w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

Good luck with your purchase.

The people that have been more successful with this engine are ones that . . . . Have I.C. engine experience with Glow two and four cycle as well as gas two and four cycle engines of lawn/farm and model airplane use. The reason being is the ability to sort problems with fuel mixture adjustments and being able to recognize carb or ingition problems.

The engine has not been that successful in 3D applications because of the weak nature of the fuel pump and the sensitivity of air/fuel mixture. Warbird and general sport flyers have been well pleased. In an open installation, the engine tends to not be any more heat prone than the glow 125. Some scale people have had heat related problems with the engine because of tight cowling etc.

I have two FG-20's and a FG-36.

One of the big problems with the 1/4-32 plugs in this engine is carbon fouling from rich mixtures

Carbon accumulation on the exhaust valve stem is another problem for some people.

There is nothing like that wonderful Saito four stroke sound. But a two stroke DLE 20 with the Walbro type carb is more simple to operate if you are engine challenged.

Garthwood

That's right, there's nothing like that wonderful Saito four stroke sound. I've been a Saito 4/stroke user for about 7 yrs. I have thought about the two stroke DLE20 engine, but I opted for the Saito FG20 even though I read quite a few negative comments. Those comments are more than a year old. Someone mentioned that Saito updated their carb. My plan is to install the FG20 in the H9 P51 Blue Nose Mustang .60. I do know about the heat problems of in cowl engines and the Mustang cowl requires larger heat outlet.
Thank you for your comment.

w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

That's a great combination and you will enjoy

clytle374

So I've read both threads here, the 50-something page one and this one. Sounds like the FGs can be made to run. Love the idea of 4-stroke gas.

I've been looking at a 60 sized Extra from AeroWorks or Seagull. The closest hobby shop to me recommended the SeaGull and the FG-14 as a good match, and 3d capable. I noticed the Aeroworks seems a bit smaller and lighter with the max engine being a 100 4-stroke, they sell Saito FG-100 on the same page. Sorry if this sounds off topic, but I'm getting back on topic here. After everything I'm reading I don't think the FG-14 will have nearly enough power for 3d. And the FG-20 is probably too heavy. If true that leads to my 2 questions.

I found a new FG-100 for $270. It's been setting for a good while, is there any revisions of the motor and is it a reason to avoid it?

Next question is since the CH ignitions I gather are better and cheaper, and I saw a post or two about having good luck using the glow carb with gasoline. Would I be better off to get the 100 and break it in, then convert it to gas? If that would work it doesn't look to be more expensive and would give me the right size and weight.

Thanks
Cory

PS I know 4-stroke or gas isn't the best answer for 3d, but the sound and economy of it is very tempting. Obviously it wouldn't be crazy 3d.

w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

You need a DLE 20 for 3D?

clytle374

Not sure why you ended with a "?" I wish they published the hp specs for the FG. I guess I'll probably get the Saito 100 then, it does real nice according to the videos on glow fuel.

Thanks
Cory

MaxAdventure

My Feedback: (7)

W8ye sums it up and always has very appropriate suggestions! I don't have near his engine experience and I'm not a '3D' pilot. I do like to be verbose and based on my understanding:

You're looking at a super light 3D plane and mating it to a very poor HP to weight engine (compared to what is possible). If you intend any 3D, I imagine in the end I anticipate you will not be satisfied with the combination based on how I read your posting. When you think of owning an FG engine, you might want to think about a plane to showcase the engine - it's strong points. Amazing sound and fantastic fuel efficiency. (not to mention the mechanical aesthetics!).

If you go Saito glow, you'll still have a great sound, less weight (remember we drop the ignition and any additional ignition hardware) and more power than gas
If you go two stroke gas, you'll have the fuel economy and good power
If you go electric, you will have amazing power with seeming instant acceleration. I've seen some big 3D planes in these parts (Boulder, CO) go electric and they're pretty phenomenal. Expensive to start down that road if you don't already have the proper support equipment.
If you want to convert to gas, try reading some threads on people who've done that. Check out how many hours went into getting it to run well and are still using it. Let me know if you find anyone.

Just think about what you really want to deal with. If you intend any prop hanging at all and you have a fuel issue (read the original thread on FG20 fuel delivery), or it's not broken in yet, or, or...
The few videos I've found on the web with an FG doing 3D summarize fairly well.

clytle374

Thanks. I do respect both of your informed opinions, that's why I'm asking. I saw a video from Saito with the Edge and the FG-14 prop hanging, and though it might be okay if the engine has become reliable. Doesn't sound like the right path to follow.

Is there another thread just on fuel delivery? Kinda why I was asking about the glow carb and was thinking using a real pump with it.

Thought I might partly balance the ignition weight with less fuel.

I really do not like the sound of 2-strokes. I fly small electric but I'm not going there on large stuff. The Aeroworks edge looks very impressive with a .91 on it.

Maybe someone will start force feeding the air and fuel in someday and get the power levels up.

