aspeed

Even the LA .10's are the same design carb except for the remote needle, still, as is the AP .09. The latest old style loop scavenged OS .10 goes about the same as the later LA. Fairly good. The later one has a muffler I think. I have the .15 and it is that way. I think we lost the original poster.

MJD

My Feedback: (1)

I don't think he figured it was such a subjective question.

GallopingGhostler

My Enya .09-III TV has an idle air bleed screw, so does my Thunder Tiger GP-07.

Here's the original poster:
The subject of engines is a very broad one. In conclusion, I'd say that there are defects in nearly all brands, and one can't single out one brand. So, I don't know if the OP's question ever truly got answered.

50+AirYears

I just noticed some comments about a certain brand of four stroke engines being hard to start and backfiring and throwing props. I remember seeing this with many 4s, not just the mentioned brand, back in the early days. Seems to me Lee adressed the issue in one of his columns. He seemed to feel the issue was due to the owners, not the engines. IIRC, his idea was the problem was mainly due to too big or small a prop, Nitro and oil percentage other than asked for in the instructions, and people setting the needle way too lean trying to get a high peak RPM beyond the engines capability. Also there might have been problems with setting the valves wrong. His recommendation was to follow the mfgers guidlines for prop size, plug, fuel oil and Nitro, and to use a tachometer because these engines don't have the same sound changes the 2s do. Slight differences in sound with RPM changes are too fine for most people to notice.
After the column came out, several, not all people in the clubs locally trying to use these engines followed the column, and had the troubles drop to almost 0. In fact, for a number of years, my club hosted the 1/4 scale pylon races, everybody used a common fuel, and everybody used a tachometer to set the mixture, using RPM rather than sound. I don't ever recall any of those racers experiencing throwing props or backfiring. In fact, I think the particular brand was in over 2/3 of the planes.

blw

My Feedback: (3)

Those 2 engines mentioned are high compression 4 strokes, and they would throw props if too lean.

Mr Cox

Well, that is exactly my point. Just because it was good enough at the time, doesn't mean that it works well. Before the carb they offered a choke on the OS PET, and that worked well enough at the time compared to no throttle at all.

You do need and adjustable low end, and OS had that on all of their other engines, i.e. .15 and up. You can put a .15 carb in the .10 engine and get a better low end, simply because it is adjustable.

proptop

My Feedback: (8)

When I first saw the title title of this thread, I thought...Hmmm, this should be verrrryyyy interesting (remember Arte Johnson on Laugh In? )

It is...

rc74

My Feedback: (6)

If your just getting into this hobbie stay away from glow and go GAS! So much better

GallopingGhostler

Well this is interesting. The engine works fine for me. It idles fine. Come to think of it, I mounted it sidewinder fashion on a SureFlite 40" foam Piper Cub, and worked fine on its side. So, it is my favorite engine. I have 2 of them, and the OS Max .10R/C flies fine WITHOUT AN AIRBLEED SCREW.

So, if you needed to modify yours to make it work for you, more power to you.

I have told you my personal experiences with it, so if you don't believe me you are free to ignore me.

GallopingGhostler

I beg to differ, Mr Cox. Please see the attached photo. The .15 has a larger carburetor. It will not fit the .10. Come to think of it, neither does the OS Max 10LA have an air bleed screw (see photo).

pmerritt

My Feedback: (118)

I think the biggest problem with most engines is that really BIG nut in front of the prop!  (not the small one)

GallopingGhostler

Sometimes people do have bonafide problems with engines. Defects do happen. Once in a while a poor product is released that should have not, but you are right. Sometimes it is a poor selection of engine (bad engine/plane combo), poor choice of propellers, use of fuels / additives / propellers counter to the manufacturer's recommendations, etc.

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

To me, a bad engine is one that requires additional machining or a replacement of brand new factory original parts in order to make the engine run within expected parameters. This is especially true if the original misdesigned part could never have worked under any circumstances.

I don't consider an engine bad if a part or two is malformed, but could have been made to work if manufactured as designed. That is a different matter entirely.

Nor do I consider an engine bad if the manufacturer doesn't choose to gush over me on the telephone.


