forestroke

krosypal - unfortunately, i was in hong kong at the time and the using the warranty would likely costs the same as a new engine. but even if i were in the states, could i return an engine that just doesn't deliver the horsepower? or runs finicky inverted? i think TH will likely just suggest you run it right side up. and i was not using any large prop. i went from a 12 x 6 to a 12 x 8 without any appreciable effect. i was running my 11 x 6 on my 46FX at 11,500 rpm on low nitro. if i had to go to 11 x 6 for my TH75 to get the same revs, i might as well not have it at all. its not only heavier but a (relative) gas guzzler.

and, how many engines of a particular make would you purchase before you decide that it's enough to make it statistically significant? i draw my conclusions from my own experience as well as those of others here on RCU. all i am saying is that if so many people complain, there has to be something wrong with the quality control or design of the engine. i don't much think that buying an engine should be like a game of roulette.

my TH75 is 4 years old now. has had all gaskets replaced and a new head. engines i've owned and personally vouch for or recommend against based PURELY on my own experiences.

O.S. FS70 Lovely
O.S. FS52 Lovely
O.S. FS30 Lovely
O.S. 46FX Awesome
O.S. 32SX(2) Awesome

Y.S. 63 Awesome but Temperamental

ASP 61 Good Value and while Low on Power, Good Scale Engine
ASP 30 Decent Value but Low on Power

TH75 Still Flying but Really Not Worth the Hassle
TS61 Low on Power

forestroke

krosypal - after reading your lengthier post, i'd have to agree with you on that one shouldn't make a general statement based on an isolated incident. i also believe that chinese engines are great value and you'll find that i will recommend chinese engines based on those merits but to discount the value of quality is silly. i would say that a good chinese engine can pretty much do 100% of an O.S. but it's getting that good chinese engine that is the problem. i've had friends who've run the GMS engines (same plant with TH) with great success. on the other hand, i've had friends that have literally thrown in the towel to get the GMS engines or many chinese engines for that matter to stop. it's that inconsistency that is more disconcerting.

by the way, i'd never put an L.A. or any bushing engine in my plane either. a bearing engine is the only way to go. and as for thunder tiger, their engines are really great... i've had the pleasure of breaking in and flying the 36 pro, the 46 pro and the 91 four all with really great results. they were easy to start, had great power and are good value. on the other hand, the GP versions i'd stay away from.

and i just bought a ASP FS120 and a ASP FS91, which i hear are also good performers and great value for money.

rambler53

My Feedback: (494)

Maybe you can help me with problems I'm having with 4 stroke engines and we can use our energy in that direction than debate TH to OS? What break in do you perform on a 4 stroke that is different than any other ringed engine? Why do I have trouble getting WOT?

forestroke

what do you mean not getting WOT? on the ground or in the air?

i would check is the lash on the rockers. if they aren't done properly, the engine will lose power. i have a set of shims i use to set. its from, you guessed it, OS! :-) but i use twice as many times for my Y.S. and ASPs. even for a new engine, it's worth it to check after running it in.

for break in, i run it at rich idle first for one tank. then run it through rich and lean cycles for two tanks letting it cool completely between tanks. i set the idle and fly. hasn't ever given me problems.

the O.S. 52 has a strange break in where they say to go directly to the rich and lean cycles for a tank before flying. i tried it and the engine runs fine but i don't think i'm going to do that again. i had the cylinder bog down and seize during one of the lean sections and scared me to death. i thought i had scored the sleeve. luckily nothing happened.

i use heli fuel on all my 4-strokes. either cool power 15% or 30%. for most flying 15% is adequate... only my Y.S. demands the good stuff :-) i do this because heli fuel helps with lubrication and running cooler. but then again, i've never tried anything else!

for my ASP fourstrokes, i run it for one tank on blubbering idle, then one tank of rich idle making sure it is still running cool. then run a rich mid range before doing two tanks of rich and lean cycles. i do this now because none of my friends ASP's run smoothly after a standard break in and with some testing a friend found that by babying it at break in, it would run consistently if at a slightly lower compression. i bought it and that's how i did it for my 30 and 61.

