|
RE: Engine suggestions
I am not a huge fan of OS but for the money they are the best running engines out there. Look at rc combat 90% of the engines used are os and they outturn and outlast about anything out there. I have tested many engines (norvel, webra, MDS, magnum) and none come close to the performance of the os. |
RE: Engine suggestions
ORIGINAL: tonyob Having your instructor agreeable to what you are flying, in regards to plane, engine and radio is preferable for sure. At our club we've seen plenty of new guys come along with cheap equipment sold to them by various local hobby shops and they wonder why they have trouble or can't upgrade, etc. Talking to the instructor and other guys at the club is worth doing particularly since you are likely to ask them for help when you have trouble. If you've asked them, and gone against their advice, they may be less able to help you then if you go for their advice. At the end of the day, however, it is YOUR plane, YOUR equipment, so you have to get something you are comfortable with. |
RE: Engine suggestions
Thanks you guys, for the sheer number of responses! Amidst all this varied opinion, some kinda clarity is coming up (atleast i think http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/js/f...wink_smile.gif)
|
RE: Engine suggestions
For trainer engines (also for 2nd plane use): 1. OS 46AX, pricy but easy to start and tune and tons of power if you can afford it at all, you won't be sorry! The user friendliness, reliability and extra power when it gets windy will be appreciated on the first flight.
2. Thunder Tiger 46Pro, a less expensive but still very good alternative. As an instructor I found them also to be as easy to start and tune as the OS but not quite the same power, but close enough. Any other brand in this size just doesn't give the reliability needed for nice training flights IMHO. [8D] |
RE: Engine suggestions
archie05,
The reason that I run strictly OS engines is not my opinion. I have been flying RC since 1980 and after entering the hobby with a RCM trainer and a K&B 40........which by the way was a good combo at that time. I then started purchasing OS engines and have never looked back. The OS engines of course cost more but they fly out of the box..........back then and now. I don't have to work on OS engines, they just fly and fly and fly............quality costs.........and that is not an arguable point. I worked in engineering for over 45 years and there was always an argument about schedule or quality.........schedule always lost because when we cut corners it cost........taking a few extra hours and delivering a quality product costs more but it is worth it to the end user. Andy |
RE: Engine suggestions
Sport_Pilot,
I don't know where you get that most engines outlast OS. I still have the OS45FSR that I learned to fly with in 1983 and it runs fine. As a matter of fact it was stored for a few years when I moved and recently I dug it out and mounted it on my original Midwest Sweet Stik. I made a comment to one of my buddies that I hoped it would start after all those years.........well the starter didn't even turn over one time and the engine started and away she went. OS goes the distance...........PERIOD! |
RE: Engine suggestions
O.S. Max engine durability varies from model to model. Just because a .45FSR has lasted and lasted doesn't mean that a .46 AX will enjoy the same long life.
The Glow Engines forum here on RCU has extensive posts regarding engine durability testing. The following post by Dr. Nitro was made in a thread concerning the O.S. Max 1.20 AX 2-stroke, and is frequently cited: ORIGINAL: DR NITRO For the past few years I have been paid to test run engines for a model fuel company. Since I have my own private flying field and am out in the middle of nowhere and retired, I can do this till my heart's content and not bother anybody. Mostly I run them on the several engine test fixtures, then a few of them I will actually fly on one of my planes or heli's. I even have a set of load beams to mount on car engines and a ducting system to cool the head when I test run them. I have gone through lots of engines, some were good , some were junk. I use as a baseline, the average 40 size two stroke will run 15 minutes (at varying throttle positions) on 8 ounces of fuel. My goal is to get 400 hours on an engine or 100 gallons, whichever comes first. I have had numerous engines make it past this mark and a few that did not. To be be fair, I do a few things that the less experienced modeler does like shut them down for the day and do nothing to them until they are run the next day, I also run them a bit lean but only to the point where the rpm's are peaked, not past peak and generally use a prop that is on the small end of the scale for the given engine. I do run them on a fuel type that is intended for that design or recommended in the instructions. and always two identical engines are run identically at the same time, one with a competitors brand fuel and one with the company