airborneSGT

My Feedback: (15)

Just wondering who has run these and what you have to say about them. The 3W is darn cheap and seems to have good ratings. Just wondering what your actual user experience has been. The ZDZ 80 and Super 80 have also seemed to work well for people. Honest opinions and pictures of setups would be apreciated!

flyinrazrback

My Feedback: (69)

I have the 3w 80 Competition series on the 3w can, only 7 flights so far but pleased. Excellent power, awesome transition, and not a shaker.

Flymyplane

My Feedback: (24)

I have a ZDZ 80 RV copper version that I have had NIB for 2 years. Its now mounted to my NEW never flown H9 Cap 1/3 scale. I was curious if Id get it started after having it for so long, without running it. I just ran it up last week, and its great! Has tons of power, and very smooth transition. Its actually perfect throttle response, from idle to high. The only problem I had was on my 2nd days run. It would die out at idle. Having not messed with the needles yet, I started to lean the low end a bit. Now its got the perfect idle, at about 1400 rpms to 1600 rpms, and perfect transition. I also have brand new ZDZ 80 super that I just bought. I have it mounted to my GP Cap 580, but not ran it yet. Im still in assembly mode with that Cap. It looks to be a beautiful engine. I will say this, the Super 80 exhaust port is very, very clean! No burs, no "gunk" just clean! It looks more like a Glow engine through the port. What I mean by that is the machining! I have seen 3ws that the casting looked to be desired through the port. The 3w 80s are priced pretty low right now! The only thing I dont like about the 3w 80xis, is the mounting platform. You have to buy the additional plate, otherwise it is very difficult to mount. I really like the zdz already having a beefy mount plate as part of the back plate. Makes it very substantial. Plus I already own the 80rv regular, so some parts are interchangable, like prop bolts, ect. I do like that on the ZDZ the center bolt is threaded and you have a double nut assembly to help secure the prop. I really think that has to be of some benifit, when torquing down the bolts. Its my thought that the center bolt nut, actually compresses the prop more evenly, then without having it. Maybe Im all wet. Just my thought. Just my observation, Im not a professional engine guy here. I dont think you could go wrong with either engine, its simply matter of choice. With the price being so low with the 3W, its a great bargain! I still opted for the ZDZ 80 super, but that was just me! Heres some pics of my installs.

aegis

I've had my 3W80Xi running only once on the ground so I can't speak to how it performs, but here are some pics of my setup.

Dan

bodywerks

My Feedback: (4)

I have heard that ZDZ's are a PITA to fire up for the first flight of the morning - anyone concurr?

rmh

Nope -there are quite a few of em here - and basically - choke -flip n go
There were some with carbs which would not choke -- all that I know of have had carbs fixed or replaced

mrbigg

My Feedback: (21)

Not at all. MY ZDZ 120 is pretty easy. 10 flips choke on, ignition off. Turn the ignition on, 1 flip to fire. The last 5 times I've started it, she fired on the first flip with the ignition turned on after choking.

Hey Dick, this motor is a HOSS on my profile Ultimate. TONS of power!

Scoubidou

My Feedback: (17)

I have read this comment a few times on RCU with the old ZDZ engines series and i was a bit worry to purchase the new ZDZ-80 RVJ. I decided to go with for the power and i do not regret it.

I started for the first time my super ZDZ-80 last weekend and it fired after only 6 flip with the choke on, choke off and the engine started on the second flip. Very easy to start. I had some throttle linkage issues and i had to stop it because it can not go slower than 4000 RPM on Mejzlick 26x10.

I am going to maiden my plane as soon as the rain stop.

Daniel

juanes1969

I have the ZDZ80RV, 69 flights and 8 gallons of fuel through it and never a problem. Great power and reliable, has never quit in flight. A flying buddy has the 3w-80, nice engine and shakes less than other 3w´s I´ve seen. Easy starts too and powerfull.
I don´t think you can go wrong with either of them.