rambler53

My Feedback: (494)

A 4 stroke lover at our club helped me with the engine and he also couldn't get it to bring on the power at full throttle. It is consistently weak on the ground and in the air. We checked everything, rockers, lash, compression, carb, even changed needle valves. It liked a smaller prop. I'm thinking of changing fuel tanks just to rule it out but it's not running lean. Once it did dead stick on me and I took it off the plane giving up and now put a new one on. I want to break it in correctly and thought like most ringed engines, you vary rpm, cool down between tanks, and start rich to clean and cool the new metals until they run in. ABC engines sure made me lazy last two years, this sounds like work!

forestroke

krospal - i think it is even more critical for a fourstroke to be broken in correctly than a two stroke because you're only getting ignition every other stroke. i would also try to use higher nitro fuel for saito's and Y.S., which seem to benefit greatly from it. my Y.S. is much much more temperamental on 5%-15% than it is on 25%-30%. could make a huge difference. i think that you should try some 30% heli fuel on your old lump before moving on. you might be surprised. as for the new engine... you cannot break it in like an ABC engine. but then, you already knew that :-)

rambler53

My Feedback: (494)

Thanks. I started recently the 4 stroke affection, and have several to start with. Maybe you can give me more insight on what to expect with your experience. I have old ones from RCU market place and some new ones. I've heard Saito has a common problem of bearing failure, and if this is ignored it can ruin the case. Debates locally include a significant power difference between OS and Saito of the same displacement. I find that hard to believe but I lack the hands on with this subject so far. Do you have some applications and recommendations on any of the following for easy flyers like Pipers, Decathalons, etc? I don't 3D or hover, or I'd fly heli.

Saito 1.20 , .91, 1.00, .80, .72, .82., .56
OS (glow plug leans towards the prop, what idiot designed that? I immediately bought a remote glow plug adapter) .90
Surpass Ultimate .70, .61, and I think I have a Magnum .91 in a RTF plane I bought (Four Star .60). I noticed when I test flew the four Star the sound was very addicting and that's why I started this flush out of the 2 strokes and want to put 4's in their place. But I already threw a prop, spent $100 on new double prop nut kits to help keep props out of my body. I've seen guys at the field here flip them over intentionally in the wrong direction to get them to start in the counterclockwise direction! Seems to work for them. If you can help me with more on these than what I've read in the past as to proper starting, and what size would work in .40, .60, .90 2 stroke applications, I'd appreciate that as many others possible going into this direction also. I have two .40 sized Pipers, one has the Saito .56 on it as it came that way. But to me it's underpowered. I have replaced it with the much heavier OS .80 and that's why I bought the .82 Saito for the other and to keep the nose weight down. The Saito .82 is on the clipped wing as well. Friends are telling me these are far more power than any Piper needs (70" wingspan). Then another tells me I can get away with displacement for displacement between 2 and 4 strokes, but why do kits disagree with such recommendations? (I know, another long post, but I'm basically throwing three separate posts all at once out here for faster input.) Maybe there are some sources out there besides the vast spectrum of opinions on 4 stroke applications. I don't even know where to get a prop chart for the 4 strokes without going online to look at new engines of same displacement and copy their recommendations. Finally, why the $7 long reach plugs? And as far as fuel, I thought the extra oil content was the primary concern, not nitro content? Just asking, and asking...

Mr Akimoto

I have been an observer of the R/C scene for many years. During this time, I have read many R/C product reviews and watched many modelers fiddle with their engines trying to start them. In general, I would stay away from all engines that undercut the prices of established manufacturers such as OS and YS. These would include all Chinese products including the Tower engines which I imagine is Chinese too.

China is in the early stages of re-industrialization (after the Cultural Revolution), and they are furiously working to produce cheap products for export often selling them at a loss just to establish a foothold in foreign markets. In the next ten or fifteen years, China and India will be economic and manufacturing powerhouses likely exceeding Japan and the US of A but not today. The government planners in China (and India) are strategic (long-term) planners who see current sacrifices of long work hours and low wages for workers as a way to an eventual raising of their standard of living.

