da Rock

4 strokes are cool sounding. They are more expensive however, weigh more and there is more to maintain.

I've flown my Tiger2 and Calmato with both the 46AX and 55AX. I doubt anyone on the ground could tell which engine was in the air. About the only time I noticed was on straight climbs. They really don't happen too often. And even then, the 46 has absolutely no problem with tear drops, humpty bumps, or anything with verticals.

I fly 5% nitro in all my glow engines in the winter. In the middle of summer, I'll usually switch over to 10%. When it gets real hot, I'll use 15% or if I'm visiting a field that's in the mountains. Nitro provides oxygen. It also burns with less heat. It's better in the summer than low nitro fuel for helping the engine run cooler and with better power. It's not needed in the winter. There is no real magic to fuel brands. I use Omega with and without castor. With castor in the summer when it's easier to fly with too lean a needle. But it's not a big deal. Synthetic fuel is cleaner and provides excellent lubrication. I make sure to run some synthetic every so often in all my planes to help clean out the castor buildup. Also not a big deal.

tony0707

the Tiger 2 is built very excellent with its very little flexing light plywood fuse and large wing
i aquired one with very little damagemade it a tail drager
i run a Webra 61 champion speed in mineold school very powerful 61 ( turns 1000 more RPMS on the same prop as my OS 61 SF )
i would run a 55 AX or 65 AX ( depending on weight needed ) if i was needing a newer engine design for the airframe
the 55 AX and all the OS AX series of engines just produce more power for an OS than any engines of the same size did in the past
i fly a 75 AX in my 60 size Stikmost powerful 75 i have used myself
do remember to add more engine if you need nose weight to balance well
i run 15 % morgan omega fuel and recommend you do the same for long engine life (need the castor oil )
you made a very good choice for a second plane really good flying smooth aircraft
welcome back to the hobby !

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

Yes and it is substancial and one only needs to look recommended props are for the 55AX and the forty six. The middle of the road reccomended sport prop for the 55AX is 12x7/8. This is even more propellor than most sixtys will pull and much more prop than either the 46FX (dicontinued) 46AX series 1 (discontinued with possibly some still in the pipeline) and the 46AX series 11 will handle. The 12x 8 is what I use on the Ultimate biplane I pictured in my earlier post.

At your elevations for two strokes 10% is fine 15% becomes much more desirable when density altitudes go past about 3000 MSL and over 5000 and up, 25% can make the differeance in even being able to fly.

Oh and the The 55AX is a drop in for the 46AX which means on your airplane there are no modifications needed at all.

You have never really made it clear if your listed options were existing engines or you were going to buy. Now if you opt for a 46AX you need to be sure and make sure you are getting the series 11 and not the series I. The series 11 is a totally different carburation system and in particular the midrange setup and the new one is far better than the old carbs of the FX series as alway of course just my opinion.



John

Invasionhunter

I am looking at the new engines and the OS .46 I was looking at is the series II. Now you all have me interested in the .55 though as I have always been a speed junkie. I just don't want to go overboard engine wise with just getting back in the hobby. Won't the .55 change my landing speed a bit or would it be the same? Is it a slow easy landing plane as it is?

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

Yes of course it will if in fact it actually weights more the the typical four strokes or the older 61 two strokes the fellows tend to hang on the Tiger but thats not normally the case.

The 55 will not turn you Tiger in to an overweight goat. It is in fact the perfect (there goes that opinion thing sneaking in agine) engine for your airplane.

And yes Your airplane has for years been my recomendation for the best second or low wing airplane.


John

lkruse

My Feedback: (42)

The prop is a Master Air Screw 11X7, which seems to be just right.

Sport_Pilot

A Fox .50 weighs the same as most .46 AX and has almost the power of a 55 AX.  Better carb as well.

jp1961

I'd consider the Aviastar .46 from SIG. At 49.95 it's hard to beat. Once its broke it, it's a good running engine. Have on in my Falcon III on floats, didn't dead stick once this summer.

Jeff

[email protected]

My Feedback: (1)

stay with the 46 i use 10% cool power but i have not seen any differnt with the other fuels ck with your local flying field see what they got everyone likes what they got no matter what engine or fuel

spd101

Evolution. 52 would be perfect, I have 3 evolution engines and they are awesome

mmassey

start with the os 46. I had a super tiger 40 on my old one and it was a little slow. I just finished building a new one today need to cover it yet. Going to cover it with ultra coat, probabily the orange with the white strips. I found out the hard way that I can't see matalic blue when it's comming straight at me. That's why I built a new one. I do like that navy theme on the other post. It gave me an idea on the canopy.

Mike

bikerbc

You are going to need to add weight to the nose of your Tiger anyway they are almost always tail heavy so the OS 55 is not going to add any weight to the plane...They are just a tiny bit heavier than the 46 anyway....The only reason I promote the OS46's is because I have had better luck with my 46 motors...They just run better for me although the OS55's run great too...John is probably rite , the OS 55 might be a better choice..Its a toss up really...But you will not save any weight with the OS 46....

JollyPopper

My Feedback: (6)

I have just an interesting observation here. I bought an OS .70FL by mistake. I bought it on the internet and assumed the seller had made a typo, meaning FS instead of FL. When I got it, I realized it was not the FS series I was used to seeing. I did some research on it at that point and found that it was the poor man's OS .70 four stroke engine. It had an air bleed carburetor and non-ringed piston to make it cheaper. I further found that it weighed just 19 ounces with the muffler installed (I believe that is what it weighed, but my memory is not perfect). And the most amazing thing I discovered is that it has exactly the same mounting pattern as most .46 engines. Sooooo, I was looking for a plane to put it on. I was building another Sig 4*40 at the time and decided to try it on that plane. It is a dream to fly. It has the sound and torque of a four stroke but power of a .46 two stroke. I have never had a Tiger 2, but I suspect they are pretty similar in size and flight characteristics.

In my research, I discovered this is a love it or hate it kind of engine. A little search here or on other sites will reveal a lot of criticism of the engine, but I had it and was determined to use it. It has one unique feature in that it has two nipples on the muffler, one to pressurize the tank and the other to blow some lubrication back into the crankcase. A lot of people say this engine will self destruct early, and it might. I have only flown mine a half dozen times or so, but I really like the combination of engine/airplane.

bikerbc

I have flowen both the OS46 and the OS55 on the Tiger 2 and to be honest you will be hard pressed to tell the difference in power...The 55 does have a tiny bit more but I sure did not find it to be a very big differance...What I did find was my 46 would always start by hand , was very easy on fuel , I always got comments on how quiet it was. It is very easy to tune but seldom needs tuning...

[email protected]

My Feedback: (1)

i have 3 os 46 all hand start very good engines