F1race79

My Feedback: (6)

You could get the 3W 80 for $600, can't beat that.

marzo91

My Feedback: (57)

Who has them for $600? That's a great price!

flyinrazrback

My Feedback: (69)

aircraft international has them for $600, if they have any instock, to me the real bargain is the competition series version of the engine at $700, which is still $125 less than the zdz. The CS versions are really opened up inside compared to the stock motors. I really like my 3w 80cs so far.

rmh

what is a competition version?
3W has always been a puzzle to me on this business of the "special" versions. frankly other than some purty up which the engine really does not need I don't see why it is really a higher performanc setup -
a number of other mfgrs do this same thing - frankly I see it as nothing but purty up . but then in th Hew Ess Hay purty up means a lot - maybe someone will offer silicone shots or botox etc..

JPrc

My Feedback: (22)

What is a ZDZ 160 champion?

Flip and Fly

I have the ZDZ 80 RV in my Ultimate, 200 flights or more and I have a 3W 80xi that I purchased last fall.

The ZDZ has been a good motor, had a crank problem but it was fixed under warranty so I am still happy with that. It has been a little prone to flooding, but after a little fiddling its a non issue. I run a separate line from tank to carb so I know how many flips needed to get it primed. If I would flip choke on till it fired it would often flood. I also found that by retarding the ignition pickup on the hub a little things have improved greatly. No flooding anymore. Still making big power

The 3W has 3 bearings on the crank vs 2 for the ZDZ and seems smoother to me because of it.
It is a little stronger than the ZDZ, the 3W turns my 26-10 Bolly wood prop at 6300 rpm, on the same day the ZDZ could only manage 6100/6200 rpm. Also the 3W is not run in yet, not that that will make a big difference I feel. Both run open stack.

The 3W has a very small foot print and can be hard to mount without the mounting ring, however I did not need it. I like the clip on spark plug boot that the 3W has rather than the little alan screw that the ZDZ uses. And I like the 5mm prop bolts that the 3W uses vs 4mm for the ZDZ. 4mm bolts will strip the heads after several uses or so I find.

The new ZDZ 80 RVJ might be the power King but you will pay for it.

I need to get the 3W up and flying. I had a 3W 60 for a few seasons and it was a great motor until I planted it

Any way just my take on it, you really can't go wrong with either unless you get a lemon, and yes that does happen to every one! ZDZ was good on my warranty!

flyinrazrback

My Feedback: (69)

Dick, have you ever seen a 3w QS/CS motor next to a stock one and taken them apart? They just dont paint the cylinders. All of the ports inside the motor are opened up a lot, and the same with the exhaust ports. The motors are not the same. The QS/CS motors are smoother, better midrange and torque, and more top end power (not that the stock 3w motors are lacking). The CS motors just go a little bit farther for the modeler who doesnt mind paying a little bit more for a more custom engine. There is a guy who modifies DA motors, so think of a stock DA as a stock 3W, and then after he is done with them (porting, polishing, etc) they are like a 3w CS motor. Just like car engines, people will pay extra for every extra bit of umph they can get.

rmh

I have not gone into one .
when manufacturing low volume engines -- most of the "secret" stuff some custom engine guys claim they know --is just as easy to do on the stock engine . For example - raised ports - If they were better - the manufacturer would simply include them in the casting - at least today - the new super porting the 3W/ ZDZ/ MVVS use is simply part of having a extremely improved casting technique. The mfgr can make any old shape wanted now.
As for polished ports - you can have em - from a flow standpoint it is very easy to reduce flow by a super smooth finish.
If the engine is "squared" (blueprinted ) and all flashing is removed - thats about it --unless some one who knows their mass from a scroll in the ground, changes the basic power band of the design.
In today's market. The engine should not suffer from being off axis or have rough casting edges and flashing--unless it is dne in an old sand casting foundry and none of this stuff is done that way.
I would really like to see the actual gains of the "competition engines - vs th stock design -simply done right .
We went through this when drag racing --years ago - a really well setup stock OLDS would run with and beat the cheaters . which really pissed em of as I could spot their mods ( shift points were wrong etc..)
-

flyinrazrback

My Feedback: (69)

I have had numerous 3w motors, both stock and QS/CS series. The CS motors always pull about 200-300 more rpm than stock motors, that is comparing 3w 106s and 150s. Also, the stock 3w 157 is a bit behind the 157CS as well. 3w has got it right on the 80s, they know the market, and especially since you can get a 3w 80 for $5 more than a DA 50, and also most folks flying the 33% birds are on a budget, so when you look at prices when you can get a 3w 80 for $225 less than the zdz, its a no brainer, even if its a couple hundred rpm less than the new zdz. I wouldnt even want to speculate on what the DA 75 (if it ever comes out) will cost, but I bet its even more than the zdz.