Finally, I am always amazed that the major economies of the world have an insatiable appetite for 3rd-world goods and services!

Adios,

Mr Akimoto

rambler53

My Feedback: (494)

[quote]ORIGINAL: Mr Akimoto

China is in the early stages of re-industrialization (after the Cultural Revolution), and they are furiously working to produce cheap products for export often selling them at a loss just to establish a foothold in foreign markets.


Ya know what? This has nothing to do with this post, does it? I'd write more but I'm off to China and traveling the world for the next five years to catch up with Akimoto's criteria for an opinion on RC engines. What a guy, I mean bigot.

forestroke

i agree with krosypal for the most part. china engines are good value. but i also agree with Mr. Akimoto simply because i do believe that o.s. engines are more reliable. for me, the added cost of that minimal increase in reliability is worth the extra price i pay for them for certain applications. yes most people will believe that O.S. is overpriced just like mercedes, bmw, lexus, infiniti and jaguars are overpriced. there is almost no additional functionality you get out of a lexus than it's toyota counterpart. so why do people buy them? because they think it is worth the money for that marginal quality benefit and some of those less tangible things.

having said that, i don't agree with Mr. Akimoto's other nonchalant comments:

"furiously working to produce cheap products for export" - i think this belittles the planning of the country and its companies. the fact that they produce products for the masses is a result of the consumers. i'm sure you would agree that the world is not ready to purchase high cost/high quality products from china because it just doesn't have that kind of country brand image. just like japan after the war, it could only produce cheap products for the developing countries. i don't think the japanese were thinking "let's produce the lowest quality items at the lowest costs" but rather, what can i produce at what price that others will accept? and what they found is that they could provide consumers the most value by offering low cost items at reasonable prices. and that is what essentially happened. "made in japan" was once considered a joke just as "made in taiwan" was and now "made in china" is. but clearly there was a strategy, a chosen path that was rooted not in low quality but in developing their capabilities.

"early stages of re-industrialization" that is an interesting thought. while on a whole that might be true, it is misleading. while made in china the products may be, many times the design, machines, even management are foreign. i just went to a plant in shanghai and the machines they use are from japan (okuma, mazak, etc.). i've been to plants in india where all their equipment is imported (german, american, japanese, taiwanese, korean). many plants have japanese leading their quality control employing statistical quality control and reaching six sigma. the majority of laptops these days come from china including Dells, which have nearly zero-defect. so while it is true that china is still reeling from the cultural revolution, many plants if not many of areas of china are world class. so, these china engines, such as those from tower hobbies could be every bit as good as those made in developed countries.

"selling them at a loss" that's a bad thing to competitors, bad thing to the manufacturer... but frankly a good thing for consumers. you're saying that we are getting even more value than we are paying for!!! but i doubt it is true. i'm not sure where you get your information from but i would say that most of these companies that produce engines are private not an SOE, so they have to make money. i think you must admit, a country such as china is not exactly treating model aircraft engines as a necessity or even desirable for economic growth.

"The government planners in China (and India) are strategic (long-term) planners who see current sacrifices of long work hours and low wages for workers as a way to an eventual raising of their standard of living." huh? last i checked, there is quite a market economy in china. a lot of people around the world are moving to china to find a job.

that "insatiable appetite for 3rd-world goods and services" is why Japanese is where it is today, export-led growth. and why the insatiable appetite? the products from developing countries like China and India offer products with a performance/price ratio higher than available from developed countries.

of course this is slightly off-topic but it does support the entire chinese rc manufacturers, of which the company manufacturing TH is one.

Mr Akimoto

I'm not sure what your post has to do with anything either, and you might consider using a few paragraphs for readability!

Mr Akimoto

rambler53

My Feedback: (494)

Thanks, have a nice day.

