richohealey

i'm looking to buy a fourstroke for my .46 3d. i've been told that a saito 82 would be perfect. however i can't afford a new one. so i'm looking for a second hand one, so how lastable are they? like years??? because i don't want to fork out for one only to have it die on me. (i'll probs sell my trainer and maybe one of my 46 FXs)

thanks in advance


-richo

edgeman55

My Feedback: (25)

This engine has only been on the market for a short time so you may have trouble finding a used one,but if you can find one you will be very happy in that set up.The 82 is very light and has tons of power.I have two of them and love them both.As far as how long they will last is better measured in hours not years and would depend on how much time you fly every year.If a Saito is well cared for they will give you 100's of hours of use.

tIANci

I bought a Saito 72 that was 1.5 yrs old ... the owner treated her well and hence it was a great running engine. Would max out at 10,200RPM ... a run in one would max out at 10,500 RPM. So it depends on who you buy it from ...

mikeboyd

You may want to reconsider getting rid of the .46FX. With a tower .46 muffler on it, it will do just as well as an .82 four stroke on 15% Nitro. most of us like the two strokes better, because they spool up faster and are cheaper to replace, when we get to showing off and bury it in the dirt.

richohealey

ahhh dude, the whole reason i want the four banger is that they spool up faster.

RhyanO

Some friendly feedback, please dont take this the wrong way.
"four banger" typically refers to a 4 cylinder engine. The Saito 82 is a single cylinder engine. So if you want to use the term "banger" correctly it is a one banger.
By saying "four banger" I assume you are refering to the number of strokes the engine makes for each power (bang) stroke, which you are correct. They are strokes not bangs tho.

wind junkie

My Feedback: (1)

Interesting. I agree 2 strokes are cheaper and DO spool up faster (they can rev from 5K to 17 K in the same time a 4 stroke revs from 4K to 10K) however, you'll never see the plane actually MOVE faster than the 4 stroke powered one -- just the opposite. You get more "whine" and less "pull" with a 2 stroke. The props are smaller, and the torque over the useable (hovering) mid RPM range is less with a 2 stroke.

Concerning durability: After crashing a 4.5 lb tufflight 4D well over 100 times (many, many of these resulting in buried engines) with an OS .46 FX, I can attest that this motor is a good durable one. Two other friends I fly with had similar experiences. The only issue I ever had with the OS was the carb screws had a tendency to fall out, but that was solved by some loc-tite. HOWEVER, after I put a Saito .72 on the same plane, I was pleased to find that it too could survive crashes. And the best part was that the carb is in the rear, so it wouldn't fill up with dirt. I could just replace a prop, clean the dirt out of the fins with a toothbrush, start her up and go practice some more.

A Saito .72 saved my butt MANY more times than the OS .46 ever could. I can't count the times I was doing something crazy low over the deck and punched the throttle when the plane was getting hairy, and thinking "Wow, the 2 stroke could never do that!"

2 years ago I filled out the R/C report questionaire category "best R/C related purchase within the last year" as "my Saito .72". I still think it was worth every penny. They get stronger with age too! Can't say that about an ABC engine!

So, if you plan to fly a LOT, and you consider the cost of your time, it doesn't make sense to skimp on the motor. In my book, unless you actually prefer the whine of a 2S to the "Harley-esque" thumps of a 4S, there's no reason to use a 2S for 3D. If it's an issue of cost, save that extra 100 bucks you were thinking about for the next plane. Drink less beer. (did I actually type that?) Well, you get the idea. That extra 100 bucks goes towards power and reliability you can almost bet your life on.

Rich, if you do want a used motor, now that the .82 is out, you should be able to get used .72. The power isn't really all that much different ( I find that a friend flying his .82 on 15% nitro is roughly equivalent to my .72 using 30% -- both motors on the same prop, same weight airplane).

