I liked your review on the Skylark, and also the supplement on the OS 75 AX. There is not enough exposure to two-strokes like you see with fours. It gets a bit old reading all the praise reports found on Saito 72s, and similar products, all of which are above my price range. It's a sad fact that not everybody can afford one of those. I have a .46 AX and a .40 LA. Both engines will start at the first flip, and run reliably enough to get a plane back, and in a controlled fashion. And, they are modestly priced compared to, say, a .91 Surpass or that ilk. I often think of the .40 LA as having the ability to pull a stump, because I only need about 60% throttle for takeoff on my Superstar!

I have thought about kits like the Great Planes Rapture 40 for my .40 LA. However, it is a full build and it has been documented that the plane will land hot, and has less of a margin for pilot error as compared to the planes on Ken's list. I nixed that idea because of the build time and all the fancy tools, jigs, and hardware requirements. Not to mention, I don't like the idea of a tip stall when there's a lot of money invested in electronics and a nice engine, especially when setting up to land over a corn field. A lack of support from others on building it was also a contributing factor in my decision to stick with the more affordable ARFs.

I will be ordering the smaller brother to the 75 AX, the 55 AX. I plan on installing that on a Tiger 2. I think that plane will be worth saving for over the Winter, and having it ready for Spring. It will give me piece of mind knowing that my equipment and engine will be in service for a good while, and perhaps that will make the hobby considerably cheaper for me over time. Perhaps the Skylark will be worth considering, when I decide to add the 75 AX to my collection. Thanks for all the info!

NorfolkSouthern