Mr Akimoto

I'm an economist specailizing in international trade. As such, I spend a great deal of time in destinations such as China, Korea, and Taiwan. For example, over the last five years, I have spent nearly half of it in China. As a result, I have traveled to nearly every part of the country. I know the culture, people, politics, and the markets intimately.

For the most part, China is a backward and very poor country with huge social problems that the government is between a rock and a hard place trying to resolve. What you see on TV, usually of a few major cities or manufacturing plants, doesn't truly portray the reality of the common person in China.

China is still a communist country run by an elite group of politicians and central planners that have reluctantly moved to a freer society and a "more" market oriented economy. However, don't believe for a minute that one can freely express any opinion that pops into one's mind with out consequences.

Regarding the banking system, China doesn't really have one, or what they have is an antiquated system that is in desperate need of reform. The stock market is a very dangerous place for Chinese investors with difficult or impossible to understand rules regarding accounting and reporting of company profits.

Regarding the rest of your post, I find it difficult to believe that you have ever set foot outside the US of A. Like most westerners, you wear blinders and can't really see. You evaluate things within your own frame of reference unable to free yourself from your own preconceived prejudices.

I'll provide you with one example of just how difficult the economy is in China. You have no doubt heard all the rhetoric from your congressional leaders regarding the trade deficit your country runs with China. They want the Chinese to revalue their currency upward by some 27%. In other words, they (you) feel Chinese imports (into the USA) are too cheap, and you should pay more! In the meanwhile, the Chinese are adamant about keeping the currency at its current peg to the dollar. If their economy is so good, hot, and properous, then they should welcome a re-evaluation. Consider that they could receive more for their exports and with a strong currency, they could acquire more in international deals with other countries (the recent deal to buy Unocal for example).

The fact is that the economy is very weak and feeble like a young child just beginning to acquire the life skills for survival.

I must run. Business calls!

Mr Akimoto

Mr Akimoto

I believe you have embarrassed yourself with your obvious ignorance and meager writing skills!

Mr Akimoto

forestroke

Mr. Akimoto - it was a shock to read your response. at first i was quite impressed with your self-proclaimed credentials. but as i read your post, i was progressively less impressed. i realized that you are exactly what you claim to be, a macro economist. so i'm not suprised that you take the information that you've collected and make general comments about a certain country. that's your job. and i don't contest any of the remarks you made in your second post on the macro scale. but the claims you make about china do little to support what you originally posted, which reads more like preconceived prejudices (oops, that's redundant).

and, as for my credentials, i have been building CNC machines for over a decade. i have visited numerous manufacturing plants from all five continents so i do know what i am talking about when it comes to manufacturing quality and quality control. at least i should know a little more than an economist :-)

Mr. Akimoto, for the benefit of everyone here, i'll withdrawal those poorly constructed and meager arguments that may have offended you. it was not my intention to hurt your feelings. all i am saying is that there are products from China that are good. they don't all have that third world mentality. for example, i've had great experiences with World Models, which nearly everyone here will agree offers one of the best values for the money.

as for your attack on my knowledge and skills, i was more angry than embarrassed. but that's okay.

by the way, i agree with one more thing: as an economist specializing in international trade, you had better stick to those japanese engines!

forestroke

Mr. Akimoto - thought that "obvious ignorance..." comment was for me. definitely less angry now

you know, i wouldn't be surprised if somehow we know each other through as few as one degree of separation given that asia is so small. wouldn't it be a pickle if we were somehow friends? you never know!

anyway, would be fun to discuss all those macro issues with you.

