shorte

I think Saito thinks most people will crash and destroy the motor before it will self destruct in 10 flights.How hard would it have been to use needle bearing like normal gas motors.
They could have spread the sensor screws farther apart to give people to run any timing they want by sliding it back and forth.
80 bucks for a modded prop hub that should cost 10 buck is crazy.

cathurga

I dont think Saito would release something if they KNEW it was bugged, thats not what they're about. I DO believe they thought it would be a functional engine, but the longevity is always in doubt unless they tested it over a long time, made inprovments and worked out its faults. Being in business where they are under pressure from people like at HH, they dont have the luxury of doing those extensive tests...if they believe its solid, then they would rather face the prospect of a few warranty repairs, if most engines work fine.
We dont know how many engines are out there, running well from day one, maybe hundreds or thousands of flights without a problem...We do know that they HAVE tried to make better components to stop the failure rates, and the new pistons and cylinders may solve most of those problems, the cause has not been fixed. I would still like to see on the new engines if they have changed the timing at all....
Putting needle bearings might help as well, but a properly lubed bushing would work just as well I would think. I would never think of modding mine to have a needle bearing on the main....it would simply mean that ONE cylinder would be running and TWO wouldnt...the other TWO are under the same/similar stress..
I also understand that the cost of a new hub and the negative pressure crankcase seems like a lot but it is likely to reduce the chance of failure, but it SHOULDNT be necessary on a new engine you paid good money for...
For me, at this point, would I buy another Saito FG60? Given the way my engines are running now, and if they continued to run like this with regular servicing, I probably wouldif it was one of the new versions. With the modded pistons you are likely to lose a little more power through the lowered compression, but you are unlikely to have a failure. If I had to get one, I would STILL change the timing, and would do the negative pressure crankcase mod as well. For around $200 on top of the engine cost, I would consider it 'good insurance'.
If had NO CLUE about the problems that people have experienced, I would probably also go and buy one, like I did previously...
If you havent got one, and dont want to do the mods, I would look at alternatives if you HAVE to have a radial....

shorte

I am getting the Fg61TS twin. Looks like they have made enough room to set the timing on that motor if you want to. The only thing I don't like is how they put the carb so far back behind the motor.
I haven't read of any failures on that motor but the carburetor should have been turned a different way.


I bought a Fg60r3 . It had all the new heads and pistons and would have fit nicely on my stick. But I couldn't take a chance of the motor blowing up.
So I sold it.

cathurga

FG61TS is a good engine, doesn't seem to be plagued with problems. I don't own one, so cannot really comment, although it looks to be lubed by blow-by only.

Crankcase mod entails opening up the plenum into the crankcase. Don't think its possible on the 61TS as the carbs feed straight into the intake tubes..

lolo396

Here is a picture of the modification of my propeller hub.
You need a stop piston and Rcexl Ignition Hall Sensor Test Kit Timing . Cost 15$
I move only 3 magnets to have 30 degrees BTDC.

757jonp

My Feedback: (48)

I finally got my TF P47 flight ready this past w/e after considerable delay. I'm pleased to report the plane, engine, and even the pilot performed extremely well. The only major change to the engine was resetting the timing to 32 degrees BTDC via a MM prop hub. Still using 100LL with 15:1 Klotz, it started without any hassle and ran like a raped ape in the air, never even a hint of a hiccup whatsoever! This was the first time I've flown it that it "felt" like it was running correctly!

cathurga

Jon, good news! They idle better too, right?

Lolo, what did you remove the magnets with? Dynamite? LOL! Thats one way of doing it.....

lolo396

It's not easy, but we can do it.
the height of a magnet is 4mm
Drill a 2.5mm hole under the magnet and make a slit to the top (see photo)
Then push the magnet with a 2mm steel rod

JieM

Hi Cathurga, that's not correct. The maximum stress is on the main rod. It is the only one who rotate by 360deg with the load of the 3 pistons. The 2 others make just small oscillations with their own load. That's why all rod failures appears on the main rod.
Have a look
Of course engines with bushing work, but in general, the lubrication is made with a pump (cars, motorbikes engine). It is the only way to have a very good reliability.

JM

cathurga

I don't disagree with you, but the 'lesser' cylinders dont even have bushings at all, and I think in an application like this, its that critical to have roller bearings. Car engines have bushes (mostly) on the crankshaft journal's and many of them on the big end as well. Granted, as you say, they have oil pumped around under pressure, so have enough lubrication. Without having to go to the trouble of modding the engine in such a complex way, if you supply it with lubrication (from the negative crank mod), I would think that it would be enough....time will tell.

