Bob Laine

My Feedback: (91)

Hi Tim, Thanks for asking me for my opinion on these engines, "Taurus 3.2," Zenoah G-62, and the DA 50, for the "TF Giant P-51. First, let me say that I own all three engines and have experience with all three. As a matter of fact, I own engines from every engine manufactur'er out there. Now.... I'll try and address your question. If the Top Flight P-51 weighed 30-35 lbs, I would probably choose the Zenoa G62. Nor have I seen anything that was better suited for flying the Big old heavy giant "warbirds" than the Zenoah G62. But, Re-calling my experience with the many different makes of engines I've used, the Zenoah G62 is hard to beat in it's class. ( 30 to 35 lb)For the particular application that you are describing, (TF giant P-51), my choice would be the Taurus 3.2 52cc. The DA 50 would be OK, and is a great little engine that probably is the most popular of the three engines named. And I think DA finally has all the bugs worked out. I have one on my "Double Vision," and it's running great. But in all honesty, I have to admit that it is not nearly as smooth running, and has more vibration than Taurus 3.2. You've heard the old saying "Nothing runs like a Deer........? well in this case, Nothing runs like a Taurus.
I'm sure that any of the engines you mentioned (Zenoah G-62, DA 50, or Taurus 3.2) would work well for the application you have in mind. The Zenoah (stock) might be a little on the heavy side but would still fly it just fine. The DA 50 would also be a good choice, and because of the weight factor, it would probably be better a better match for the TF P-51, than the G-62. But, DA 50's still have the very noticeable throttle glitch. (Mine included) This leaves us with the Taurus engine. What can I say, it's runs smoother, transitions better than either of the other two engines, and has much more power than you'll ever need for the P-51. And most of all...........You'll know the minute you start the engine, and after the first flight , you've made the right decision if you choose the "Taurus. 3.2."
Thank you for asking for my opinion on these three engines, and good luck with which ever choice you make. They are all good engines and either one will serve you well. Bob

If you go with the G-62, send it to Ralph, RCIGN1 and let him put electrinic ignition on it. you'll lose lot's of oz's.

tms261

Thanks Bob, thats just what I needed, an opinion based on first hand knowledge of all three engines. In the case of my DA-50, serial #37XX, it has run perfect from the start. I'm probably not a good enough pilot to notice any "throttle glitch". I do however constantly vary the throttle while flying the Edge 540. The DA starts easy, and has never quit on me. I have used the CH ignitions on glow engines and have a couple on hand.

The thing is, a fellow at our club flies this plane with a G-62 and its very fast and has great vertical. Just what I want. Actually what I really want is to outrun him!!! At least to be close but with a nice, easy to start, smooth running engine. if that sounds like a Taurus, then I'm sold!! I have no doubt that the support I would get from Bill would match the excellent support I've gotten from DA.

Can you tell me if the Taurus is based on the Husky cylinder? I just love gasoline engines and know there are a bunch of good ones out there. Each with its own strengths and weaknesses, depending on intended use and expectation. I'm after speed, at least on the P-51, dependability and smoothness..

Thanks for your response Bob, I've read many of your posts and respect your opinion.

Tim

Bob Laine

My Feedback: (91)

Tim, I'm not sure exactly what engine the Taurus is based on. I can tell you that it run's a MALI jug. You allready know about the crank being a 2 piece crank W/three bearings, so I won't go into that. Bill O, reads this thread regularly and I'm sure he'll come on here and give you the information you want to know. That is unless it would require him to divulge trade secrets. As I said in my other post, I'm a firm believer (and lover) of the Zenoah G-62. But in this case, and for this application, It would be my last choice for the TF P-51, and I'm sure the Taurus 3.2 would be a better choice. It will turn a 23/8 all day and it will be a better engine if you ever want to build one of the newer "aerobatic" type airplanes where weight is everything. The reason is simple,........it will give you the nescessary power you need with far less weight to make those screaming low passes down the runnway with that P-51. Why not call Bill O, and talk with him about the 4.2 if you're hesitant about the 52cc 3.2
Merry Christmas, and let me know which way you go. Remember............It's all about having fun.

PS Good luck in the race, and by the way My DA is serial number 1064. Been back for repair but runs great right now

mglavin

My Feedback: (31)

The Taurus Engines use cylinders manufactured by Mahle. Mahle manufacturers these cylinders for various OEM companies such as Makita/Sachs or Husqavarna to name a few. The Taurus Engines 2.6/3.2 utilizes a Makita/Sachs/Dalmer cylinder.

I have a Topflite Corsair and a Mustang both are fitted with the 3.7 Taurus Engine, again with the Makita/Sachs cylinder. I chose the 3.7's based on the displacement for the Limited USRA racer class which limits displacement to wing area.

Bob Laine

My Feedback: (91)

Thanks for the excellent information about the engines, and their supply source.

T-one

tms261 OK Some answers. The cylinder/piston is Mahle made and carries a Dolmar prt number on the flange.
Taurus uses no Echo parts whatsoever.
the crank is a FORGED 2 PIECE, NOT THREE
The TS 52 has 2 precision ball bearings for the crank, 1 in front and one in back, also precision roller bearings for the con. rod and wrist pin.
In my opinion after the engine has some time on it I think it would perform as well or better against a G-62. And at 3lbs 5oz without the muffler you can see the power to weight difference. Prop use can run from 20x10 to 24x8 the 52 will pull it.
Give me a call if you any further questions.Thats what we are here for. Thanks for your interest.
Happy Holidays.
p.s. Bob we are looking at the muffler attachment question.

Steve

My Feedback: (54)

Got my first Taurus!! I did a little work on the throtle linkage. It was stif so I sanded down the ball links and installed a safety screw in the end of the butterfly arm. I would recomend this. Looks like an excellent engine. Can't wait to run it. The motor was run at the factory also which I think is a good thing.

