"The Pinto" Flying Models Dec '72

When the Pinto was introduced, the engine of choice was the TD. Personally, a Norvel would be a much better choice for this plane and a .061 at that. This is one that has always been on my to do list. I've built a few Orientals and have done the ARF route (It's easier to build) and I enjoyed them all. This is one where weight is exceptionally important. I've seen one of these fly and sure enough it has the same characteristics as the larger version. Ken

Thanks Mark,

No need to apologize. $75 is a good chunk of change.

I like kits because it gets me in the air faster, don't get me wrong as I like to build too. With a kit it's all there except wheels engine and tank. If one was to source all the bits separately it would cost a lot more. Trust me I have done it   

Buying kits keeps the very small amount of CL suppliers in business.

If someone has excess parts and materials then it makes perfect sense to scratchbuild. I haven't scratched anything bigger than 1/2A.

Ken,

It would be nice to have a fully capable 1/2A stunter. I know of only a couple out of the box full fuse kit's that are fully aerobatic. I wonder why it never took off? Maybe it's a wind thing.

Ron

Cribbs74 wrote: $75 is a good chunk of change.

I like kits because it gets me in the air faster, don't get me wrong as I like to build too. With a kit it's all there except wheels engine and tank. If one was to source all the bits separately it would cost a lot more. Trust me I have done it   

Buying kits keeps the very small amount of CL suppliers in business.

If someone has excess parts and materials then it makes perfect sense to scratchbuild. I haven't scratched anything bigger than 1/2A.

Ron

True. But, I just sat down with my insurance agent yesterday to review my car and house policies. Saving money is getting more important these days. So, using up the spare wood, wheels, and wire I have on hand is getting more attractive than saving build time. I'm fixed for engines for a good while, also. About the only thing I'm lacking on is space to put all these planes once finished.

The Scrimping Mark

Sure Mark,

I totally understand. I was speaking in general.

Like I mentioned if you have stuff it only makes sense to use it.

Cribbs 74.......
 
 I really like the lines on this one!  It is similar to the "Nobler" and that is saying a lot! I saw the Nobler fly way back in the middle 50's so it must have been one of the first in Southern Cal.

 I've had the full size Nobler kit sitting & waiting to build along with a Fox 35. I've built the profile 1/2A Nobler with an 049 TD but havnt flown it yet.
 I think the "Pinto" will be on the build list soon and I am wondering if the Cox 09 Mediallion would be a good choice for it?????

  RK Flyer   

RK,

To be honest I am not sure how the .09 would do. It's heavier than the TD .049 by 1.25oz so some balancing would have to be done. On the other hand the plane itself is close in size to a .15 size plane. The .09 may be a good fit.

Looking at the pictures there isn't a lot of room in the nose, but I am sure it can be modified a little.

Try it!

Ron

Wow, thanks for digging this one up Ron. I was out playing all day and just came in from painting the Skyray, so only now have been able to catch up on my reading. What a little beauty. I wish I thought I was capable of doing it justice. The closest I've ever come to considering a serious 1/2A stunter is Jim Thomerson's Cheap Thrill, Model Aviation, December 1988. It too is Tee Dee powered. I like the Oriental look of the Pinto better though. I've heard the name before but never known what it was till now.
Rusty

Doing it justice?

In which way? Building or flying? Don't make me send you one Bro.   

Seriously though, it's a cool little plane. Maybe one day, but it's not on the top of my list.

Cribbs74 wrote:Doing it justice?

In which way? Building or flying? Don't make me send you one Bro.   

Seriously though, it's a cool little plane. Maybe one day, but it's not on the top of my list.

Building. It might be over my skill level. I know I can fly it.

RknRusty wrote:

Cribbs74 wrote:Doing it justice?

In which way? Building or flying? Don't make me send you one Bro.   

Seriously though, it's a cool little plane. Maybe one day, but it's not on the top of my list.

Building. It might be over my skill level. I know I can fly it.

Apparently you need to review your build threads Mr. Cloverleaf.   

Cribbs74 wrote:RK,

To be honest I am not sure how the .09 would do. It's heavier than the TD .049 by 1.25oz so some balancing would have to be done. On the other hand the plane itself is close in size to a .15 size plane. The .09 may be a good fit.

Looking at the pictures there isn't a lot of room in the nose, but I am sure it can be modified a little.

Try it!