From an economy perspective, if someone bought this engine, at US$1200 (or whatever they go for now), add the timing hub for $100, the crankcase mod for another $100, and the engine should be ok.....I would do that. I would think that these mods are 'bolt-on' mods that most people could do, without having to send the entire motor to someone else which will require back and forth shipping, parts and labour. I fully understand that many people would want to do that and avoid any messing about, so perhaps that WOULD be an option. I know that many people shipped their engines to Ray English for him to do his mods and guys like Morris, CH-Ignitions, Ray and Morris make a living out of doing these sorts of things and we can ALL be grateful they are doing it.....so people have options. Its good to know!

757jonp

My Feedback: (48)

Jon, good news! They idle better too, right?

I'd say it idles a lot better, definitely easier to start. Mine was set at about 50 degrees BTDC and would actually want to "kick back" when starting. (Not surprising with that much advance) While conducting static tests it seemed that the average temps were down at least 30-40 degrees. What impressed me and the crowd watching it is how well it yanked that 24lb P47 around. Most of time flying at half throttle with plenty of suds left.

Where are we getting that crankcase mod done for $100?

cathurga

Jon,
Glad that you are getting the benefits of the timing ring, it certainly changes the way the engines run. What prop are you using by the way?
My apologies, I know Morris charges closer to $250 for the crankcase mod....and the prop hub is around $100.

757jonp

My Feedback: (48)

I've been using Valley View RC "house brand" props for quite awhile. I have no idea who actually makes them, though I suspect they're a rebranded Falcon beechwood prop. On this application I'm using a 22 X 10. Price is very reasonable IMHO on them and have given excellent service.

I thought that price was a off, looked on the MM site and he wants $450+ for a modded new one! Even at $250 that's getting up there. I considered just moving the prop hub on the collet, (I think you did that one time), but decided to splurge for the new ring setup... a little pricey at $100, but it does the trick. Advantage to that setup is you vary the timing to whatever you want too.

You know I've threatened this engine with a gallon of glow fuel waved at it if it gives me any more grief? With that adjustable ring, it'd be a easy conversion and the carb is compatible with glow fuel. (I tested all the gaskets) Only question is will it flow enough fuel? I didn't want to do that, but it's still on the table as an option.

shorte

what is the best break in oil?
I have cool power
Redline and stihl ultra hp
Cool power has no mix ratio so i don't know how much to mix.

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

8 OZ to the gallon will get you in the ballpark.
I use Red Line which is what they finally came out and recommended.
Sparky

khoysagk

My Feedback: (2)

Stihl HP Ultra, much better than Redline IMO.

757jonp

My Feedback: (48)

Oh Boy... here comes another oil war! LOL I use Klotz. Why? Because I ran out of Stihl and had some Klotz! Do I like it? No, it smells funny, but I still run it because I got it. Does it work good? Seems to, engine hasn't burned up yet, but then again it didn't burn up with Stihl either... Bottom line: 8oz to a gallon (of you favorite oil) will give you pretty darn close to 15;1 ratio by volume. I'd use the red one, not to start an oil war, it's just to so dam pretty! I have no idea what that green stuff is...

Seriously... 15:1 of good quality synthetic oil and you should be good to go... enjoy!

shorte

The green stuff is Morgans Cool Power 'Blue' Synthetic Lubricant that is what saito says to use.


I watch a video where Amsoil Saber Professional burned clean and Stihl HP Ultra had carbon build up where it wouldn't run
Anyone use Amsoil Saber Professional
I am ready to break my new motor in.
I think I see why now. 100 to 1 oil mix so you have no carbon . If you run 15 to 1 with this oil I would bet there is carbon build up.

This is what it says to use in the saito manual
1. Fuel ●The fuel is mixture of commercial regular gasoline and reliable oil for 2-stroke engines. ●[Example of oil recommendation] ・ Klotz KL-200 Original Techniplate ・ Morgans Cool Power 'Blue' Synthetic Lubricant etc. ●Be sure to use the mixture “gasoline : oil =15~20 : 1” by volume ratio. (Ex. 1000ml of gasoline should be mixed with more than 50ml of oil ). ●In Break-in process, use 15:1 mixed fuel to ensure the best lubrication for initial run. ●Any damage caused by the fuel used, in which the oil ratio is lower than 20:1 ratio, is not warranted. ●Do not use gasoline ethanol mixed. It may cause not only power loss but also corrosion inside the engine.

