quote:

ORIGINAL: ajcoholic

quote:

ORIGINAL: alfredbmor

Model Airplane News and FlyRc in an effort to cover this novel engine on their latest issues have committed a great mistake. The engine has not been fully tested as many other engine reviews published in the past. If you carefully read both reviews you can easily find that there is a tremendous rush in the edition and finally you have nothing, they did not fully test the engine, they did not explain anything about the materials, assembling, maintenance tasks, plenty lack of information and obviously they did not had the time to bolt the engine in any particular plane where you can find important facts as weight and thrust. I do not know anything clear about this engine except the price, I am subscribed to both magazines and I consider this kind of reviews worthless and a lot less than professionals. If someone here is interested on buying this engine then try to find more information here in the forums with people that already have bought one and are able to share their real experiences and real facts, at least that is what I am going to do before spending that bunch of money.
Alfred.

Alfred,
In my full review of the OS 200 - I clearly have not just "rushed" a review. I did what I always do, properly dissassemble the engine, discuss the components and quality of build with many pictures. I discuss the dissassembly (did you somehow miss that page?) I FULLY tested not just three different fuels (10%, 15% and 30% nitro) with a wide variety of props, but I teested various plugs and discuss how it handles. Of course I always give exhaust and head temps for all props and fuel, always.

My engine reviews for Fly RC always include a flight testing phase. I was not able to get the flight tests complete and submitted in time, so they will be in the following issue. I had some new servos for my test airframe on order which held me back a few weeks.

If you find my very thorough test of the engine "worthless" and inadequate, I am not sure what you expect a model magazine to actually do on top of what I am currently doing - but I am always open to suggestions.

In the end, when I say in my review that I would recommend an engine to a fellow modeler, it is a sincere and educated comment based on 25+ years of engine work, and owning and running hundreds of engines in those years. I would buy one of these in a heartbeat. The engine is awesome.

Andrew J. Coholic
Fly RC Magazine

quote:

ORIGINAL: LuvBipes

Hi Andrew, thanks for participating in this thread - always good to here from someone w/ FIRST HAND knowledge of subject matter.

One question, was there a typo in the review? If memory serves the posted rpm numbers look strange: The figures of the 17X8N were 600 rpm LOWER than for the standard blade 17X8 - that would seem strange......

I have to think that either the engine wasn't sufficiently broken in, or that there's a typo someplace. By the way, the posted APC 16x8 rpm figures are what a garden variety Saito 150 gets, so I'm thinking either bad tach or not broken in.

thanks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: alfredbmor

quote:

ORIGINAL: ajcoholic

quote:

ORIGINAL: alfredbmor

Model Airplane News and FlyRc in an effort to cover this novel engine on their latest issues have committed a great mistake. The engine has not been fully tested as many other engine reviews published in the past. If you carefully read both reviews you can easily find that there is a tremendous rush in the edition and finally you have nothing, they did not fully test the engine, they did not explain anything about the materials, assembling, maintenance tasks, plenty lack of information and obviously they did not had the time to bolt the engine in any particular plane where you can find important facts as weight and thrust. I do not know anything clear about this engine except the price, I am subscribed to both magazines and I consider this kind of reviews worthless and a lot less than professionals. If someone here is interested on buying this engine then try to find more information here in the forums with people that already have bought one and are able to share their real experiences and real facts, at least that is what I am going to do before spending that bunch of money.
Alfred.

Alfred,
In my full review of the OS 200 - I clearly have not just "rushed" a review. I did what I always do, properly dissassemble the engine, discuss the components and quality of build with many pictures. I discuss the dissassembly (did you somehow miss that page?) I FULLY tested not just three different fuels (10%, 15% and 30% nitro) with a wide variety of props, but I teested various plugs and discuss how it handles. Of course I always give exhaust and head temps for all props and fuel, always.

My engine reviews for Fly RC always include a flight testing phase. I was not able to get the flight tests complete and submitted in time, so they will be in the following issue. I had some new servos for my test airframe on order which held me back a few weeks.

If you find my very thorough test of the engine "worthless" and inadequate, I am not sure what you expect a model magazine to actually do on top of what I am currently doing - but I am always open to suggestions.

In the end, when I say in my review that I would recommend an engine to a fellow modeler, it is a sincere and educated comment based on 25+ years of engine work, and owning and running hundreds of engines in those years. I would buy one of these in a heartbeat. The engine is awesome.

Andrew J. Coholic
Fly RC Magazine

Andrew:
I did not miss any line of your review, but as you just said, there is not a flying test, and I do believe that there was some pressure to publish the review at the same date issue (September) as Model Airplane News did. I have to be honest with you and all your readers and, as you said, you did a tremendous job disassembling and testing different fuels and I consider your review much more professional than the one published by MAN reviewed by Chris Ch., but at the end there is not a flying test, I have been following your reviews for a large amount of time and I will wait for the next issue to read your announced flying test.
Keep the good work.
Thanks
Alfred