Thanks so much for the heads up again, so i have more choices now, will see what the seller has with him...

Need a Bonito making 11 minutes in this track...

http://idrett.speaker.no/Organisatio...7&CatId=982322

I am doing 1130 with my +4, lightly modiyfied ;-) Aprox 40 second laptimes and the track is fast! I did 12:30 with my best OS V-spec engines.

That's awesome, what's your set up: Car, tank, restrictor, plug, fuel, ect....?

That engine is not possible to buy, even from Huston, CRE or anyone. Only one person as i know have theese engines and he have helped me meka one.

Os-vspec engine. Crono 2032 pipe. The 2032 pipe on this combo makes the engine hit the pipe a bit hard but on this track it is not a huge problem. Nitrothane 30% fuel, Losi Car ( somehow that car use less fuel than many others...) OS p6 glowplug as a 3 or 4 is just to warm to get the best fuell milage.


My +4 is a BTT team engine lightly tuned by my self. I am not a skilled tuner like MOnty, Murnan or CRE, but it is better than stock. Crono 2032 pipe. Meccamo 25% fuel. C6tgc glowplug. Standard compression. I use a IDRC restrictor as they help a bit with fuelconsumption too. Problem is that the OS speeds are fatser so i need more topend on that LONG staright :-)

Clutch setup is important also, but i do not remember what clutch i used.

Moast important is how you use your throttlefinger. If you press to hard you get wheelspin, and less runtime. The harder you have your clutch engament, the more fuel you will use. A friend of mine ( best driver here ) switched from 0.95mm spring on his Kysoho to 1.0mm springs and lost 30 seconds runtime..

Lots of good info, Thank you!!

Hey, anyone know the difference in the Nova Plus4 Btta, the Btts, and the Btt?

They all share ths exact same parts Reggie

Btta steel f/r , btt ceramic rear/steel front , btts ceramic f/r

Nova carburetors
 

I got some information that Nova stopped producing 24063 carb and has replaced it with 24069. Is it true? i'm currently using BTTS with 24063, what will be the advantage of using 24069? should I replace it? I'm all for fuel mileage.... If there's anybody with knowledge on this, your information will be appreciated.

On the exploded partssheet fromn Novarossi dated 6/6-12 it is 69 carb on engines produced after this date.

But i`d like to know how i can identyfy witch carb i have? Monty...

The only difference that I know of is the part of the carb that goes into the engine on the 69 is metal where the 63 was plastic. So unless you take your carb on and off all the time it won't matter which carb you have. The 63 will deform slightly if you crank down on the carb bolt too many times or make it too tight.

Thanks.
There are several differences between carbs, if i rember correctly 63 or 65 carb has a different internal volume. This again affects fuel economy and how the engine tunes. There is a lot more to the carbs than what meets the eye.

Thought so, thank you!!

Thanks for the info. So can i say both carburators are identical except for the neck section material? No different in tuning characteristic?

There is a .5mm internal difference between the two in the exit (bottom side) of the carb , not noticeable in the tuning , yes one of the carb bodies (063) is composite material all the way from the bottom to the slide barrel and one (069) is lined with metal and machined instead of molded .

Never fear its a non issue

If he were asking about a 63 and 65 I'd say you are correct but he was asking about a 63 and 69:D

Ya that ones a wee bit "different" Pauly ;)

Then the Question:

Does the 65 use less fuel and how does it tune comared to 63 and 69? I have asked before but it was when Nova announced it. Now, maybe someone have experience with it :-)

The 65 in theory is supposed to use less fuel. I have one on my clockwork btt and on some track I've been able to run 12 minutes full to empty. I never tired the stock carb on it so I can't tell you if it would be just as good on milage or not. The top end needle usually ends up in a similar place as the stock carb but since the low speed is so much different it's tricky to get set from the beginning. It super buried in but that's normal because of the different look of the slide. The smaller restrictor you use like any carb it will be more sensitive to needle adjustments.

I often switch between 63 and 65 depending on track location. Since 65 is 7mm carb it uses less fuel to mix with air to get perfect mixture (63 is 9mm) Given the same track (45 seconds track) i can get 14 min with 65 compared to 12 min with 63. However, when i race at high altitude, its very difficult for me to get the tune right with 65. The room for error is very small. 63 is a lot more forgiving. 65 is smoother at the low end. And the low end needle with 65 is almost all the way in. Hope its useful. I havent tried 69 yet so i cant compare.

wow 14min with the 65 carb..... are you using 5.4/5.2 venturi or smaller one??
can't even get the tuning right for this carb maybe due to my hot wheather

deleted

I always use 5.4 ventury. Im not saying its the best but when i first switched to BTTS, i started with 5.4 and 9901 pipe and stick with them. Never tried other combination. I find it 'easier' to tune when its closer to sea level with 65 But when i race on higher ground, i'd rather use 63. Anybody know anything about 69 carb?

Other than this new carb, does Novarossi have anything new they're coming out with in 2013?

I tried the 9901 with the 41021 in Australia and can't believe what a waste of money that pipe was. Very disappointed in the performance. Lost heaps of top end and bottom was ok. But only okay. I will order a 9886 or 9853 with a 41001 header and see how that goes, hope I'm not wasting more money on bad advise.


I usually run the 2096/41021 combo and it seems reasonably good. Want more over all grunt though.

Didnt you ask about EFRA legal pipes?