GalenB

My Feedback: (18)

FWIW -- I use the Cool Power oil... I figure that this engine is really a glow engine so using the oil that has been used in Saito glow engines for decades cannot hurt. I have more than 40 trouble free flights on my "bog stock" 60 R3... And as near as I can tell without removing the engine from the airframe there doesn't seem to be excessive carbon build up. Pulled a plug and it is oily from rich running, but no other build up... That may not mean anything, but that was the best I could do for now.

Engine starts easily and runs reliably. So far do good...

shorte

My bottle doesn't show a mix ratio .
Is 8 OZ to a gallon good for cool power to get 15 to 1?

GalenB

My Feedback: (18)

Technically it is 8.5 oz per gallon to get 15:1. I am usually generous and round up to 9 oz... So 8oz is close enough if you so choose... Again -- since this just a glow engine on ignition a little more oil, and running a little rich, won't hurt... I am not going for maximum performance and want a reliable, great sounding, engine.

cathurga

Ah yes, "Ye Olde Oile Debate"....it has been raging on for years, and will do so until the end of time. I think its personal preference, experience and availability that makes the difference, and as important...environment.

I have some theories, and they are probably rubbish, but I will put them here for you to see. I have mentioned them earlier in this thread, and got shot at, naturally, but its MY experience, yours may not be similar...

So, the premise of these engines, is they have no other way of lubrication (in standard form anyway), they rely on blowby past the pistons during normal running. as they are converted glow engines. Most of the manufacturers of the oils, proudly announce that most of their oil is 'burned off' during combustion. As most of them are designed for 2T engines that get their lube BEFORE the combustion process, this is not a problem. The oil/fuel/air mix is travelling through the crankcase, lubing as it goes, and then the combustion takes place, and all the residue is burned off and blown out the exhaust. In many cases, they run carts, weedwhackers, saws and blowers with 40:1, and sometimes 50:1. The same applies for the 2T engines we use in our planes..DLE, DA, DLA, RCGF, Zenoah etc etc.
Now we get to the Saito 4T gassers....they DONT run the fuel through the crank, so the solution is to increase the amount of oil in the mixture so that some of it is passed by the rings during compression, and some of it is left in the combustion chamber to burn off...not all of it does. The oil left over does some lubing and some of it is forced past the VERY hot exhaust valve, and some of it reaches its flashpoint and turns to carbon, which builds up over time. In the Saito FG40, they even TELL you this will happen, and they also say to clear out the carbon build up in the muffler from time to time. I dont say this happens to ALL the engines, for example, in my case, the ambient temps are VERY high here..44 Deg C (or 113F in 'murica-speak). This means that my engines require better cooling, but will probably run higher temps than the guys in the more reasonable climates of around 20Deg C.I think that this is what is causing me the most headaches....I suffer from more carbon build up than others might. The fact that I am running a 4-bladed prop might also contribute to more 'bogging' of the engine, although I reckon I am hitting 6,000rpm and more in flight, so its not labouring THAT much, IMO.
The only solution for me, is to reduce the oil content, but at the same time, trying to maintain the lubrication factor. The only way I see is to somehow try and emulate the 2T engines, by getting the oil through the crankcase BEFORE combustion. Hence the mod to modify the plenum and get SOME mixture into there....the MMM and other mods does that for me, so I can reduce the oil content, and still have the lube.

I think your choice is your choice on your model, and your situation is likely different to mine, so go with what you think is going to work for you. I was using redline previously, but have moved to Stihl, because they have their 4-mix engines, which is like a hybrid 2T and 4T engine, with valves and fuel running through the crankcase, so they probably know a thing or two about doing oils fit for that purpose...just my choice. Its also available here, at a decent price and quantity.

Each to their own on that topic, I guess.

shorte

Okay. I am going with Stihl HP Ultra. I see they run that in the 4t too.
https://slideplayer.com/slide/7077935/
I read the DA recommends Amsoil Saber Professional. That stuff is expensive.

cathurga

Stihl have:
Stihl HP Ultra - Fully Synthetic, for their 4-Mix engines
Stihl HP Super - Doesnt say synthetic or mineral on their website...
Stihl HP - Mineral oil, says its for hot climates.

The local supplier doesnt get the Super or the Ultra here, so I went with the plain HP....it suits me if its for hot, temperate climates..

....pick your poison...I can't vouch for any oils on the market, I just go with what seems to make the most sense TO ME.

khoysagk

My Feedback: (2)

I have two FG60's and one FG84, use Stihl HP Ultra at about 18:1 (20:1 would be 6.4oz, I put in 7oz). My engines run great, never had a problem.