Super D

I love my saito 82, it will swing a 15x4 where an OS 70 wont very well.

richohealey

ok dudes, settle sorry to start controversy. i was a motorbike guy before i came into theis game, and from where come from 4-banger refers to a four stroke, maybe it's an australian thing. anyway, yes a four stroke produces more usable torque, with power all over not just in it's power band (i used to own a two stroke motorbike- never again!). hang on, better fix that- two stroke motor bikes are GOOD. don't get me wrong (i d0on't want to offend anyone else!), but i ride trail/enduro and it suits my style better.

that said, i feel a fourstroke will suit 3d work better as it can swing a more apropriate prop for the job.

-richo

richohealey

what is the minimum nitro for a saito engine???

RhyanO

I have run my Saito 82 with 15% nitro. I have not had any problems with this fuel on this engine. I do add castor oil to increase the percentage of oil up to 18-20%. Some guys will probally tell you to run up to 30% nitro. I have heard you will get a bit more power, but the cost is quite a bit more.

tukkus

My Feedback: (2)

i use 15% coolpower on my satio .82 and it will swing a 14x4w prop at around 9500-10,000 rpm's with no problem but i usually keep it at 9200-9400 rpm's..if you goto 30% it should swing a 15x4w with roughly the same results

STG

My Feedback: (26)

Both motors will spool up great if properly tuned. Yes the 4 strokers most often have the weight advantage(and are easier to tune), but cube for cube they have nothing on the 2 stroke.--maybe a more pleasing sound.

In the 18oz weight class--The SA72, 82 and YS63. The only 2 stroke with muffler that can run with them is the Jet76L and that is $.

In the 23oz weight class--SA110(21.5oz) .91, OS.91Sur(23.5oz), Mag .91. A good running .91FX(24oz) 2 stroke will come out ahead of these motors -- can easily compete head to head with the 4 strokes. Put a tuned exhaust system on the .91FX and obliterate the 4 stroke per weight. (Yes the YS110 is only 27.5 oz, but you will be running at least 20%) .

Wind Junkie,
I am surprised to see that the saito has been surviving your crashes. I put a plane in with a OS108 on the front this spring and I have a hard time thinking that a SA150 would have made it with only scratches and minor dents. Hopefully I will never have to test the crash resistance of the SA100.[&:]

I broke the SA100 in on 5% Omega and was very surprised to see how well it ran with little nitro. I have since switched to 15% C.P. for 4 stroke (with some Castor) and have seen no RPM increase. 15 x6 apc 9500--(BTW my .91FX turned this same prop 10,200 and with Ultra thrust 11,300 with 15% C.P.)

wind junkie

My Feedback: (1)

STG,

Keep in mind these are 3D practice crashes. Never more than 30 feet in altitude. These are not 100 mph dives from high altitude like you might get in total radio failure. Our field is all mowed grass. It does get pretty hard in the summer time when the clay soil gets baked, but usually it's a mud fest when the spinning prop hits the dirt.

Another thing maybe I should have qualified is that the tufflight 4D has a break away motor mount, so some of the energy in the really hard nose down crashes is dissipated in breaking 2 nylon bolts, which allows the front end and landing gear to dis-assemble -- rather than hurting the plane (or the motor).

By far however, most of my crashes with the Saito have been silly prop breakers -- seldom more than from 10 foot altitude botched recoveries, but ALWAYS at full throttle in some sort of last ditch effort to NOT CRASH. The Saito has always come up smiling in these cases. I can remember having to re-position the muffler a few times when it would rotate on the threaded tube. Sometimes I would lose the "puke tube" fuel tubing that hangs down in the front. Still can't say enough good things about it.

Your OS 1.08 is in a slightly higher weight class than my .72, but still, I bet if you were to crash in a "botched 3D manner" you'd never break that motor either, or a Saito 150 for that matter. Still, if you were to break the motor from say, maybe hitting a hard hickory tree from a "non typical 3D crash" I'd suspect the carb to break off. This may be just as likely as the push rods getting bent on the Saito. At that point, a lot of things boil down to luck. It's a lot different from hovering over the ground (which is always there, asking your plane to cartwheel into it) vs hitting a random tree in a non-3D manner, which is how I assumed most guys would be crashing their birds in this forum.

richohealey

i think dad runs 10% nitro with 18% castor. maybe some synthetic in there. will this work ok?