I'm contraced by, just for comparison. Anyway, to make a long story short, I have run the engines you mention above and a bunch more of the OS line, this is what I got before the engines just simply wore out: 25FX- got to about 6 gallons 32SX- got to about 20 gallons after the first set of sleeves 40FX- got to about 20 gallons 46FX- (early ones) about 6 tanks 46FX- (later ones) about 40 gallons OS 50- (airplaneversion and heli versions)- could not get past 10 gallons without it puking the bearings, longevity testing suspended on the modern OS 50 61FX- got to about 65 gallons OS70 Heli-got to about 3 tanks on both engines, rods gave out. replacement engines made it to about 15 gallons 91FX- got to about 35 gallons 160FX- (after several tries and replacement motors, testing was abandoned) OS 120 Surpass III- bearings failed around the 15 gallon mark, heads warped around the 50 gallon mark OS 91 Surpass- got about 80 gallons before it was just plain worn out OS 70 FL- after about two gallons of frustration, testing was abandoned. As a comparison, heres some of my test engines that are in either the 400 hour club or 100 gallon club Fox 35 CL, 40 bushing, 40BB, 45, 46, 50 and 74 Enya- 25, 40's (all the 40's), 50SS, 50CX, 60 (all versions) and 4-strokes: 46, 53, 90, 120 (old and new) and the 155 (everything tested) Irvine- 46, 53 Super Tigre (italian)- 34, 40, 45, 51, 75, 90, 2300, 4500 (no chineese ones tested yet) K&B (Pre Mecoa)- 40 (4011), 48, 61 Thunder Tiger- 25, 40, 42 bushing, 46, 61, 65 bushing, 120 and 4 strokes: 91 and 120 (everything tested) Magnum- 46 (the only model tested) Webra- 50 YS- 45, 53, 91AC Saito- 56, 65, 72, 80, 91, 100, 120, 180 (everything tested) Moki 135, 180 (everything tested) MVVS 40, 49, 77, 91 (everything tested) Rossi 45, 53 (everything tested) Now heres some that did not make it to the club: Anything Mecoa Anything Leo Anything MDS Anything OS (modern) Don't flame me guys, these are just the results experienced. In all cases, fuel should not have been an issue since failures in the OS line on one fuel were very soon repeated on the other, which indicates design problems. Dr Nitro Frequent posters to the Glow Engines forum include other glow engine experts like Harry Lagman, Dar Zeelon, Ed Moorman, Hobbsy, DownUnder, w8ye, Ed Cregger, and many other regular posters. It's well worth taking the time to wade through the posts in the Glow Engines forum and really read all of the information and knowledge that is accumulated there. Even posters who have run dozens of different engines for hundreds of hours each will disagree from time to time. |
RE: Engine suggestions
As an instructor I found them also to be as easy to start and tune as the OS but not quite the same power, but close enough. |
RE: Engine suggestions
I don't know where you get that most engines outlast OS. I still have the OS45FSR |
RE: Engine suggestions
ORIGINAL: willig10 Jpmag: I have to disagree with you a little here. Here is why. The engine is not the instructors but the student's engine. It is the job of an instructor to lead the way, give advice but not to dictate what engine the student ultimately decides to purchase. In my humble opinion a reputable instructor will or should be able to dial an engine in and pass that knowledge to the student. My 2 cents Glenn You're going to be slamming that trainer into the dirt with a deadstick landing at least once, snapping off props and needle valves, bouncing it on landings, or worse. A $140 engine is an expensive way to go if you crack the carb neck off, break off mufflers, bend crankshafts, etc. OS parts are ridiculously expensive. I usually disassemble my old OS engines and keep the parts for the next engine to have it's own supply. I'd avoid used engines starting out, unless it's local and you can hear it run or you know the reputation of the seller is well established. Make OS a certainty in the near future, but smack around a cheap engine from China first. Your instructor should be very proficient in engine tuning and handle that for you starting out. Your focus is flying, orientation, and learning flying safety. The product knowledge comes with experience. Everyone has gone in some direction with a brand and stuck with it from what I've read here. I used Super Tigre decades ago without any issues, however, that was control line flying. RC was a bit different with a carb but I learned how to tune them as easily as OS. As you can see my avatar says what I still like most, and I own and fly many Super Tigre engines on my planes today. I got out of the hobby for a long time (1982) and when I got back into it in 2002, I had to learn to fly again. The local crowd mostly flew OS and they suggested I switch. I was picking up engines used from EBay, and all of them generally were out of tune on the low end adjustment, as it's common beginners just move the high speed needle thinking it will cure idle problems. Some needed Teflon wrapped on a leaking needle valve, or a new backplate gasket, carb O ring, something had to