RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good?  
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Tower Hobbies
Enter up to 4 keywords or Tower stock numbers
Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: Wayne Miller
  Printable Version
       

All Forums >> Radios, Batteries, Clubhouse and more >> User Product Reviews >> RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good?
Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>  

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good? - 10/12/2005 3:49:07 AM   
forestroke



Posts: 1796
Joined: 10/20/2003
From: Taipei, TAIWAN
Status: offline 		i must add... i got my engines for maybe 70% of their cost in the states by buying them in hong kong. i wouldn't be surprised if they weren't exactly the same quality as those that went to farther shores.

and as with all chinese brands, you can never be sure what you're getting. some are screamers, some are duds.

_____________________________

Member of the 4-stroke Symphony

(in reply to forestroke)
       Post #: 51

RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good? - 10/12/2005 3:52:08 AM   
nitro-pilot


 

Posts: 389
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Palm Bay, FL, USA
Status: offline 		Probably but

SuperTigre .51, twenty years, flawless running
SuperTigre .45, ten years, flawless running
SuperTigre .90, 8 years, flawless running
SuperTigre .35, .25, .15 etc

Maybe try a real engine with a real carb. ST made the first ABC engine and they never flake, peel, or require $60 cylinder / piston rebuilds. Try one.

(in reply to forestroke)
       Post #: 52

RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good? - 10/12/2005 4:26:49 AM   
forestroke



Posts: 1796
Joined: 10/20/2003
From: Taipei, TAIWAN
Status: offline 		i've yet to buy a supertigre... but then again, i haven't bought a 2-stroke in a while. i'm all 4-strokers now and lovin' it.

well, that's not exactly true. i have bought a novarossi, a couple of sirios, a rex with the new rex 321 on the wish list

_____________________________

Member of the 4-stroke Symphony

(in reply to nitro-pilot)
       Post #: 53

RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good? - 10/12/2005 2:12:11 PM   
nitro-pilot


 

Posts: 389
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Palm Bay, FL, USA
Status: offline 		Not to plug my market place ads, but go look at my 80 engine garage sale and it says it all. I've run more engines and not just OS. Many pilots compare FX to GMS. Sure, what a difference. Many pilots ran 5 engines as this forum proves. 5 engines. I've run over 300 engines. FX sucks compared to so many many engines of all time. But yes, I'll take a FX over a Tower engine, or a SK, Magnum, and Fox. But how many Picco's did you try? Ever see a Dynamix tach 18,000 rpm on a .40 Webra? Pylon racing engines are fantastic engines. German made engines are capable of outlasting all of us. I never had a Supertigre I didn't like less than a FX. I know many pilots locally that bash all other engines and say FX is the best because they only owned and started and flown FX and never tried another good engine. How about Rossi? For $30 more, you could have a real performance engine with .7 HP gain.

4 strokes are nice, but I find them to throw props sometimes and that scares me a little too much to lose health to play with engines. They can be a pain unless you put time in them after they age. But it's worth it I guess, they sound great, and they are torque monsters. But the issue was 2 strokes. Webra, Rossi, Picco, MVVS, and SuperTigre are my favorite all time manufacturers. Nothing tunes better than a SuperTigre carb. Most repair guys I deal with will replace a carb with a SuperTigre as tweaking the carb is possible and you can yield more RPMS.

FX is a fine mid grade engine. But rear needle valve engines? Plastic parts on the AX? Please. Don't compare a Honda to a Ferrari.

(in reply to vertigo72480)
       Post #: 54

RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good? - 10/12/2005 5:37:37 PM   
forestroke



Posts: 1796
Joined: 10/20/2003
From: Taipei, TAIWAN
Status: offline 		krosypal - well many people would argue that a honda is better than a ferrari in many respects. if dependability, reliability, low running costs and overall value is what the honda is known for and the honda is like the FX, i'd take the FX for airplanes for general flight. i might choose the ferrari only if i'm pylon racing, which i don't.

however, i do run hand made italian motors for my on-road cars, which is all about acceleration and top speed. if the engine quits? yell out to make sure no one plows into it and just walk out and collect it.

by the way, the 512TR the 355 and the 550 Maranello are my favorite modern day cars. 1989 porsche 911 speedster tops the list.

_____________________________

Member of the 4-stroke Symphony

(in reply to nitro-pilot)
       Post #: 55

RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good? - 10/12/2005 6:44:28 PM   
nitro-pilot


 

Posts: 389
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Palm Bay, FL, USA
Status: offline 		Honda performance was the point, not fan belt disasters, fast corrosion issues, and awful crash testing. Ferrari would blow away a VW by 50 mph, not to mention the blondes you can get with it are outnumbered on any Ferrari compared to a Steinfeld car. Seriously, the pylon engines are precisely made, lasting longer than any FX engine with 2+ hp giving it far more power to weight performance and reliability. No plastic back plate of the AX either. But some like vanilla at Baskin Robbins. I'm more into using pylon engines for everything. Why go backwards? How many put the FX aside and go back to LA engines? Trying to describe a pylon engine to FX users like like describing sex to a virgin. Until you experience it first hand, you'll never completely appreciate it. Buy a Rossi or MVVS and try to not take it out to the field every week, allowing your FX to gum up and get dusty for an eventual Ebay sale.

