Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

I was wondering what the popular opinion would be concerning an engine for a trainer (Avistar). I have been told to get the OS .46AX engine, because I could move it to my next plane once I am ready for it. My thoughts are that once I learn to fly, then solo, and am ready for another plane, I would probably just get a separate engine for that plane anyway?

What do most of you guys do, move engines from plane to plane, or have different engines in each plane? I was considering the OS .46LA for my trainer, and am having a hard time justifying the extra $50 for a trainer. Thoughts?

Thanks in advance

Jim

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

The LA is a cheaply assembled motor compared to the AX.

You pay for what you get.

Do a search on the LA series and you'll read a lot of stuff. If you are in a money crunch and are planning on getting a .60 or .90 second plane, then the LA is probably alright. But, if you think you'll have another .40 size plane down the road, then the extra investment will be worth it.

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

I vote for the AX; its considerably more powerful and will indeed be more useful in subsequent planes that you may have. I teach students to fly from a grass field. Sometimes the LA engines barely have enough power to get the plane to move through the grass fast enough to takeoff. Not so with the AX. You might also consider a Super Tiger; there are some good prices on STs these days.

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

The LA is a bushing type engine and costs half of what the AX costs and has plenty of power for the trainer and is very reliable and just as well made. You probably will keep the trainer and either sell it later as a package or continue to learn from it periodically. Mine is used for training and fun fly bomb drops etc now and flies almost weekly although I have several other planes and engines. Go LA.46 and then buy a ST.46 for the next step.

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

Regarding your question about moving engines around. I have an engine for each plane that I have. Now I only have 6 and am building my 7th, so I might change my opinion as I get more. However, I like to have all my planes, including trainers, ready to fly anytime that I get the urge to do so. There are days where I just want to take out my easy flyers and kick around. Then there are those that I really want to practice aerobatics/3D etc. I would not want to be moving engines around constantly. I will add, though, that several of my engines have been on more than one plane, I just don't have that particular plane anymore. (you can guess why not:D:D)

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

All the LA engines I have seen are typically marginal for flying from a grass field and/or in winds above 10 mph. They just do not have the power.

I would go with the AX. If you don't want to go the extra money for an AX, look at the Super Tiger 45, Thunder Tiger Pro 46 or the Evolution 46 engine. These are ball bearing engines with plenty of power and, as you can see, the price difference between the 46 LA ($65.00 ) and these engines is neglidgeable. Super Tiger 45 ($70.00), Thunder Tiger Pro 46 ($80.00 ), Evolution 46 ($90.00)

For a $5.00 - $25.00 difference I know I would want the extra power.

FWIW - The Evolution engines are broken in at the factory - just mount and run.

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

I had the same hard decision(at least for me) to make when I got my trainer. I went back and forth from the LA and the AX. I decided on the OS.46AX because of more power but more important it was also recommended by my instructor. He had more experience with the AX and I figured I would just go with that.

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

I anticipated moving the engine from my trainer to a second plane because I figured I'd crash it. In fact, my plan was to solo, fly the trainer until I crashed it, and then upgrade to a new, more advanced plane. Plan worked better than expected (unfortunately)... my original engine (and engine mount) is flying my third plane now... :D

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

Hi!
I have flown R/C for 30 years, competing in scale, pylonracing, sailplanes and aircombat and having flown helis for just pleasure and teaching newcomers in flying for at least 25 years...and I assure you that the best engine for a newcomer is the OS LA .40-.46 engine ...not the ballbearinged .40FX or .40AX.
The reason for this choice is very simple!
The LA engine doesn't have such temperament as the Ax or FX engines! And a temperamental engine that explodes in power when you give power to it is not what a total newcomer needs.
What he or she needs is an engine that produces good trust and is light in weight and responds to throttle action rapidly and without hesitation.
I know that all OS FX or AX engines are good at this too but they are much more temperamental in their behavior.
Using a 11x5 or 11x6 APC prop on a OS .40-46LA engine will give a very nice airplane behavior. Much better flight behavior than with a ballbearinged engine of the same size.


Then after a year or two when you have learned to fly and want a low winged airplane with a little more speed and want to do some maneuvers ..then get a ballbearinged engine.
But it doesn't have to be an OS....there are many more good engines out there.

