Lets take a poll on the FX 91  
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: none
  Printable Version
More Resources on the
O.S. .91 Ringed
  • 6 Active Classified Ad(s)
  • See User Ratings
  • Suggest Compatible Equip.
  • Check for Retailers
  • Discussions on this Product


    • All Forums >> Glow Engines, Gas Engines, Fuel & Mfg Support Forums >> Glow Engines >> Lets take a poll on the FX 91
    Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7   next >   >>  

    Login
    Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
    Lets take a poll on the FX 91 - 7/28/2003 9:11:25 PM   
    Kirk RC


     

    Posts: 268
    Joined: 4/14/2003
    From: Salt lake, UT, USA
    Status: offline     		Heres a new Tally for the FX 91 saga.

    Ran right out of box: 26
    Fixed it to run: 13
    Hate it: 13
    50/50: 3

    Common trends continue with less than half running right out of the box. All the threads and fixes seem to point to the needle valve as THE issue. The tank, hose size, prop and fuel tweeking appears not to be the real issue any more than on any other engine. Engine works once a perry pump/ KB remote needle valve type set up is installed.

    On a side note I thought I had mine "fixed" with the assorted bigger fuel line, seal the nipples, bigger clunk, 13-8 prop etc etc.
    Flew twice OK but then over heated and dead sticked my Direct Connection FA-18 "Blue Angles" out in the weeds. Shattered the front, tore out nose retract, busted canopy. Thats it for me !!The remote needle will be cut off the back plate and a new carb installed with pump.

    Clearly a major design fault on this OS product and NOT the issue of dumb modelers just not knowing how to set up an engine.

    Good luck to those who have not made any modifications and running it with the straight from factory set up.

    (in reply to Kirk RC)
           Post #: 76

    91 -61-FX - 7/28/2003 10:24:34 PM   
    Wulf



    Posts: 295
    Joined: 2/3/2003
    From: PENTWATER, MI, USA
    Status: offline     		If the .91 has these problems are they also present in the .61 FX?-I know they are quite similar--I hope I do not have to dead stck my FW190-D-9.I realize it`s getting off the track a bit but,I like to know.Anyone help?

    Wulf

    _____________________________

    Wulfmann

    (in reply to Kirk RC)
           Post #: 77

    Lets take a poll on the FX 91 - 7/28/2003 11:28:28 PM   
    SuperStick



    Posts: 125
    Joined: 12/15/2002
    From: little rock, AR, USA
    Status: offline     		while i personally dont own an 91 fx there is 2 at our field both are having problems, we couldnt find an air leak in either we dunked the engines in alchol and had a low pressure 12 volt air pump hooked on to the carb couldnt detect an air leak, Looks like they have a problem at the needle valve either harmonicing and the needle vibrating causing the bubbles so far both guys have sent the engines back they refuse to spend money on something thats supposed to be ready to run especially an os

    _____________________________

    luck is when prepartion meets opportunity

    (in reply to Kirk RC)
           Post #: 78

    Lets take a poll on the FX 91 - 7/29/2003 12:32:09 AM   
    Hircflyer



    Posts: 769
    Joined: 12/6/2001
    From: Kailua, HI, USA
    Status: offline     		Well it looks like the remote K&B needle valve did the trick for me.

    As much as I hate to admit it, if you have one of these engines it appears you have only two choices, do the remote needle valve/pump modification or junk it.

    It certainly seems the the OS folks are not going to help and thats to bad because for over 30 years I've only used OS engines and now I don't think I will ever buy another.

    That's the scary part I've never looked at at any other engines and now I don't know where to even start.

    _____________________________

    Finally! Everyday is a weekend

    (in reply to Kirk RC)
           Post #: 79

    Lets take a poll on the FX 91 - 7/29/2003 1:46:03 AM   
    basmntdweller


     

    Posts: 1731
    Joined: 1/3/2002
    From: Indianapolis, IN, USA
    Status: offline     		All you guys that hate this engine, box them pieces of s*** up and send them to my trashcan . Really, if you want to unload one or two, I would like to get another one at a "don't run worth a crap" price as long as it hasn't been trashed by crashes and such.
    Later,,,basmntdweller

    _____________________________

    Proud brother of the Profile persuasion!
    I got all cross****ed and turfed it, AGAIN!!