bodywerks

My Feedback: (4)

The CS series also has dual sparkys on the head. I don't think that adds much to the top RPM, but maybe better torque/throttle response. Still, The CS is almost a half-pound heavier than the ZDZ. If I were near sealevel, I'd probably give it a shot, but I need the lightest possible up here in the nosebleed section.

rmh

All of the 3W's I have setup/started /tested /owned ---ran very well -the twin plug 200 of a few years back -was rather anemic I thought . I think they dropped it ---
Twin plugs were done for military specs - for the drone craft business At least that was what I was told --by guys in that business.
frankly I reall don't care for all the wiring attendant with em --but I do know that on some setups the power difference is detectable.
For the price on their new "80" the power is cheap - a hell of a lot less than any twin 80/100 I have seen.
I have gassers from 26--160- and my favorite ----the new 80 J I have - the size of these new 80's is just right - like Goldilocks
said not too big -not too little- just right. Powerwise all my engines are great -the 80 size model tho is kinda the best of all worlds .

flyinrazrback

My Feedback: (69)

bodyworks, not all CS motors have twin sparks, that is an extra addition that you can get on the stock motors as well. 3w still has the 200, they have updated the crank as that use to be a big issue with the older ones. Granted, its not very close to the zdz 210 though (another note, the DA 200 is only a couple hundred rpm stronger than their 150, not impressive to me considering the extra weight you pick up). Bodyworks, maybe you should just stuff a BME 110/115 in your 33% at your altitude, that should do the trick (or move out of the stratosphere). I think the 80cc motors are perfect for the 33% planes out there, just a waste IMO to stuff 100s in them. However, I will take my 3W 106s over any 80cc out there in a real 35% that is 28lbs.

rmh

I guess 25% displacement advantage is noticable advantage
The 80 singles tho -on a good full pipe setup will make you re think this one
installing the pipe is a bit of work tho
a good 26x10 prop cranking well over 7000 on the ground is going to make most 35% models wake up. I did the 35% extra by Wildhare with this setuop for a couple of flights when testing engine setups - lots of power but prop noise was high.
the best setup for the 35% stuff I have seen here- a plain old normal 160 ZDZ on a 30 x10 - on simple light in cowl mufflers - displacement really does solve a lot of problems - the 35% stuff set up this way will accelerate -rapidly straight up - most flying is with power held waaay back -till you want it - not for newbies --

flyinrazrback

My Feedback: (69)

Each motor has their own applications, no doubt the super 80 on a pipe is close to or equal to say a DA 100, but when it will honestly pull a 28x10 mejzlik at 7K like my 3w 106s, I am game! I may get that AM 33% 260 when it becomes available and try the super 80 on it for comparison. I hear nothing but praise for these new 80s. I have heard the EVO 80 is a brick though. Dick, what is the scoop on the new super 160, have you got to run it yet?

rmh

The 28x10 Mejzlic-I likely will never know how it runs on the piped 80 -mainly because that is not a prop which will allow the engine to run up in it's best power band. It may be pretty good tho as the Mejzlic 28x10 is not far off on load from the 27x10.
I am flying a 39 lb ,42 % older Radiocraft -I got in a swap - nice model but huge - The 160 on JMB cans yanks this thing out of stationary hovers - vertically very easily and with good speed recovery . It is only on about 6th flight and I am using the 30x14 ZM prop - extremely quiet and good on any type flying - you can't get any prop rip with it . It is very thick with an extreme twist
I flew it on a 32x10 and any power application was a BLAAAAAT- so I will look thru some other props
the engine is like a sewing machine - in a hover -you can play the power up and down in very fine amounts - this is -I think partially due to the new ignition curve . easy to start instant - spool up.

flyinrazrback

My Feedback: (69)

Thats cool, I am thinking on the new zdz 160 if I get another 40% anytime soon. The zm props look neat, but I dont think I would like that much pitch, maybe a 32x12