Thanks a bunch
Cory

MaxAdventure

My Feedback: (7)

I'm with you on the two strokes! I swore them off a few years ago and only have a single OS .70 2stroke in a heli I plan to keep.
As for electric, if we compare a Saito revving to the sound of classic rock, a 5HP + electric revving is like techno. Certainly not for everyone, but I have yet to tire of it on my DHC2 mkIII turbo. The right prop makes a big difference.

Try Yamada. I have a couple of YS supercharged 4cyl engines I've been drooling on in my work room but I have yet to try them out. I'm forced to keep buying glow fuel, but from what I read they're worth it.

Sorry to any who feel I'm straying a bit off topic, my point is to really enjoy the FG20 you have to pick the right platform. There is no right power source for every model plane, each one has it's place.

karolh

The Saito FG-20 CAN be made to run well, but why risk having all the hastle to do so. IMHO, just go with a DLE 20 and have the best of both worlds of a great running engine, glow like beam mounting, very good fuel economy as it only needs 8 ounces, excellent power to weight ratio and no glow mess to clean up afterwards.

Karol

w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

The more successful Saito FG20 stories involved war birds and and Cub type planes.

The DLE-20 is also used in these scale applications but the DLE has been successful in 3D profile and built up fuselage types. There have not been any significant changes made to the DLE-20 except using a NGK CM-6 spark plug and special mufflers for specific applications. The mufflers are available from J-TEC and include two different Pitts type mufflers and a muffler with the exhaust pipe sticking straight out from the engine for mounting the engine horizontally on profile 3D planes.

clytle374

Thanks for the advise. I'll give up on the gas engine and buy the Saito 100 from the hobby shop. I'd rather buy glow than go 2-stroke. Kinda irritated with the shop owner talking up the FG-14 as a great match for 3d for the Seagall edge. Heck, the engine isn't even the right size for that plane. Looks like I'll choose the AeroWorks Edge since it's a proven combo with the Saito 100.

Thanks
Cory

Rick.

I don't own an FG14b, but, looking at the specs, prop rpm, thrust on the usual 14x6, and weight of the engine/ignition/batts etc it doesn't take the brains of a rocket scientist to realise that the power to weight ratio of the FG14 and its equipment is poor compared to most other 15cc sized engine options. Thats not a bad thing necessarily, just 'horses for courses' in a vintage floater, club trainer, piper cub or a small warbird the FG14 should be great. Those airframes can carry the weight and there will be plenty of thrust for normal flight, but to do the prop hanging stuff and get a good 1.5:1 thrust to weight ratio for 3D in a medium sized 60" ish airframe is asking a bit much - so for that i'd say go for more power in a lighter engine - like the DLE20 Or as you say, give up on gas and go glow.  The whole hobby shop proprieter thing is an ever present problem in our hobby. Many shop owners either don't fly regularly (or at all!) or don't actually flight test the gear they are selling - so their advice is based on a guess as to what they just 'think' is ok combined with the often exaggeratted claims by the manufacturer on the box lid. If in doubt don't rely on the advice of someone trying to sell you stuff - come to R/C forums like this one and look up the engine/airframe combos that users say actually work well - i learned my lesson the hard way................

clytle374

Where are you getting the thrust specs? I've looked for quite a while and haven't found anything specific to tell how much power is lost from the glow version.

Are there any other changes to the gas version than carb and increasing the compression ratio? Every other thing I've read advocates decreasing the compression for gas. Sorry to ask, but the idea of someday trying a gas conversion on the 100 won't leave my mind Also CH ignitions is closed at the moment, so I have no idea what it weighs.

The comment about the lhs proprietor is dead on, and why I asked.

Thanks
Cory

w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

The intake manifold is smaller in diameter on the FG-20 compared with the 125.

There's probably 5% less power on the FG-20 compared with the 125.

clytle374

Only 5%, I could live with that. People have put 125s on the AW edges for altitude compensation. I fly at 3000ft asl.

Thanks
Cory

CH Ignitions

My Feedback: (11)

The intake on:
FG20 is 9mm, with Walbro/Zama carb C&H/AC ignition, APC 16.5 W prop, 8100RPM, close to 11 LB thrust.
Fa 125 is9.5mm
Did not measured the comb. chamner yet but I will soon.
Valves are the same, exhaust is the same.

FG30intake 9.75mm , Exh port11mm, Valves both 14mm, Exh threads 13x1mm 10mm NKG
FA 180 intake11mm, Exh port 11mm, Valves both 15mm , Exh threads14x1mm 1/4 32 glowplug/sparkplug if converted

Hope it helps

Adrian

P.S. Any one having a FG36 would you please let me know the intake diameter, I work on a FA 220 conversion and I will be interested to know that.

clytle374

Let me know when you measure the chamber. I've been wondering why they cut the bottom of the jug to raise the compression when lowering it seems standard. Can't help but think they might have changed the piston/chamber some. Looks like the specs I've been going off of here don't include the ignition since the 125 and fg-20 have the same weight on the engine comparison page.