    (in reply to Kirk RC)
           Post #: 80

    Lets take a poll on the FX 91 - 7/29/2003 3:57:39 AM   
    2thelmt



    Posts: 102
    Joined: 12/28/2001
    From: Acton, ON, CANADA
    Status: offline     		[QUOTE]Originally posted by basmntdweller
    All you guys that hate this engine, box them pieces of s*** up and send them to my trashcan . Really, if you want to unload one or two, I would like to get another one at a "don't run worth a crap" price as long as it hasn't been trashed by crashes and such.
    Later,,,basmntdweller     [/QUOTE]

    Ambulance chaser comes to mind when I read your post.
    Please, we paid good bucks for these plants, and I for one, would rather fix it, than let it die. I'm getting the cheap next step and installing a K&B remote valve...
    Ian

    (in reply to Kirk RC)
           Post #: 81

    MY EXPERIENCE WITH OS ENGINE - 7/29/2003 4:06:05 AM   
    nedyob


     

    Posts: 1240
    Joined: 2/5/2002
    From: NORTHWOOD, IA, USA
    Status: offline     		I've had OS engines in all my planes.
    When I get a new OS engine, I put it on the engine stand and run it very rich (Wholly Smokes) and I lean it out just a little.
    It seems that most of my OS engines take a good 10 or so tank fulls to break in. It seemed like my OS 61FP would never get broke in way back when. Since then the OS 61FP has been running like a champ.
    I did have a few dead stikes with it and didnt tear up my trainer beyond repair.
    I did make a adjustment to the low end adjustmest I think a 1/4 turn.
    So with that I have broke in all my OS engines the same way and never had any problems from the OS 61FP all the way up to OS 160 FX
    I can't count on both hands all the OS engines I have. but thay all have been reliable up to this date.
    There just little fussy when breaking in and time consuming.
    NEDYOB

    (in reply to Kirk RC)
           Post #: 82

    Re: MY EXPERIENCE WITH OS ENGINE - 7/29/2003 4:20:59 AM   
    SuperStick



    Posts: 125
    Joined: 12/15/2002
    From: little rock, AR, USA
    Status: offline     		[QUOTE]Originally posted by nedyob
    I've had OS engines in all my planes.
    When I get a new OS engine, I put it on the engine stand and run it very rich (Wholly Smokes) and I lean it out just a little.
    It seems that most of my OS engines take a good 10 or so tank fulls to break in. It seemed like my OS 61FP would never get broke in way back when. Since then the OS 61FP has been running like a champ.
    I did have a few dead stikes with it and didnt tear up my trainer beyond repair.
    I did make a adjustment to the low end adjustmest I think a 1/4 turn.
    So with that I have broke in all my OS engines the same way and never had any problems from the OS 61FP all the way up to OS 160 FX
    I can't count on both hands all the OS engines I have. but thay all have been reliable up to this date.
    There just little fussy when breaking in and time consuming.
    NEDYOB     [/QUOTE]


    no doubt os makes great engines, however on the 91 fx they do have a problem both guys at my field have been flying for 20 years and are both os guys. THey have broken in more os engines than most of us have broken out and in and they just cant get this engine to perform except for slobbering rich.

    OS is held to a higher standard than other engines but that is a reputation they have earned with the performance of their product. It is a mystery to me and others why they have let this one by especially when the market is shifting to bigger planes

    _____________________________

    luck is when prepartion meets opportunity

    (in reply to Kirk RC)
           Post #: 83

    Os 91 FX - 7/30/2003 11:17:47 PM   
    Roger George


     

    Posts: 42
    Joined: 2/19/2002
    From: Thornton, CO,
    Status: offline     		Love all three of mine. Ran great right out of the box. One flip start on them,idles great, and they really go. I have one in a 60 Stinger, unlimited vertical and screams in level fligh. They seem to get stronger with each flight. I have never had a minutes trouble with them or my 4 61fx's and my 7 46 fx,s. Most user friendy engines I've ever had. I read about OS FX tbls all time, Im either lucky or other people are unlucky. Love them.

    (in reply to Kirk RC)
           Post #: 84

    OS 91 FX - 7/30/2003 11:34:55 PM   
    Roger George


     

    Posts: 42
    Joined: 2/19/2002
    From: Thornton, CO,
    Status: offline     		PS. to my last post. I'm curious as to what prop size you guys with the heating problems are using. I run all 3 of mine on 13x8's, this is the only prop OS recomends for this engine. They say this engine love's to rev. A friend had a heating problem, he was running a 15in prop switched to a 13x8 heating trouble went away. I tried a 13x10 and the engine really loaded up and performance suffered. I even run pitts style mufflers on these engines. I also run Omega 10% fuel. Might try a 13x8 just a thought. Good luck.

