Khozu

Hi, who has experience with this engine? It looks pretty good. Can someone post some comments, specs?

soarrich

My Feedback: (98)

I have the side carb one. It's the smoothest gas engine I have, adequate power, starts easy, good throttle response. I bought a Turnigy 16x8 cherry prop for it it turned it 7400 rpms, others said try Xoar 17x8, but I damaged the plane before I got to try one. If you don't need the absolute most power, it's a good engine.

Woody218

My Feedback: (24)

I agree with Rich's comments, it starts easily by hand, and is very smooth!

Khozu

Thanks Guys, I have just bought the rear carb one but was a little worried as it seems to be quite new and there does not seem to be a lot of people using it. Planning to put it on a 70" Yak which should weigh in at about 4.5 to 5 kgs. I was hoping it would have enough power for it and was also wondering about the reliability of the engine.

ravikoth

Hi Khozu,

Just bought this one for a friend who is quite a nit picker, will post results from his experience in a few days for your reference, all in all looks good, however with these dime a dozen chinese knock off's
fingers crossed at all times. Best of luck with yours. i just picked up the following, probably made in the same factory, just badged differently.
http://www.mldengines.com/

ravi

Night Scream

I just bought this engine from hobbyking.com

It has supposedly a 3.0hp displacement.

I'm hoping to put it in a 68.4" wingspan edge 540 from horizon hobby.

For 3D i hope it will have power to pull it out easily out of a hover.

Night Scream

Does anyone know where i can find the carburator for this engine?
Hobbyking doesn't have it in stock.. Anywhere else that might sell this carburator??

opjose

It's a fairly standard sized carb.

You can usually substitute others from a similiarly sized engine w/o problems.

Just note if your engine uses an external pump pulse line, or uses a built in pulse pressure hole... THAT you'll need to match exactly.

Small engine repair shops may have the carb you need too.

You may want to google for "Walboro Carb" or "Walboro Carb rebuild kit" to find a vendor.

Night Scream

Question:
Did everyone that also have this engine..

Did you guys had to turnt he carb upside down.. So that the fuel fitting is facing down as well as the linkage?

opjose

I've not reversed the carb.

I believe the pump pressure hole only is feed on one side of the carb, not both, with the stock carb.

If you are use a non-stock carb, things may be different.

Octopus RC

My Feedback: (2)

Hi Khozu
PM me your e-mail , i have it`s manual which can send you by e-mail !
Thank .

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

You might want to be careful believing those HP numbers. The best 28CC engine on the market is good for only about 1,400 watts. The 26CC Turnigy does not fall into that category. 745.6 watts = 1 HP.

The Turnigy and MLD engine are good "starter" engines but don't buy into any HP numbers. I would be inclined to believe from 1.2 to 1,5 HP with either of them but 3 HP is a gross over statement.

captinjohn

Displacement and Horse Power is 2 differenat specfications. Are you Talking 3.0 cubic inch displacement? If it is 3.0 cubic inch....that id about 50cc cubic centimeters. Capt,n

captinjohn

More on the Turnigy 50 about 3 cubic inch.<hr />Earmarked in China as the DL50-Killer. The Turnigy HP-50 has shamelessly borrowed porting and head design from the DLand combined it with a CNC machined billet alloy crank-case to produce a powerful, lightweight and reliableengine.

<hr />Thats form Hobby King

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

I was referring to the thread topic of a 26CC engine. About 1.58 c.i. for a 26CC engine. Don't know that I'd want to put a 50CC engine on a 68" monowing plane. Might come in a "tad" nose heavy and need a lot longer landing gear

3HP on a decent 50 is pretty weak.

3 c.i. for a 50CC engine is close. 3.05 c.i. actual.

kerwin50

I hear alot about hp but isn't the torque of an engine just as important if not more, these are airplane engines not car engines.
My OS 61 puts out 1.9 hp but there is no way it can swing the prop a 26 cc can or fly the size of plane the 26 can.
even though they are close in hp

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

Torque is far more important than HP, but most nobody has any idea of what they need for torque. The point where peak torque is reached is where we want our RPM to be. So if peak torque is achieved at, say, 6850 RPM, we want to prop to achieve near that at WOT. Since our props unload substantially we really want to prop for a static count of less.