Texan

My Feedback: (10)

Bill,

Can you tell us the displacement of engines currently offered by Taurus. The Taurus website does not appear to be up to date. For example, the TS42 is not listed on the engines page.


TX

G McIntosh

My Feedback: (9)

TX' .. I picked up my 5th Taurus engine from Bill, around two weeks ago., a 4.2 for my Ziroli Stuka I'm building.. I know he has two more of them in stock. My other four engines are all 4.4's which are in mustangs.. Glenn

T-one

Texan, the TS number is the cc's ex. TS 42 = 42cc, 2.6cu.in etc.
TS 52 =52cc= 3.2cu.in and so on. I could list all the rest if anyone is interested. probably should do the web site.
It will be updated.

Texan

My Feedback: (10)

Hi Bill,

Yes, please let us know the engines currently offered by Taurus. I may need to purchase an engine not currently listed on your site.

Thanks,
TX

tms261

Hi Bill, is there or was there a Taurus 3.7? I read that a guy had two of them in Mustangs for some racing event. I'm still thinking about the TS-52 for the TF P-51, but if weight is not an issue, I'd go for the 3.7 I think...

Tim

T-one

tms261, The 3.7 is the TS 62, 62cc, 3.7cu.in and is in stock currently 72oz. complete less muffler
also a TS 69 69cc 4.2cu.in in stock 76oz complete less muffler
complete means even with the spark plug and motor mount attached to the engine.
I believe Taurus is the only one that gives a weight with everything attached except the muffler (pitts wrap around.

tms261

Hi Bill thanks for the information on the 3.7(62). I might be perfectly happy with the 52, but I will be glassing this plane and have heard people say they add up to 15 oz of lead to balance with the lighter 50's. I'd rather add power and use the throttle than to add dead weight. I guess the 62 may have the 3 bearings instead of 2? Can you give me thrust rating? I would be very interested in using this engine if it will fit in the plane without cutting the cowl to pieces. Physical dimensions compared to the G-62? Is the included muffler a rap around Pitts? I'd like to run something like a 20 X 14 prop.

I have a record now of being one of the pilots that has few issues with equipment and fly very dependable planes that never seem to have trouble. I come out to fly and fly and fly. I would like to introduce my club members to the Taurus engines as part of my next low maintenance project. Some of my friends say, "just fly the engines you see others fly. We havent seen the Taurus, why do you want one"? Just need to make sure it fits in a TF-GS P-51, and then make them wish they had one!!

Thanks so much for your time Bill. Will you be getting these engines add to the web soon?

Tim

tms261

Hi Steve congratulations on the Taurus. What are you putting it in? Would you keep me(us) posted on what you think when you run it? I need to decide in a hurry now what engine to use in a glassed TF P-51. I'm after more speed than scale, and would rather thottle back than wish I had more than I have. So I'm thinking at least the 52 if not the 62. Let me know what it runs like compared to your other gassers.

Tim

Steve

My Feedback: (54)

Will do Tim. I am putting it in a Colombo Anderson 27% 300L. I have a post going on it in the Giant Scale forum. Its almost done. I'll be posting photos in the forum and on the Taurus site. I just checked the muffler angle and its going to work without cutting the engine box. I'm real happy about that. I may also end up with the TS 62. I have a Lanier Cap 232 in the bones that needs a little more weight and power. If you get one keep us posted. I'll fire mine up at work today.

Bat Fastard

My Feedback: (8)

I ran my new TS 52 today for the first time. It ran so good I decided to fly it. To sum up in a few words: I have owned and ran quite a few gas engines and none of them have or even come close to having the throttle response as the Taurus. As for power I dont know 'cause its new and has clearly too small of a prop (22-8). It will however snatch my little Velox (16#2oz) out of a hover with authority. Thanks Bill for the service and first class engine, consider me a customer for a long time to come.

Jamie

rajul

My Feedback: (58)

Hi Bill, is it possible to "customize" the carb insulator block to turn the carb 90deg and not have to use a bell crank ? Thanks

tms261

Hi Steve, did you get a chance to crank that 52 yet? Just curious.

Tim

Steve

My Feedback: (54)

I started breaking in my 52 yesterday and it fired right up. I only had to richen up the low end about 1/4 turn and the high just a hair. Throtle transition is excellent and smooth. I am using a Zinger 22 X 8 and it spools right up.

Bob Laine

My Feedback: (91)

That "test" stand, sure look's familiar?

tms261

Ironic, I have an uncle that just gave me a 6" vise for Christmas!!! I may have found my first use for it!!! The Taurus is VERY interesting for my P-51 also. Just need more info on dimensions of the front of the plane and engine sizes so I can decide between the 52 and 62.

Steve

My Feedback: (54)

Its been a good test stand over the years. I just have to make sure I open the door so I don't gas myself.

T-one

TS 52 wt 3#5oz w/everthing but the muffler aprox 7.5oz (Pitts)
props anything from 20x10 to whatever works well Rpm range 5800-8000
from back of mount to face of prop hub 6.125"

TS62 wt4#10oz same as above, muffler 8.5oz
props 22x8 on up whatever works best same Rpm range
from back of mount to prop hub face 6.875"

Peak torque HP is from 6400-7400rpm. measured on the ground.
Thrust is dependent on prop design which can vary from manufacturer.
Menz S, Mejzlik, MX, MSC(have to drop one size, but pulls like a BULL)
thanks to all for the kind remarks, we try.
Happy and a healthy New Year to you all.

Steve

My Feedback: (54)

I think my engine was a little on the heavy side. I took it to the post office and had them weigh it with muffler and prop. Total weight was 4 lbs 8.5 oz. A little heavier than expected with a light weight wood prop.