Regards!
Jan K
Sweden

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

I've heard exactly the opposite... all the guys I know that had LA engines ditched them for an AX/FX/SX engine because the LA was tempermental...

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

And in support of Jan, I've got another reason. Far too many beginners learn on overpowered planes. This allows them to build bad habits such as 10 foot takeoff runs and 45 degree climb outs. The result is a bunch of people who have no idea how to make their plane fly in a manner that at all approaches a full scale plane. I'm not saying people shouldn't perform extreme things with their planes, I just think it's sad that some people never learned anything but extreme. I've heard the argument of having the extra power to help get out of trouble. Instructors would do better to teach students to not get in such trouble in the first place. This would put them in a better position for flying other planes. Students would do better flying mild mannered trainers and developing good habits before progressing to overpowered planes.

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

My AX is not temperamental at all. In fact, on its first run, it cranked right up. Its been flawless for me.

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

Think I'll have to side on those who recomend the LA. Many beginers dont really know if they will stay in the sport and that will allow for a savings of $50 or so. The LA does exactly what it is marketed to do. The AX is for more performance. However, if I was to recomend a good trainer engine, I'd have to say the ST-40 for $50 is hard to beat. Duel ball bearing and TN carb. The ring engine, may resist lean runs more and cheap replacement costs. It also cheaper than the plain bushed LA. A bit heavier though. Just my $.02.

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

I now have 14 flyable planes (and I fly'em all). One has an LA .40 which I have found to be a very reliable user friendly engines of all. I also have 2 Super Tigre .40 engines which are also very easy starting and trouble free. They also have a heck of a lot more power and haul much larger planes with good authority. For the same or less than the LA I vote for the Super Tigre hands down.

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

Go for the O.S. LA 40. I have it and it is a great engine now that i know how to start it (was turning the prop the wrong way when i first got it). But it is nice and cheap, and if you ever hate the sport (which i know you wont) you can get out without much money loss. Also, if you are getting a plane engine radio and everything get the nexstar package, because it comes with the nicer AX if you want it bad. But from what i have looked at for new planes the ,46 just is too small for most of the ones i am looking to buy

Hope this helps
Chad

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

Either type of engine is fine. But the bushing engine is quite a bit easier to clean after a crash or off field landing, which most beginners do a lot of. As far as a bushing engine not being as good as the ball bearing engine - well what kind of engine did you drive to the flying field? I can't think of a single automobile engine that has anything besides bushings on the crankshaft, cam shaft, or rods.

With the .40/45 LA fly with either a 10x5 or 11x5 prop.

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

Ive just bought a OS 46LA and im very annoyed because i cant even get it to start up, all it dose is spit fuel out the front into my eyes. That did sting. Im hand cranking it and i have done everything the instructions tell me but it wont work.

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

If money is the issue then I would seriously look at the Thunder Tiger engines. As an instructor I found them to be as easy to adjust for reliable running as my OS engines and they have very good power. I had an OS 40FX engine on my LT40 trainer. It worked but when the grass was tall, it made for some very low speed takeoffs. As someone above wrote "Sometimes the LA engines barely have enough power to get the plane to move through the grass fast enough to takeoff. Not so with the AX." < I totally agree and it was much easier to train with LT40's that had 46FX engines pulling the plane. The AX engine is the newest version. BTW, the Avistar is actually considered a very capable second type plane because of its speed range and aerobatic ability so you may just want to hang on to it even when you get another plane. It will fly circles around standard trainer type planes.

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

I have two 46 LAs that have never had any problems of any kind. I use them for fun fly planes and any of my small planes. I no longer fly any new 40 size planes but have used A couple of the Tigers and the OS 46Sfs. I wouldn't ever own another Tiger of any size, {{Junk}} JMO!!! It's true the bearing engines have more power and will outlast the LAs but the LAs are so user friendly. Been flying with my two for five years and they get A lot of air time.
I have different engines for each plane but when I get tired of A plane and build A new one then the old beast gets retired and the engine and gear get moved to something different.
Only thing I do to new LAs is to remove all the screws one at A time and lock- tite them. I have set up planes for other people using the LAs and to date unless I tightened up the screws they would come loose.

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

this is so true, i have seen it at my club

one guy flys on the throttle. and when he had his first dead stick , well,,,,, in it went.