DALE PABAJO

OWNERS OF TH ENGIENS I HAVE A TH .60 GAVE IT THE LOOOOONG BREAKIN PROCESS RUNS GREAT LOST IT IN A CRASH GOT THE ENGINE BACK TOSSED IN MY ENGINE GARBAGE BIN PUT IT BACK TOGETHER WITH A BUSTED PISTON BROKEN CARBURATOR SINCE THE MUFFLER GOT TORN OFF IN THE CRASH I HAD TO CHANGE IT FOR AN O.S. MUFFLER IT DOESNT HAVE AN EXACT FIT BUT IT WORKS USED A CLAMP FROM A CAR WATER HOSE I MEAN THE ENGINE IS REALLY JUNK BUT I PATCHED IT UP BUT SOME SILICONE ON IT FOR THE AIR LEAKS AND IT RUNS JUST GREAT. FOR BEGINERS I WOULDNT RECOMEND SINCE BEGGINERS ONLY WANT TO FLY NOT AJUST ENGINES[8D]

forestroke

i wouldn't really classify myself as a beginner but i'd still rather fly than tune my engine. in fact, tuning engines has to be one of the LEAST favorite activities. that and salvaging a lost plane.

genrcflyer

My Feedback: (1)

Can Krosypal tell me how to adjust the carb on an OS .61 SF? I got one at auction that had been sitting awhile but had great compression with everything else loose and turning freely. Put it on my old 4 Star 60 with a 12x6 prop and, after some priming, it fired right up. Think it will give me the vertical that the old KB .65 Sporster wouldn't. Runs great with a lot of power at full throttle with the needle screwed way out but won't idle down. Suggestions anyone? Thanks.

rambler53

My Feedback: (494)

Idle screw is not set properly. When you say it won't idle, is that a sudden stop like a lean condition, or sputters rich? Set the main mixture needle and then very little adjustment is now needed on the idle screw, 1/8 turn at a time and run it until you get the idle you desire. Don't get redneck and turn it out too much. If it ran good before on another plane, than clean the dirt out of the carb. Check out n4367a onthe worlds largest auction site, he's Otho, he works on all my engines for me. He's the main man.

elenasgrumpy

My Feedback: (4)

I have a new Tower Pro .46 that is in their Tower Trainer that was bought for me as gift. I took it to the local club field here and asked this guy Dale to help me run in it a bit. It started right up and as another club member came up and saw what I was running he began to tell me good luck trying to get that thing to run right they're junk! Meanwhile Dale is quietly tuning away and in about three minutes has this thing purring like a kitten. With about 3 minutes worth of fuel ran thru it, low idle is as smooth as can be, when he cracked it wide open, no hesitation what so-ever, just solid horsepower. Since then I have had another friend at the club maiden it for me, then he took me up with a buddy cord. Dale tuned it fat on the ground telling me it would lean out just right in the air that way. So far he has been right on the money. By the way the other guy that trashing this engine quietly slithered away when Dale got it idling so nice that fast. Now keep in mind I am a rookie at this hobby but in MHO the one I got is a darn good running engine! Lots of power with a great low idle & positive throttle responce. I guess only time can tell how long it will last it really isn't completely broke in yet. Mark T.

rambler53

My Feedback: (494)

Just remembered, replace the glow plug first.

vertigo72480

How come nobody has mentioned the Magnum engines? I have a GMS .47 that is extremely finnicky, swaped it for an OS .46 FX and no problems. My next nitro motor was a Magnum .28. It's a little screamer. Another guy at the field has a Tower .75 in a F-14 Tomcat that we clocked at 12,500 at WOT. My friend has a GMS .76 that is a little power house. The only motor I've ever had problems with is that .47. Not sure why, but I wouldn't rule any motor out. I usually buy on recommendation, experience, and price. Meaning, who recommends what, who has experience with what, and what's the price. I may pidle around with the GMS later on, but I just wanted to fly.

rambler53

My Feedback: (494)

Ew yuck, a FX, (shudder). Good luck! LOL I rather ignore the OS fantasy and enjoy real engines.

forestroke

hey... i loved my FX!!! (it wen't in with a bang when my pattern plane lost rudder in a low knife edge). it was easy to tune, idled forever and was great out of the box. i was definitely spoiled. i ran TS's TH's TT's and GMS's as well and nothing could beat out the FX.

TS 61 - stable but lacked power
TH 75 - deadsticks all the time
GMS 47 - great power but had to throw in a rag to get it to stop
TT 36 - great power but had to throw in a rag to get it to stop

for 2 strokes, i still like OS