Ron

With that big 36" wingspan, I think I'd go for a Medallion .09 myself. The mounting holes are only 1/8" wider, and to keep the prop backplate in the same position, you'd move the engine back 3/8", so if I built tail heavy as I usually do, it might just work out fine. And, wouldn't you just know, I finished rebuilding a Medallion .09 this evening. How's that for coincidence?

The Serendipitous Mark

Cribbs74 wrote:

Ken,

It would be nice to have a fully capable 1/2A stunter. I know of only a couple out of the box full fuse kit's that are fully aerobatic. I wonder why it never took off? Maybe it's a wind thing.

Ron

I was looking thorough the 1/2 A range and wondered the same thing. I have noticed though that the competition stunt planes have got bigger and bigger - a lot of engines now seem to be 90s.

I wondered if the lack of fully aerobatic pattern 1/2A s is more to do with line length and flying speed.

I feel that one reason is that 1/2A never gained wide popularity is size. The other is that 1/2A is a major pain for some requiring high nitro fuels which just eats the paint right off of your model. Even the most experienced users run into difficulty and they're just not reliable like modern stuff available today. This is why 1/2A combat didn't gain popularity with TD's. It was done, but they just can be a pain. Newer ball bearing .049's run like F2D .15's. They start immediately and run on 10% fuels. There's a lot of work in the Pinto and it's quite small which requires the hands and skills of a free flight builder. Some of my club members have hands of stone. The TD and Medallion was the engine choice. You can bet they were using a double bypass cylinder and not a single. Many times the articles are over inflated and many times the cons were not discussed. Having that muffler on the TD was more than likely a attempt to keep the TD in check . One thing about the TD is that it can be very problematic to run in stunt. This Pinto is like the Oriental which was flown by the Fox .35. You need your best TD to do so just like having your best Fox. Not only for reliability but for power. A modern Norvel would be the best choice. They run high rpm's but can be tamed far superior to the TD and use less fuel. The .09 in my opinion is almost twice the weight of a .049. Not a good thing here and it's going to use more fuel which requires a larger tank. Not saying it wouldn't work, but a .061 Norvel can make as much power . It's quite difficult to read the fine print in this article but they clearly discuss the issue of using .008 lines. I'm sure this is a key factor in it's flying characteristics. Ken

I have four Norvels of various stripes, and I agree that they'd be a good fit for the plane.  The thing is, I just don't like them as much.  I bet that if I ever did just bolt one on and give them a fair shake I'd like them.  Just that they're not a Cox.  And I just love my Cox engines....

The Fanboy Mark

Mark,

In the pictures that you took at the July 5th. Fun Fly In, you have one of Mark Hanson's 09 Powered "All American"  ( Dmeco's 1950) and I am wondering if you had time to watch him fly it. Mark can really make it sing going thru all of the stunt patterns with ease. Its smaller than the Pinto with a wing span of 26" & area of 140 sq.in. & fuse is 131/4".

I have the plans for it & will be building 1 soon ....But I really like the Idea of the Pinto with the 09.  Where can I get the Plans for the Pinto ?

Thanks, RK Flyer   

RK Flyer wrote:
I have the plans for it & will be building 1 soon ....But I really like the Idea of the Pinto with the 09.  Where can I get the Plans for the Pinto ?

RSM might have full sized plans, since they sell a kit. I was just going to use the scan from the RCU thread in post #2 above and blow up the picture to the right scale. The lines will be fuzzy, but good enough to build from. That's how I build half of my planes. Just blow up a drawing, and then fair along the lines to get my working drawings. But I like that kind of thing.

The Fuzzy Mark

I read the title and thought you were talking about this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzv4q5EEy1k

RK Flyer wrote:Mark,

In the pictures that you took at the July 5th. Fun Fly In, you have one of Mark Hanson's 09 Powered "All American"  ( Dmeco's 1950) and I am wondering if you had time to watch him fly it. Mark can really make it sing going thru all of the stunt patterns with ease. Its smaller than the Pinto with a wing span of 26" & area of 140 sq.in. & fuse is 131/4".

I have the plans for it & will be building 1 soon ....But I really like the Idea of the Pinto with the 09.  Where can I get the Plans for the Pinto ?

Thanks, RK Flyer   

Hi Richard, I PM'd you on May 26th... the message is still in my "outbox". Have you made the move to the East coast yet?