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

I've gotta side with the guys who say to go with the LA engine. I have one on my Avistar trainer and I couldn't be happier with it. Having a trainer that won't hover (an exageration of course) is not a bad thing. Learn to fly first and then overpower the snot out of your next pane if that's your bag. I've noticed a common theme throughout most of these threads. It seems that everyone wants to overpower their planes to the point that they're flying this massive engine with wings. In my opinion, it's better to learn to fly a plane that isn't overpowered for the reasons stated above by Chuck. In fact, even on my 2nd plane which is a 4* 40, I run a Super Tiger .40. Guess what? IT FLIES GREAT despite the fact that 90% of people on here will tell me it's "underpowered" (even though Sig recommends running a .35 to .40 engine) As far as the cost goes, the LA is rather inexpensive and is quite reliable. Keep that engine on your trainer and then spring for the "good" engine on your next plane.

Whatever you choose, have fun and enjoy:D

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

While I've seen a number of guys do exactly that, the .46LA vs. .46AX question is far from this... these are the same size/displacement engines, and only have 3.6oz of weight difference, and in a nitro trainer that will weigh close to 5lbs, that's not much of a consideration. It's really a question of economy vs quality... and everyone will have their own view on that tradeoff...

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

I just have a problem with inferior stuff (Not saying that the LA is, but it is a cheaper motor). I have always been that way. I've owned some cheap stuff that broke, just due to its cheapness. I like to think that when the going gets tough, my stuff can handle it.

Personally, I get extra piece of mind out of that extra investment and its worth it to me. Just work a bit harder to make a tad more money, or save for an extra week or two.

For exmaple, I only buy Japanese vehicles. I mean, not to start a war here, but a Toyota or Honda will go further than any American car, everytime (I've had good luck with Chrysler products, however). They cost a bit more, but are worth it. There are some exceptions to this rule, but I don't think many will argue that generally, this is the case.

Anyway, I say go with the AX. It's an extra $50, and once it is spent, you'll have a more powerful, longer lasting, better accepted (Most people at my club hate the LAs), motor that you will be able to likely run in new models.

One poster said on here to get the LA for your trainer, then get a better engine for your next plane. This is the more expensive route, as I see it. However, if you want the trainer to always be flyable, then perhaps that is good advice. Otherwise, one engine now, and you'll be able to move it right over to your next plane (providing it is a .40 sized bird).

Good luck either way.

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

Jbakic,

You have heard about the same number of opinions for the LA and the AX. Everyone has their own preference on which engine is better for one reason or another. I think that you should ask yourself some questions

1) Are you flying off of a grass field? If so, the LA will sometimes bog down in the grass during takeoff if your field isn’t cut regularly
2) Do you plan on flying in windy conditions of 8 – 10 MPH? You will need a little more power if you do
3) Do you plan on staying in the hobby for more than a year? If you don’t then the LA will be more economical, but it may also add to your frustration by not having enough power and help push you out of the hobby
4) Does your field have a cross wind? You may need the extra power on landing

There are a couple of things that I have read here on this thread that I agree with and some that I don’t, but again, everyone has an opinion. I agree that everyone tends to want to OVER POWER a plane, but flying a trainer with an AX isn’t over powering the plane. That little extra power can help your instructor save your plane when you get into a bad situation during your training. I by no means am an expert, but I can say that at my field 85% - 95% of the people who had LA engines in a plane soon removed them and put in at that time an FX or Thunder Tiger (Price point and good engine) into their trainers. I still have my trainer after 4 years of flying and I replaced the MDS 40 with a TT 46. The plane still flies slowly (that’s what throttle management is for :D) but I have enough speed have a little fun every once in a while. Here in order are my choices.

Thunder tiger Pro 46 $79.99 (Good strong engine)
http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...&I=LXKF97&P=ML

OS .46 AX ABL w/Muffler $114.99
http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...p?&I=LXFMD5&P=

OS .46 LA w/Muffler Natural $64.99
http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...?&I=LXGGV7&P=0

If you don't want to spend the $50 extra dollars, spend the extra $15 and get a stronger engine. Hope this helps

Lee

RE: Engine for Trainer - LA or AX?
 

I'd look at the Evolution .46 (not the trainer system, but the .46nt engine) before I decided on either of the other two. It's got more power, and is just as, if not more reliable and user friendly than either of them others in my opinion. The price is right, too.