Neither of the two you mentioned are EFRA legal

Good luck to you

9853ss/41001 is a very good buggy torque setup bug not EFRA approved ;)

Wow, just a little harsh on Houston don't you think? He helps out a lot of people on here easy rhere bud.

I was running the 9901/21 setup with the roma and tried the 9853/41001 and performance was alot better especially top end will be sticking with that setup in my 6TR for 2013:nod:unless a bonito comes my way!
9901/21 better for buggy I reckon:confused:
for more grunt try softer clutch springs,shoes/smaller bell/thicker diff fluids/softer tires and up your carb insert, take your crank out get a hobby tool give it a good polish (less friction happy engine) that usually works for me:nod:

I really think the track surface plays a huge role in which pipe a person would prefer..... We run on very high bite and I dislike the 2096/41021 combo as it lacks bottom end power for my taste.... I find the 9901/41021 lacks too much top end for my taste...... Swap the 9901 to a 41001 manifold and it wakes up on top a fair bit and seems to even snap better in the bottom....but its still nothing impressive IMHO...... As soon as you have some real traction you can really see which pipes make good power and which ones do not........We have a very short run triple and it gives us a great reference point for which combo's make the bottom end power and which ones do not, add in we have a 180' straight rolling into a wide open sweeper, so we get to see the top end too...........For me on the BTT the 9886/41001 offered it all, it could pop the triple with ease and rings like a banshee down the straight,...good luck trying to clear our triple with a 2096/41001.... it just does not have the grunt to do it, the 9901/41021 will clear the triple but gets eaten alive down the straight............i just do not like the 41021 manifold on these engines, as it really doesn't make enough power for my track conditions......to me it makes the engines feel lazy......But until you run on a track with grip like mine you just couldn't understand........imagine a surface with so much grip your shoes squeak when you kick your feet, and where a truggy with a OS 25 can't even spin the tires from a dead stop...... I Am not saying those combo's are bad, but they certainly don't offer the strongest performance, they are IMO lazy !

about 4MPH better top speed swapping the 41001 in place of the 41021 on the stock BTT with 9901...bottom end seemed slightly better as well..... IMO the 41001 wakes the 9901 up pretty substantially over the 41021.....

Before I get anyone all fired up I am under the belief that the surface you run on play a huge role in what pipe your going to prefer.........High bite surfaces and slick surfaces are radically different loads to our engines....And how a 2 stroke engine reacts and throttles is very dependent on the load load placed upon the engine.....Different pipes and headers will react differently depending on the load working against the engine...so what is ideal on slippery tracks may not be ideal on high bite tracks and visa versa....Also to factor into it is the reactivity of the fuel being used...some fuels are naturally extremely crispy and other fuels are much less crispy........Some will look towards using a bottom end pipe and long manifold to overcome the laziness of a high oil fuel or low nitro fuel........whereas with a reactive fuel we can run more top end oriented setups and still have all the crispy low end throttle response we can handle........

Ofna 086 its cheaper and has great all round power.

Hmm
 

My most favorite setup is the 9853ss with the 41005 manifold. I started out with the 41001 and it was great, but the slightly longer header makes that 9853 even better overall. it barely fits length wise in my Mugen though.

for sure, but the durability doesn't match the 9886 Super Strongs we have... Plus they do have a different feeling powerband....the OFNA pipe is a little more on/off the 9886 is a little smoother...similar overall power tho....

I currently run the 9886/41001 combo on many tracks and really like it. I don't like how the 41001 makes the pipe hit my fuel tank. I was told the 41019 makes the same power as the 41001 but angles the pipe away from the fuel tank. Anyone else notice this?

I agree anyone on a budget and want to try its a great option. I run this pipe @ times its a performer

:nod::nod::nod: bang for the buck is amazing !!!

Yes, we have noticed this also on some cars Dan and I prefer using the 41019, just on my Serpents to give it a touch more clearance. Just remember that the 41019 does not come with header to pipe short springs so you will have to buy them separately (NOV60003). The 41001 comes with them.

Put two wodden pices inside your header, and you can bend your header to any angle you need. A "little adjustment" needed on many heaers :-)

totally agree track surface is a massive factor, there is a huge difference on our track between running a dry surface or every few races sprinkled with water and your setup will be adjusted to suit, we run mostly dry tracks and engine power is alot of the time wasted cause there is so much wheel spin:cry:

You know guys sometimes it pays to be more practical. I'll admit, I'm a power whore, but pretty much every .21 on the market is already too much power for most of us who race. I've run a lot of powerful engines over the years and I seem to go faster on the track when I run a stock less powerful engine, whether it's on high bite low bite, high altitude, low altitude wherever. I guess it all depends on what your purpose is, bashing, drag racing, or off road racing. I'll be the first one to say it's cool as hell to see your car fly past everyone down the straight, but the straight is the smallest part of the track. The real time on a track is almost always made up in the infield. The last few times I spoke to Adam Drake at a race he was running the 9901 with the 41021 header. One race was indoor high bite, one was outdoor medium bite, and another was indoor low bite. I've been running that same combo on my P5XLT and Bonito for about six months now with great results. I have no problem making big jumps out of corners, I don't get pulled down the straight, and my runtimes are good. I am looking forward to trying the 41001 though. Not trying to ruffle anybody's feathers but I think sometimes we forget more isn't always better.....

On another note, even though we may not always agree on things, Monty Houston's engine, pipe, clutch set up advice has been pretty spot on IMHO!