Engine mnufacturers rarely post torque figures. That requires a real dyno and some prop experimentation.

kerwin50

Has anyone ran the rotary turnigy 26

shakeelsid

OK Guys, Here is a test report for the rear carb reed valve Turnigy 26-S engine.
A fellow at the local club bought this Turnigy from HobbyKing for close to $200 to install in his second UCANDO 60. The engine fits in the airplane fine, and can even be partially hidden under the puny cowl. I helped him run the motor in and set it up. Beware, like most other Chinese motors, it came with a ignition timing of 42 deg. BTDC, but now we all know what to expect. Set it up at about 28 degrees and it runs ok.
But what a big RF generator it is, the standard plug cap vibrates at all engine speeds, and a hose clamp would not go on becuase the CM6 plug is half way burried into the fins. I ended up crimping the metal sleeve to match the hexagon of the plug and that cured the RF problem.
It always wanted choke before starting , and no amount of hand proping would get it going, so it needed a starter all the time. Initial flights after a 2hr run yeilded 8600 RPM on a Graupner Scimitar 16-6 - Just about enough power to hover his 9 lb UCANDO at full throttle. At that point the owner thought the engine was perfect. (about 1.59 hp, 11.3 Lb thrust)

A couple of weeks later he called me asking if I could help him with his choke, which he said fell off the carb mid flight. He brought the engine over to my house over the weekend so I could diagnose what had happened. Well guys, two of the stand-offs had sheered the bolts at the engine end, the throttle plate was slopping about in the venturi and the choke plate had broken off its rod and fallen off mid-flight. One of the muffler screws had lost its thread in the cylinder block and there was a gritty feel to the connecting rod.

I liked the engine so much that I offered him a trade with one of my proper engines (A Mac Minarelli at that) - well how many times you get to see an engine in such a bad state after say three hours running. It was to be a perfect project for me over the comming long weekend.

I opened the engine up, lower Con rod bearing were shot, simply because it was forced in with perhaps a bend or a kink in the retainer mesh to begin with. I changed the bearing, smoothed out the edges of the intake port in the crank case, washed it up and closed it again. I changed the clone Walbro WT-011(I suspect the one that came with the engine was a fake) with a real Walbro WT-561. Because I had seen that the engine vibrated a lot, I also adapted a nylon glow engine mount to replace the stand-offs.

And then I dug out my own retired UCAN'T'DO 3D to serve as a test-bed.


I have been flying this combo now for the last three weekends, about thirty flights. I had a few dead-sticks in the beginning because of the carb settings. But now, it has become pretty reliable. It will need a starter all the time. It is fairly well run in now, and the best the engine does is to spin a Master Classic 16-10 at about 7700 RPM, which is about 1.8 hp, about 12.4lbs thrust at sea level. Other prop-rpm combos are within the same range, (I doubt it will ever produce even 1.9 hp) but because of ground clealarnce issues I am sticking with 16 and 17 inch props.
It is a very rough engine, high internal resonance, mis-matched crank/conrod/piston weights and I am pretty sure if I had not adaped to a nylon mount, it would have stress fractured one or more of the mounting lugs by now. Hidden behind the fancy CNC machining there are several quality control issues, and I suspect that you will get a range of performance figures from this engine. After my rebuild of this engine, I am assuming I now have a better than average example of this product. If I get some time in future, I am going to mass balance the dynamic components, look at ports and flanges and maybe try to optimize its output.

So guys this is my expereince with this engine, you make up your own mind.


Best regards
Dr. Shakeel Siddiqui

Stuart D

I bought one of these because the price was right and I had heard good reports about their 50cc engine .

This was my first "small" gas engine as I wanted to do some down sizing of my planes and this seemed to be a good

way to start . I installed it in a 2 metre freestyle plane that was about 5.0 kg . The air frame had a pipe tunnel

and I had four exhausts I could test so I was going to give the engine all the chances I could to run right .

I tried the stock exhaust , then a side to rear pitts , then a rx 140 tuned pipe with a s/steel flexi header and

last of all I used a DL 30 cannister with a rear exit . Three flights were done on each set up and the best

was found to be the DL 30 cannister .

While the engine started and ran well enough BUT its lack of power has had the engine pulled from the air frame

and that is where it will stay . I also gave the air frame away because it was such a let down .

I found a picture below , "Remedy" by Modeltech , needs a 50cc to pull those fat wings .

Stu

PS I later went on to buy a DLE 30 which is a great engine and is pulling around a 5.0kg plane with ease .

shakeelsid

Remedy is a good plane, but asking a 26cc Chinese engine to haul it around is asking too much. Put in a Roto or MVVS 26 , DLE 30, anything that will produce good honest 2.5 hp and you will have a ball. And yes, Turnigy 50cc is about 3hp engine, so will be a perfect match, if you could marry those two together

K-Bob

My Feedback: (1)

How many times have we read thatand then about the inevitable disappointment?

a1pcfixer

My Feedback: (7)

Well, when they buy from HK, they get exactly what they deserve.....C_H_E_A_P!!!!
Quality is more than just price.

Hircflyer

Amen

opjose

Agreed...

While some here are poo-pooing the engines, they TG's are actually quite good for what you are paying.

They run reliably, are easy to repair and tend to be well machined.

I have several that have held up very well after a couple of years of use.


However that said, the power output in my experience is NOT equivalent to the German engines.

So as long as you assume 60% of what the specs say, you would be OK.