Ed Cregger

GallopingGhostler

I received a Thunder Tiger GP-07 some time back that was missing a glow head gasket. I immediately contacted the hobby shop that I ordered it from, they mailed me a gasket.

Sport_Pilot

My reference was to the older Saito's.

Sport_Pilot

This is nothing compared to glow VS electric.

jeffie8696

Oh yea, and not just the airplane guys either, the car guys can get very passionate about it.
Me. I aint prejerduuce iether way.
You should see a Traxxas Stampede with a 3900KV brushless and a 3S lipo on it.

earlwb

Well as to "Bad Engines"...

1. DEEZIL - poor fits and cheap, every once in a while one of the engines would actually work and run OK and confuse everyone else

2. GHQ - sparker that ran clockwise,  it had a reverse prop on some of the engines that came with a prop. Like the DEEZIL it was cheap and poor fits, later engines actually had a stamped steel piston. Sometimes one would actually run also confusing people too.

3. Thor, Synchro, Buzz, Rogers, Bullet   - slag engine.. low cost cheap engines, .wore out in a couple of runs, I think this was where the term "Slag Engine" came from. The aluminum piston ran up and down in a soft  aluminum cylinder. The aluminum was scrap metal from unknown sources as was the unknown alloy used in the crankshaft as well.  Sometimes they had sheet metal stampings for the connecting rod too. They also coined the phrase, "If you got it to run, you wore it out already" with these engines too.

4.  The Russian made ELF 1.5cc replica engines using incorrectly machined ABC cylinder piston sleeves. If the engine ran at all, it would heat up and lose compression and quit. Most of the engines didn't run though.

tiffitech

Elfin not Elf Earl.

Besides of that, The russian Kometa MD5 which is clone of the older Super Tiger G21 if I got it right, is a thing of its own.
Piston rings that never seat, a Piston much to heavy and a Crankshaft with an intake timing that makes it almost impossible to start.
Thats all besides of the aut of angle machined Crankcase.. Have fun!

Regards,

Holm

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Those high compression Saitos mentioned above do not require a fix, just a little respect. I have two of them and its been 10 years or more since either has kicked a prop loose.

waterloged

personaly i have had some bad luck with several super tigre's others i fly with loved them. []

jp1961

The two engines I've had the most trouble with are a Thunder Tiger .75 FS and a Super Tiger 2300. Both have flamed out at takeoff (several times) with not so pretty results. One brand of engine I would like to comment on are Aviastar engines from SIG. They are very reasonable and run really well. I'm sure if Consumer Reports rated model airplane engines, they would give them a "best buy" rating.

Jeff

ira d

In the almost 20years I have been in the hobby I have run Satio, Magnum, OS, Thunder Tiger,and Super Tiger. I had the best luck with OS
and the worst with Magnum I would also rate Thunder Tiger and Satio as good engines also.

ssautter

All of the forementioned manufacturers have made good and not-so-good engines! In the real world, companies merge, liquidate, spinoff, and outsource production. Therefore, brand loyalty is yesterday's news....

In general: stay away from racing engines and gasser engines, when you are first starting with IC power. The added complexity is absolutely fine for the advanced tuner, but will test a newcomers patience.

It's also true that newer engines, in general, are made more cheaply. But, don't avoid an entire brand of engines, just because one person had one isolated, bad experience with one of their engines.

Availabilty is my most important factor when chosing a powerplant. Cost and product support are also good factors to consider.

I also try to work with OEM equipment, within reason, to combine orders and save on shipping costs and wait times. For example: I use OS and Thunder Tiger engines on Hobbico and Tower Hobbies airplanes, and E-flite motors on Blade helicopters, from Horizon Hobbies.

If you are working with your LHS, then it is possible to exchange a lemon for a new engine, and not need to call a product-tech support line. Or, if you are dealing with an online retailer, then a RMA number should be sufficient.

So, the bottom-line is to always stay away from the "other guys" engines, because that will only complicate your ordering process, and have you spending more time on the phone and less time flying.

GallopingGhostler

Give me your tired, your poor. I'll find a home for those engines.