Titan, and then the Titan became the european P-160 SE. Now, RPM is the only difference, but this was not always the case.

In other words, the Titan was first with all of the enhancements, not the other way around. Throw into the mix many "hybrid" configurations through the years and you can see how trying to make blanket statements online can be troublesome and confusing (in no way the customer's fault!!)

I have seen this new compressor design first hand, all the way up to sizes that would easily fly a small experimental aircraft. Amazing.

Tom Antlfinger

My Feedback: (24)

And there were 2 Titan versions.....I have one about #300 something and the other #1100 something.....as I recall talking to Bob or one of the wrenches at the shop, the later upgradeable models had a beefier NGV and a couple other enhancements over the pre-896 version which could not be economically updated....I presume the earlier Titans were euro P-160 and the later Titans were the euro 160 SE......

Still very confusing with lack of info.......a bit frustrating since anyone really interested in differences could readily disassemble the motor.........it would seem that marketing would be best served by making clear to all customers exactly what they are paying for when it comes to upgrades, rather than just selling a name change......I don't mean this to implicate only JetCat......most of the motor manufacturers are a bit negligent in this regard, IMO......except maybe for Wren......and I know that one inside and out since I built one.....

Having said all that, IMO, JetCat's kickbutt motor is still the P-180......my fav......I have seen it in pieces and have flown it in my 50 lb UB........absolutely the best work they have done for jet modelers, IMO.....

mr_matt

My Feedback: (10)

Oh please, let's not advocate that!! [EDIT I don't want to encourage people to take apart their turbines just for the sake of doing, some do that no matter what I would say!]

OK Tom, I will dig into this for P-160 issue for you. SN 300 to SN 1100 for a Titan sounds like a lot, but I will make the time to figure it out for you. I will answer via PM

mr_matt

My Feedback: (10)

.

George

My Feedback: (57)

Tom,

The starts in Darcy's UL were uneventful with just the occassional popping and such to let you know it was working . I'm not sure about his battery, but I do think he swapped it out during the weekend. He'd have to answer the question of whether it was the original Titan battery or not that he swapped out.

I do have a Booster 160, but just do not have much time on it, but can speak on the starting. The starts of the GB are absolutely silky smooth. As I mentioned in the ES thread, the starts are so seemless that I question if anything is even happening when I command the start sequence, it was a little nerve-racking at first.

Both engines are VERY similiar, but I think the GB was ahead of its time.

George

rcguy!

My Feedback: (69)

Any updates on when deliveries will begin for those that have this on order?

Dave

heraldoboldrin

how much weight the ultra lightning with the 160SX?? the flight is difference from the old lightning??

JoeEagle

My Feedback: (26)

I am just getting ready to start my Lightning build. I have an SX on order. From the sounds of the beginning of the thread, it appears that the extra fuel tank is in order. do you all agree??? do i need the extra tank in the Lighting? (waiting on my coupon for the Ultra Wings and Stab).

thanks in advance.

sc0tt

My Feedback: (61)

From my Lightning experience, no 3rd tank - keep it light. The stock tanks hold 5.8L. My Lightning is heavy at 35.75 lbs dry & uses a Titan. I fly 10 minutes easily, not counting startup, taxi out & taxi back. After my 10 minute flights, the tanks are between 1/2 - 1/3 full, depending on the average flight speed. I could probably stretch to 15 minutes.

Food for thought...check out BV's fuel cell addendum for the Ultra Bandit with P180. With the large 6.2L tanks they get 17 minutes. They suggest using the smaller 4.8L tanks for 9 minutes. It's all about saving weight.

Hopefully there will be a P-160SX to drool over at the upcoming Winamac meet???

heraldoboldrin

I think that lightning with Titan will be lighter 34lbs maximum.. what is your setup?? (servos, batteries, regulator.....)
They need to do a Smaller tank to fly with Titan, 5.8L is to much...

mu2driver

My Feedback: (15)

The UL i was flying was right at 35# empty, and we didnt use the aux tank. Timer was set at 8mins and we flew it WOT most of the time, with very little fuel to spar, enough to do a couple go arounds I would guess.