(in reply to forestroke)
       Post #: 56

RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good? - 10/13/2005 6:44:59 AM   
forestroke



Posts: 1796
Joined: 10/20/2003
From: Taipei, TAIWAN
Status: offline 		well... i may consider it one day. but now i'm all about torque since i like to put put around doing basic acrobatics. flying for me is pure pleasure. i see people doing low pass after low pass with their screaming two strokes. i'm happy doing basic imac stuff with a four stroke. the fact i use fourstrokes basically tell you i'm not about speed.

i only have two two-strokes now, a TH75 and a O.S.32SX. the TH is pretty much grounded and the O.S. is waiting for a new plane. i would love to try a picco, rossi or jett but rarely find the inclination. i just don't like to fly fast!

on the other hand, i completely know what you're talking about when it comes to cars. comparing an o.s. to a j.p. modified FX engine is like comparing a slk to the slr.

anyway, the ferrari will probably attract the wrong kind of girl :-) (as would the tower hobbies:-)

_____________________________

Member of the 4-stroke Symphony

(in reply to nitro-pilot)
       Post #: 57

RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good? - 10/13/2005 7:13:46 AM   
aquaflight


 

Posts: 18
Joined: 1/23/2005
From: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Status: offline 		I have had the Towers .46 BB ABC engine for 2 months. It seems OK but I don't think the rated HP is there. Also when I adjusted the low speed so that transition is fast I found the high end to be lean no matter how far I opened it. So I guess the low end has to be on the rich side which doesn't make for smooth transition. Too bad I bought it for a 3D plane. Anyone have the cure? Thanks.

(in reply to forestroke)
       Post #: 58

RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good? - 10/13/2005 1:09:11 PM   
nitro-pilot


 

Posts: 389
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Palm Bay, FL, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: forestroke


anyway, the ferrari will probably attract the wrong kind of girl :-) (as would the tower hobbies:-)




LOL is there any other kind? Maybe that's been my mistake...darn.

(in reply to forestroke)
       Post #: 59

RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good? - 10/13/2005 4:45:10 PM   
chris6414



Posts: 624
Joined: 12/23/2004
From: Warminster , PA, USA
Status: offline 		I would adjust top first then low speed as most manufacturers recommend. I have successfully tuned a Tower .46 and they are little beast when tuned properly. For 3D go with a larger prop with a lower pitch. See if it will swing a 12X4. It will pull like crazy if it can keep the rpm's at around 12000.

(in reply to aquaflight)
       Post #: 60

RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good? - 10/24/2005 2:25:14 AM   
vlizard


 

Posts: 100
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: westland, MI, USA
Status: offline 		The .75 rocks.

(in reply to xDennis)
       Post #: 61

RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good? - 10/24/2005 1:06:33 PM   
nitro-pilot


 

Posts: 389
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Palm Bay, FL, USA
Status: offline 		I've been running Picco and Rossi since this post, I'm happy with 18,000 rpm with a 9X6 prop. Fast little engines they are. I found a HB PDP .40 too, same race quality for the price of a crapola new OS LA .40.

(in reply to chris6414)
       Post #: 62

RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good? - 12/11/2005 10:16:05 PM   
Silverwing


 

Posts: 6
Joined: 10/27/2002
From: Dewy Rose, GA, USA
Status: offline 		I have three tower hobbies .46 engines on different planes. A trainer, a low wing aerobatic and a low wing pattern plane. All run great with tremendous power. I vary between a 10X6 and an 11X6 prop. Other than being touchy with the carb setup I wouldn't trade them for anything. I also have 2 thunder tiger 46 pro motors which deliver as advertised. I would agree that you get good and bad in any mfg. but experience is the best teacher. I will also agree that if you have a problem Tower will repair and generally replace the engine with no questions asked and the shipping is free. You can't beat that. Even with all the discussion so far I would trust Tower and Thunder Tiger the most.

(in reply to forestroke)
       Post #: 63

RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good? - 1/27/2006 4:27:48 AM   
painter downunder


 

Posts: 1
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: N/A, AUSTRALIA
Status: offline 		does any one have a instruction manuel in english for a fs 120 asp 4 stroke pls send to hotilmer@hotmail.com thank"s

(in reply to vertigo72480)
       Post #: 64

RE: Tower Hobbies Engines, Good? - 1/27/2006 10:12:27 AM   
forestroke