logo 600 sx vs old 600 3d

[ofaingu]

what is really the diference? is it worth buying the "upgrades"?is it flying better?


thank you all

[dahld]

If you are an aggressive 3D pilot, then you'll be more likely to appreciate the design changes (the main ones are larger dampeners in the head, stronger gear train with the taller main gear and counter bearing / third main shaft bearing, and stronger tail hub).

But like most of us mortal types, if you're not stripping gears, punishing head dampeners so they need replacing often, or throwing tail blades, then the new stuff won't change much for you...other than the shorter main shaft looks cool

Note the design changes are there to try and keep-up with the increase in power systems and desired performance pilots want since the Logo 600 was first designed. They are not there to particularly "fix" any original design flaws.

The SX stuff makes the machine an overall a better heli in the long run though. I think there will come a point when the Logo "600SX", will just replace the Logo "600-3D", and all the "SX" stuff will just become the stock configuration (Just my guess. Nothing official from Mikado on any of that).

(-: Dave

[ofaingu]

Ok understood so what you said are changes that makes my heli last linger but dont change my flight am I correct?

[trickybit]

I like orange.

[dahld]

@ ofaingu

Yes, that's how I see it (-:

Kyle helped prototype the new head and dampening (more or less just tested it after Mikado designed it, to see if it flew well). What I took away from it is, a good pilot will probably feel more change in flight performance (better or worse), by putting on a different set of blades, than by just changing from the old head to the new (the new head though is definitely not worse)

But the new head will remain consistent in it's performance longer, due to the larger dampeners.

(-: Dave

[sandro12321]

Dave, are they making a 500SX or do we just have to buy the upgrade?

[motorcycleguyr1]

Do you have to use the new main gear or can you use the old ones with the new SX head and counterbering setup? I have probably about 5 old ones and would hate to waste them if I dont have to.

[dahld]

@ sandro12321,

I've gotten no wind of a 500SX...but that doesn't mean too much. Sometimes I get advanced info (usually when Kyle's involved in prototyping or testing something). But in the case of a 500SX (due to the commonality of parts between the two helis), I wouldn't necessarily know more than anyone else. And at this point, I've heard nothing.

@ motorcycleguyr1,

There's nothing about the new SX parts (head or CB / third bearing), that "requires" the new main gear. The old main gear is fully compatible with any of the new SX stuff (same auto-rotation one-way bearing is used with the new main gear).

(-: Dave

[sandro12321]

Thanks dave, I'll just buy the upgrades. Is there a big difference in the new tails flight behavior, or is it just "beefier"

[dahld]

Just beefier. The original design handled 95mm tail blades no problem, but was kinda sketchy with 105's when running over 1800-1900 head speeds (part of the reason for the head speed limitation on the Logo 600SE...which uses 105's).

(-: dave

[JohnDoe.]

Originally Posted by dahld

Just beefier. The original design handled 95mm tail blades no problem, but was kinda sketchy with 105's when running over 1800-1900 head speeds (part of the reason for the head speed limitation on the Logo 600SE...which uses 105's).

(-: dave

Great info Dave so with that said what would be a safe head speed for the 600se now ?

[prototype3a]

I had heard that the new counterbearing was required when using the new shorter SX mast...

[trickybit]

Originally Posted by prototype3a

I had heard that the new counterbearing was required when using the new shorter SX mast...

curious to know how those would relate.

[prototype3a]

New shorter mast may not have the groove for the cir-clip? I don't know myself which is why I asked.

[dahld]

@ JohnDoe,

Q: "...what would be a safe head speed for the 600se now ?"

The head speed limitation on the "SE" was originally established due to a variety of factors:

The original Logo 600 head and dampening design was never intended to run the larger 693 disc.

The larger disc puts additional stress on the power train (which it was never originally designed for).

As discussed, the original 600's tail hub was not designed to swing "700 class" tail blades at high head speeds.

Everything else about the Logo 600 (main blade grip size, swash plate size, frame stiffness, main shaft and feathering shaft sizes, tail blade grip size, tail shaft size etc. (get the picture), was never originally designed for "700 class" disc size and the current trend to run 2000+ head speeds, and to beat on the machines as hard as possible.

All this is why Mikado placed the 1800 head speed limit on the "SE", and thus its always been kind-of a "700 lite", never able to be a true hard core 700.

So to get back to your question, just changing one thing (like the tail hub), doesn't make too much difference in what Mikado is going to say about the max head speed limit on the "SE". Adding to an "SE" the new "SX" head, taller main gear and pinion, and the tail hub, will make the "SE" a little more robust for sure.

But it still won't be a true 700, capable of a regular diet of 2000+ head speeds and the abuse aggressive 3D pilots can dish out these days.

And Mikado has yet to (and who knows if they ever will) officially sanction the "SX" new shorter main shaft with the larger "SE" disc. Longer blades and shorter main shafts increase the chances of boom strikes. At this point some are already trying it, but they are on their own.

So at this point, as it's always been and apparently still is, going over 1800 with the "SE" is on the pilot, and not Mikado.

(-: Dave

[mahbouni]

Dave, just out of curiousity, if Edge did some 653mm blades, how well do you think the 600SE would hold up for hard 3D?

[dahld]

Possibly pretty good I'd think. I mean, the standard Logo 600-3D can run 640's stock, so 653's, slightly toned down over "hard 3D" 600-3D head speeds, might workout??

(-: Dave

[mahbouni]

Originally Posted by dahld

Possibly pretty good I'd think. I mean, the standard Logo 600-3D can run 640's stock, so 653's, slightly toned down over "hard 3D" 600-3D head speeds, might workout??

(-: Dave

C'mon ReadyHeli, you know what you need to do

[MarkH]

Originally Posted by prototype3a

I had heard that the new counterbearing was required when using the new shorter SX mast...

It is. Although the new shaft is shorter, the distance from the hole the pin for the tail drive pulley goes through and the c-clip is longer. If you install the tail pulley and main gear, there is still about 1/4" left to the c-clip groove. So unless you want to add a bunch of washer, you need to use the new counterbearing unit.

I just converted my 3D over to the SX. The only issue I had was some missing screws. The washout arms now attach to the head block using m3x20 screws. These also double for tightening the block to the main shaft. The existing screws are m3x14. I had some spares so it was not an issue.

[CyprusFlyer]

Funny thing that, I wasted an hour thinking I had misplaced that pair of M20x3 screws! Cut down some shanked 25mm bolts, looking good.

May need a fresh look at my setup tomorrow, the linkage geometry is not working out. 29mm recommended for the blade grip control rods, nowhere near zero pitch with existing 600 servo rods. Lengthened the servo rods, only worry is 4 to 5mm thread in plastic, new ball joints used so should be OK.

Looks like 40mm rods instead of 30 mm would be better suited for servos. Picture of the upgrade kit shows 3 extra rods, never received those!

Also looking at the washout arm geometry, seems to confirm the swash needs to be a bit higher than my existing setup.