be done to these mystery engines to get them running properly. Thankfully I had an engine guru first hand teach me how to tune just about any engine. I'd presume the seller on the auction site thought he had a bad brand, and wanted to get rid of it when in fact the engine had a minor problem, and it was a user end issue, not the product. One thing you can gather from this post is someone has enjoyed about every engine out there, and the most user friendly engine is certainly OS. I learned that from my "instructor" who flies OS exclusively. I show him Rossi is faster, I show him Super Tigre is half price, and he doesn't care. The fact of the matter is he's got the most fly time out of any weekend compared to my variety of powerplants I bring out. My OS engines are flawless, but they do not last as long as Super Tigre, Rossi, and other well made engines with a true chrome liner. Nickel plating process has it's problems, the case is paper thin on OS too so it was never intended to meet the ground and survive. I've seen some pretty interesting crashes and those engines separate so badly its comical. (No one at our field gets up tight about that by the way.) |
RE: Engine suggestions
HI AS A BEGINNER OS EASE OF OPERATION IS A MUST UNTIL YOU GET TO KNOW THE VERY UNIQUE QUALITIES OF GLO ENGINE OPERATION OS KEEPS IT SIMPLE AS IS POSSIBLE AS THE BREAK IN PROCEEDURE WITH MOST OTHER ENGINES IS A BIG LEARING CURVETAKES A GOOD DEAL OF TIME TO MASTERAND CAN PUT YOU INVESTMENT IN YOUR AIRPLANE AT RISK IF NOT TOTALLY UNDERSTOOD-OS'S BASICLY RUN OUT OF THE BOX AND KEEP YOU RUNNING IN THE AIR-DEAD STICKS TO A BEGINNER CAN COST AN AIRPLANE-THAT GETS EXPENSIVE-DO WORK WITH A GOOD INSTRUCTOREVEN AFTER YOU SOLOA LITTLE MORE POWER THAN YOU NEED IS ALWAYS BEST AS IT HELPS STABILISE THE PLANES FLIGHT-MARGINAL POWER WILL ALWAYS MAKE AN AIRPLANE HARDER TO FLY-NOT GOOD-FOR A 40 SIZE AIRFRAME GO WITH A 46AX OR A 55AX YOU CAN ALWAYS THROTTLE BACK GOOD LUCK IN THIS VERY GREAT HOBBY ENJOY REGARDS TONY-RC- 20 YEARS
|
RE: Engine suggestions
Ihave found the Thunder Tiger GP42 to be as easy to tune and break in as any other engine. Mine will turn a Master Airscrew 10X6 to 13,500 out of the box on 10% . That should be plenty of power for the average trainer unless you are learning 3D. http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/js/f.../msn/75_75.gif
|
RE: Engine suggestions
Kudos for JPMacG on his very clear advise!
Regards |
RE: Engine suggestions
bigedmustafa. Do you have any more information from that post from Dr Nitro? Im' curious when were those tests done? Where is the original posting?
|
RE: Engine suggestions
There should be a member list here somewhere. I suggest using it and PMing Dr. Nitro.
|
RE: Engine suggestions
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_48...tm.htm#4892802
Interesting peeling issues article that might shed light on "reliability" carried over from earlier OS model engines. He's got 50 posts listed right here. http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/sear...20Nitro&top=50 |
RE: Engine suggestions
I'll put my 2 cents in for the TT Pro .46. I still have my first one that I got around 13 years ago (give or take) and it still runs great! Now to be fair it doesen't have the legs it used to but it will still pull my Tower Trainer around no problem. It has about 25 gallons of fuel through at this point with the original bearings. I am also a fan of OS engines and have had great luck with them over the years, both 4 stroke and 2. But to be honest my absolute favorite 40 size mototr is the Thunder Tiger. It is so easy to tune and doesen't really care what you put it in. Another great thing about using it in a trainer is the fuel economy. I had my throttle linkage come off in flight one day (stupid easy conectors) at half throttle and the dang thing ran for almost 30 minutes before it died! I was worried about my receiver battery dying and was about to plant it into the dirt to prevent a runaway. There has been alot of good suggestions here and do what works for you. The TT Pro 46 is a great engine and you will get years of service from it without a doubt. Good luck!!!
|
RE: Engine suggestions
Sooooo, have you made a decision yet? Looks like a coin toss to me.
|
RE: Engine suggestions
He has not logged in since 2007. I wonder if he is still on this earth?
|
RE: Engine suggestions
He probably went electric and posts for advice to stop burning up those speed controllers. Just kidding.
|
RE: Engine suggestions
Hey just came across this post about the tt pro39 engine, i have just posted a similair problem with the conrods breaking with these engines.
Avoid tt pro 39 engines i reckon. |
RE: Engine suggestions
Have had the exact same problem with my tt pro39 engine, two conrods broke on me too.
Been modeling now for about 6 years and never had this happen to me before so what does that tell you. I think their crap, will get OS. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:14 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.