    (in reply to Kirk RC)
           Post #: 85

    Wake up OS/ Any one home? - 7/30/2003 11:53:12 PM   
    Kirk RC


     

    Posts: 268
    Joined: 4/14/2003
    From: Salt lake, UT, USA
    Status: offline     		Both this thread and the "wasted another night" thread clearly point to a OS problem around their 91fx product, but its interesting to note that other OS engines that have been "upgraded" face user problems as well, read thru the threads on the pumped products.

    IMO OS has been attempting to add "value" to their products in the face of increased competition. Thats a normal response by a product that has positioned itself as premium. If they don't add additional value as other products narrow or equal the quality gap than the only thing OS can do is fight on the basis of price and change their brand positioning which they wont and should not do. Unfortunately it appears these attempts to add value ( safety via remote needle valves, pumps on engines etc )are being brought to market prior to being fully tested and performing up to what is expected of an OS product. In premium consumer goods that is the kiss of death! Compounded by discussion groups such as this thread " Viral Marketing " OS will lose control of the consumer dialog. Look at how many longterm loyal OS customers have stated that they will not buy another OS product because of the 91fx! Also think of the power of the opinion leaders that frequent this site. What do you think is being communicated by the opinion leaders to the new folks at the flying fields?
    This has the basis of becoming a classic example and text book case of how not to manage a Brand. Whats even more interesting is that historically Japanese companies don't make this mistake. Having personally lived and worked in Japan and managed a top 10 global product there, I don't remember such a clear case of Brand degradation.
    With all that said many people will respond that I'm all wet and that they love the OS product and will never change. But thats not the point, what is relevant is the loss of brand locality that took OS years to establish and the direct and measurable loss in business. In addition the "lets not address it and hope it goes away" mentality doesnt work anymore. Firestone tires on a new Ford explorer anybody! Obviously entirerly different magnatude of issue but same brand management error blueprint.
    Bottom line is that something has gone off the rails at OS and your just seeing the tip of the iceberg! "Buyer Beware" on their next line extension.

    (in reply to Kirk RC)
           Post #: 86

    OS - 7/31/2003 1:00:00 AM   
    Wulf



    Posts: 295
    Joined: 2/3/2003
    From: PENTWATER, MI, USA
    Status: offline     		I can allready see it in they`re LA line .I have had trouble with the .40LA leaning out in flite and we`re talking about a brand new engine which has been properly broke in.I`ll not buy another LA engine.Period.By the way my OS .61 performed flawlessly in my Cap today-it`s a great engine.

    Ron

    _____________________________

    Wulfmann

    (in reply to Kirk RC)
           Post #: 87

    Lets take a poll on the FX 91 - 8/2/2003 6:13:46 AM   
    Kirk RC


     

    Posts: 268
    Joined: 4/14/2003
    From: Salt lake, UT, USA
    Status: offline     		Hello OS any one home? Two of the largest threads in this engine section are on your 91fx product. Count up all the lost customers do you plan on even commenting on the product?

    (in reply to Kirk RC)
           Post #: 88

    Re: Wake up OS/ Any one home? - 8/2/2003 6:38:40 AM   
    lucien


     

    Posts: 72
    Joined: 6/29/2003
    From: Santa Fe, NM, USA
    Status: offline     		I personally saw the stress OS was under when they quit making the FP line and replaced it with the LA line. The FP engines were, IMO, excellent. There wasn't a bad one in the bunch. I had a .61fp that was a total screamer and was just plain great gallon after gallon after gallon. I still have a .25FP here and it has a 6-bolt machined head, metal backplate and runs like a top. I was shocked when I saw the LA motors with the plastic backplates and the 4 bolt heads.. yuck....

    It was obvious to me that OS was under some pretty severe stress to cut costs when they came out with the LA motors.

    In their defense, the rest of the motors are in general still really good. The .91 seems to be a lemon, but the rest of the FX motors seem to be really good. I used to have a .61fx and it ran and ran with no problems. I have a 1.60fx here in the apt. awaiting a plane and it's got a good rep. too.

    But I agree they're obviously under some kind of pressure - general cost cutting needs, serious competition from Magnum, TT, and others, who knows for sure, but those are my suspects.... it's not inconcievable that this might also be hindering their progress on the .91 issue if in fact they've recognized it.

    Still, I wouldn't expect a quick/easy fix anyway for reasons I've stated in other posts....

    LS

    (in reply to Kirk RC)
           Post #: 89

    Lets take a poll on the FX 91 - 8/2/2003 8:47:46 AM   
    FLYBOY



    Posts: 8692
    Joined: 1/7/2002
    From: Missoula, MT, USA
    Status: offline     		I have 2, have only run one but nothing but trouble. Hate it.

    _____________________________

    Fly it till the wings come off.

    (in reply to Kirk RC)