I'm going going to go the 100 glow route at first and keep watching and researching gas conversion on it. Now if I could stop thinking about how a small roots supercharger could be added. I have a habit of complicating things until I give up PS I saw you video, looks nice.

Cory

Lightspeed1551

My Feedback: (4)

OK come on all the people suggesting the use of a DLE 20 should delete there posts and open another forum. This is PRO FG20.

Lightspeed1551

My Feedback: (4)

I have a FG 20 on a 90 size 3d airplane made buy Seagull.  Its call the Harrier 3D. The engin is awwsome. The fuel consumption is unreal and with a little bit of effert and patients the engine is a fine choice!


I say down with glow fuel and down with china products!!!!!!!!!

CH Ignitions

My Feedback: (11)

Idid not had time to do all measurements on the FA125 vs FG20. But on FG30 and FA180 Compression chamber measure the same...3cc.
I will have to find some time to take both engines a part and measure all.At the mommet busy on buliding the C&H ignitions .
FA20 is a good engine without any mods if you take the time to tweak. Mine worked fine from the first and I had the each to put a walbro/Zama just to see if if can be done.

Adrian

Arruda

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"/><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 11"/><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 11"/><link rel="File-List" href="file:///D:\DOCUME~1\bc18\CONFIG~1\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip_fi lelist.xml"></link><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-comffice:smarttags" name="metricconverter"></o:smarttagtype><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:HyphenationZone>21</w:HyphenationZone> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <wontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument></xml><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles></xml><object classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></object><style>st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }</style><style><! Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}@page Section1 {size:595.3pt 841.9pt; margin:70.85pt 3.0cm 70.85pt 3.0cm; mso-header-margin:35.4pt; mso-footer-margin:35.4pt; mso-paper-source:0;}div.Section1 {page:Section1;}></style><style> Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Tabela normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;}</style><xml> <o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026"/></xml><xml> <o:shapelayout v:ext="edit"> <o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1"/> </o:shapelayout></xml>

The FG-14is a good engine for planes of .40 ~ .46 size.

I use mine on a RV-8 (HANGAR 9)and it’s a perfect match.<o></o>

It took mesome time (and 2 dead sticks) to learn how to tune it, but now it is workingflawlessly. <o></o>

To keep theweight low I’m using a small tank (<st1:metricconverter productid="6 oz" w:st="on">6 oz</st1:metricconverter> - sufficient for 20min flights) and only one batteryfor radio and ignition (2100 mA LiPo - coupled with a WIKE RC battery eliminatingfilter).

So far this combo is working very well.<o></o>

Garthwood

Note that Your seagull harrier 3d is a Chinese product. I have the .46 size that I flew with a Saito .72, not a bad flier. Just needed more strenghtening in certain areas. I am not Chinese. Don't knock glow fuel. It just requires more clean up and costs more.
I have that same engine Saito FG20 cc, still brand new in the box, but I'm saving it for a war bird that's specially recommended by Horizon for that engine. Any kind of ARF requires strengthening, especially the firewalls and landing gear block.

Lightspeed1551

My Feedback: (4)

I can knock China all I want the Harrier was made in Korea.
And I have had to decommission to many airplanes due to the glow fuel oil in making its way into the wood.

jorgy-Delta

Thanks for this thread, provided everything I needed, great help!

Bought it new in December 2011, just got around to it this summer.

About 3 hours on this engine now. 2-1/2 static break in. Little longer than I usually do, but it does me well & ending up with problem free, powerful engine(s).
Zero issues with carb or ignition, just took awhile ( and some patience ) to "get it".
Final adjustments now leaned out, very little oil blowing out the exhaust or vent. Sips fuel.
*I liked the mess it made set rich, with the Keleo exhuast: darkened up the covering and made a very weathered look on the H9 Bluenose

Idling steady at 1800 & getting 8500 w/ an APC 16x6 on the ground ( lost about 300 w/ Keleo, compared to stock )
But what a sweet and surprisingly very quiet sound. Nice scale speed with this prop.

-Pulled the OEM plug at 3 hours, cleaned & checked gap, just fine at 0.026in, no wear on electrode or bar.
Just needed a 20 min soak in WD40 and a stiff toothbrush to clean up like new. Just a touch of baked light tan, completely normal and good.
It was a little bit fouled (wet sticky) from rich break in, but nothing too bad.
-Pulled the valve covers and checked clearance:
Intake was at 0.002in, exhaust at 0.0025in just fine, no need to touch.

Now: after a good prime, she will hand start. 1-2 flips...every time! No kick. Throttle at 1 click up from idle.
Slight sputter & into steady run. Warms up quickly, under a min.

Great power. Great Engine !

About Bluenose? Mine=1st production run... read the thread, heed the thread, for sure, open up the wing bottoms and build up the retract areas as sugested !

But a nice flier after all said and done. Would I but another Bluenose...???
Not sure. Is it a one off cheapening on assembly error(s) & but hopefuly not a trend with H9 overall.

[link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_8623566/mpage_6/key_/tm.htm]Bluenose-retract pg[/link]


*Running Evolution synthetic oil, as per manual 20:1