STG

My Feedback: (26)

From what I understand a bit of Castor is good, but you want the majority of the oil blend to be synthetic, otherwise there is a lot of build up on the valve.

richohealey

ok. this fuel mix runs very well on OS fourstrokes, but i understand there is a difference in SAITO's ie different characterists.

thanks guys

PS anyone know if there is an importer for the MOJO 40 in aust?

3dman523

My Feedback: (1)

Between me my dad and mom we have had pretty much every brand of rc engine. I think saitos are one of the best if not the best four stroke. they all run great. It is worth the extra money to get a saito.

dtburton75

I agree the Saito 82 is a solid power plant it defiantly has my vote.

I have been flying my .82 for two weeks I have gone through 2 ½ gallons and it keeps showing me more power I can’t wait till gallon 4 to see what it has. Like Wind Junkie said the four strokes pull out nice at the last minute I don’t know how many times I said WOW that should’ve crashed but the torque saved my planes but with out a doubt.

I would say buy a new engine that way you know what you have and can control its life expectancy. Yea I know $$$$$$$$$$ I to was going to go used but in the past I have found that you usually have to put more money and or more time into a used product verses new so in this case I saved for a few more weeks and LOVE the results.


I would also use a 22% oil content for you’re first gallon then go to 20% oil content for the rest of its life. The fuel I use is the Wildcat 15% 2 and four stroke fuel then the oil I am adding is 2 cycle oil made by Cool Power the oil is blue and there is a go cart on the front of the bottle. I feel this mix should give the engine a long life.

Good luck with you’re decision,

Doug B.

richohealey

yeah. i have $8 left in my car fund. that's all my omney for a time. also in australia a .82 goes for 400-450 dollars AUD. so we can rule out new. i think second hand wil be the go. does anyone know where there are second hand engines to be had in australia?

IowaSilvia

My Feedback: (97)

Hey Aussie. Don't think there is an importer for the Mojo 40. But I'm sure Paul would send one to you. Just go to www.swanyshouse.com email him and see what it would cost.

richohealey

said $20 for international. that's about 89 american, or 145 AUD. i can't afford that right now.

Shogun

My Feedback: (2)

Ahh the old 2 vs. 4 argument. Pound foir pound a comparable 2 stroke will spin the same prop faster, no doubt. But 3D is mostly flown at low to mid throttle and requires a LOT of small power changes. In that situation torque is what you want, not horsepower and the 4 stroke is the torque king. Anyone that has had the chance to fly any given 3D plane on a 2 stroke and then switched over to a 4 stroke instantly notices the difference and prefers the 4 stroke.

The one thing I have noted about these 2 differnt types of engines is that you can get away with just about any prop on a 2 stroke as the performance difference from prop to prop doesn't seem to vary a great deal. The 4 stroke on the other hand is a completely different animal and needs to be propped correctly for the weight of the plane and fuel type being used. In most of the cases where guys are bad mouthing four strokes that I have seen they have failed to try a range of props out to determine which one is THE prop for their particular plane. When you find the right one you know it because the performance difference is that dramatic, I usually try an average of 4-5 different props before I settle on the one that works best.

Daniel Z

I used to run a 46fx + tower muffler on 10% nitro, now I have upgraded to YS 63S, the YS runs really great and getting stronger every run, never deadstick but until now I have not noticed a large diference in thrust, Maybe the history of ex pylon racer of the Fx makes it stronger, the main reason to go for the 4 stroke besides the larger torque on the low end is reliability; the fear of a deadstick on low 3D maneuvers now it`s gone .
So, a good running 46fx (AX and maybe 15%nitro would be better) it is not a bad thing, but it is a must to be extremely carefull on carburation mainly the low end needle.

Daniel

richohealey

yeah, i know enough about engines to know the difference, i read a lot.

I've pretty much decided that i want to put a fourstoke in this plane. SAITO and YS aside (i can't afford to buy or run either), is there a lightweight fourstroke, suitable for 3d that runs well on 10% and is fairly cheap?