ORIGINAL: doublesixes
I am also one of those enthusiasts that has experienced the ST malaise.
In its defense I can say that the engine always starts and produces lots of power but on the other hand, its inflight reliability is disappointing. One never knows if the engine will quit in any of the following situations:
a. On final, at idle.
b. When throttling up at any attitude.
c. In nose up attitudes.
It´s encouraging to hear from fellow pilots that this problem was solved by the use of an onboard plug and I will be implementing that cure ASAP. I will report my results here.
I have to respectfully disagree with Ed here where he claims that deadsticks are always the pilot´s fault. To prove my point I can say that my other OS powered engines never showed such unreliable operation given the fact that my building techniques remain consistent regardless of engine brands.
If this onboard plug cure really works, one would have to assume that what´s most adversly critical about ST engines, especially the larger ones, are the designs of the cylinder head where the combustion takes place, the transfer case and/or the carb. It seems the glow gets overwhelmed by a disproportionate amount of fuel it receives under such mentioned circumstances.
------------------
Deadsticks are the pilot's fault. Why? Because in modeldom, the pilot is the owner/operator/maintenance provider of his/her model. Kind of like the Captain of a ship. That is the context in which I am saying that the pilot is responsible for deadsticks. I'm not saying it to be a *****. I'm saying it so that the pilots out there know that if something needs fixing, it is up to them to fix it - even if they don't know how.
There is nothing unusual about the Super Tigre G2300 that makes it particularly difficult to get it to run right and consistently. No one is born having years of experience flying models. I wouldn't expect everyone to know everything. I sure as the dickens don't.
But here is what we know about the G2300:
Many of these engines need a considerable amount of running time before they become reliable. Anyone being in the hobby for any length of time knows that most glow engines need a good break-in. Ad copy be darned. Some engines come out of the box that need little break-in. This is a freak of nature, so to speak. Rejoice when you stumble upon one of these engines, but keep in mind that this is not the norm. Until an engine is well seated, reliability is sketchy. That's just the way it is, my friends.
This engine is so easy to start and handle that it is very likely that one will get a false sense of security with the engine - making a dead stick all the more surprising. I fly my engines in (after some bench running) on an old Ugly Stik type of model. This puts the engine in an environment of adequate cooling, easy accessibility and maneuver schedules that are not above its ability for lack of running time. These engines get sweeter and sweeter with more and more running time. Slow down and enjoy the view (smell the flowers). Give a newbie a turn at the sticks. It will help them and it will help accumulate running time on the engine. Everyone wins.
As mentioned previously in another post, fuel foaming will make any engine deadstick, stutter, etc. That is not the engine's fault, but that of the manufacturer of a the model if the fuel tank neck passes through the firewall, or if the fuel tank is directly supported by hard structural members and not loose packed foam. This practice alone causes the majority of the problems we read here on RCU about inconsistent engine running.
Ed Cregger