I went to the Toledo show and spoke for HOURS with BILL Oberdieck. Hellofa guy. I ended up ordering the TS52 from him. At the Toledo show, he told me he could guarantee 10 day delivery. Well unfortunately for me that has not been the case. I still do no have it. This was no big deal to me due to the fact that the plane is not ready anyway.

I have email BILL a couple of times just seeing how things were going. I got home from work today and saw that I had a message on the answering machine. It was Bill. The engine is done and ready for shipping. He also stated IN HIS MESSAGE that even though the balance is not paid yet, he is going to ship it out.

I called him up and told him over the phone what I thought of him.


For those of you who are looking for a new gas engine, TAURUS is a TOP COMPETITOR in more ways than one. I am working on the AW 33% edge 540 T and TAURUS is working on a 107cc engine, HMMMMMMMMM. Bill told me that even since the Toledo show, they have made improvements to this up coming engine.

Jeff Cottrell

Jeff, is it a single or a twin? (Inquiring minds want to know).

The TS52 is a single. As is the case with the Taurus line of engine, but unlike ALL others, this engine has a double cantlever crank and a bearing on BOTH ends, again unlike all the others. This is how the Taurus engines develope SMOOOOOOOOTH power.

I have a BME50 that is VERY fresh and the TS52 is supposed to be here by FRIDAY. I am going to do some SIDE BY SIDE testing with both engines. SAME PROP SAME SPINNER SAME DAY SAME AMBIENT TEMP ETC ETC Should give good results.


Somehow I feel that MICHAEL will sneak in a few words about the quality of the Taurus engines before this thread is through.

Bill O talks a good talk about these engines, and from what I have seen from them he has good reason. I feel that this weekend is going to be a decision maker for me. I am a fan of the BME engine, and I believe I WILL continue to use them for their light weight, but for TOTAL quality if it performs as well as I think it will, I'll probably become a TAURUS MAN.

Taurus builds a variety of singles and twins. try their website and if you ever talk to BILL OBERDIECK, tell him JEFF COTTRELL sent you.

I should have asked whether the new 107cc engine you talked about a single or a twin. I think I've decided to use the 52 to power my GP Pitts (whenever it gets here).

Anybody know what web page address is? How do these engines compare to the Fox line?

It's www.taurus-engines.net . Wish I knew the answer to that one. My GP Pitts just came in and now I'm anxious to get some power for it (decisions, decisions)

I have been a very vocal proponent of Taurus engines, and since I haven't raved about them in awhile I guess I'll take this opportunity to sing their praises for those people haven't heard it before. I appologize to the people that have heard it already.

Before I start, let me prefice this with that it is all In My Humble Opinion.

I have owned pretty much every brand of R/C gas engine over the years(Zenoah, Quadra, FPE, Brison, BME, ZDZ, DA, 3W and a couple of conversions...and a couple from the '70's I can't remember the name of) and the Taurus at least matches the quality of the best out there....and there are only a couple I'd put in that league. On top of their superb quality, from my experience with the 2.6, and others with the 3.2, their RPMs on equivalent props appear to exceed their competitors. I say appear to, because I can only compare the numbers that I have and those that have been posted by other people, and the data is not sufficient to make an absolute statement. Also, on a totally subjective note, the Taurus is one of, if not the smoothest single I have owned.

If that isn't enough, they start super easily and have very low, and reliable, idles(1500RPM when new - 1200 when broken in).

They are not the lightest of the lightest, but they are close and the small differences between the lightest and the Taurus is only about 5oz. Definitely not enough to weigh heavily(no pun intended) in the decision.

CAPtain232 has already told you about their customer service and I will second that. I've had nothing but exemplary service, and from other people I know with these engines, they have too. A 2-3 week wait to get one is typical, but it's worth it. Remember these are basically custom built motors, not off of a mass-production assembly line, and the attention to detail is obvious.

You can't go wrong with most of the motors out there right now, most of them are really good motors, but from my experience the Taurus is a cut above the rest. I would, and still do, own other brand motors, it all depends on the application. I do think the Taurus 3.2 would be an ideal motor for the GP Pitts. I actually bought the Pitts with the intent of putting one in, but things changed and I sold the Pitts before building it.(FYI, that is a really nicely done ARF)

BTW, Taurus is also coming out with a 144 twin which I am anxiously awaiting.

I e-mailed taurus about the availability and price of the TS-52 but haven't heard a reply yet. Does anyone out there know?

Hi Taildragger,

I just remembered that I saw a post on the SA list that Taurus is closed down from "5/15-5/20 to attend the Joe
Nall".

Don't quote me on this but I think the TS-52 is $559 with ignition but without muffler. I think they have a downtube available for $50 and a pitts-style for $100.

That sounds good if the wait time isn't too long. I hate waiting. (I know, Good things come to those who wait)



still hate it though!

I'm with you Taildragger. I'm the instant gratification type too. I like to order something in the afternoon and have it the next day, but I have to say in this case that the Taurus is worth the wait.

The price for the TS42 is $529, the TS52 is $559, and the TS62 is $589. They have latger singles, but I am unsure of the price. At this time the TS52 may be a little slow getting due to the fact that they sold A BUNCH of these at Toledo. They build these engines to order, meaning they do not stock mass quantities and ship from the shelf. They also test run them, and if you are at the same altitude as them you will be better off to NEVER touch the needles during break in.

As for the 107, I believe they have it in a single and double apposed. I saw both versions at Toledo. I was most interested in the twin apposed. I may have it wrong about the single it may be and inline twin, can't remember for sure. Bill has promised me the 107 and the up coming 144 will be among the best in their respective classes. I have no doubt.

As I mentioned before, I will continue to use BME and other brands of engines. Taurus has a very impressive line of engines perfomance wise and quality wise. In some cases thewy might be a tad bit heavier than another engine and when weight is the main issue, then I would most likely use BME. The extra weight comes partially from that awesome crank and dual bearing support.

Fox is a decent engine manufacturer, but not quite in the same league as TAURUS.


Jeff

Hey CAPtain232 can you give an rpm or power comparison between the BME 50 and the Taurus 52?

Hi Tim,

I collected as many numbers as I could on this and the range from users was 6800-7200 on a Zinger Pro 22X8. It was not obvious from all postings, but I would assume they were all fairly new motors. Keith from BME's numbers on a broken in motor were Mejzlik 22x10 at 7180 and a Mejzlik 20x10 at 8300.

Numbers from my Taurus 2.6 was 7150 on a Zinger pro 22X8.
At least two other people with the same engine were getting within 50 RPM on their new Taurus 2.6's on the same prop. On a broken in 2.6 with a Mejzlik 20X10 a guy was getting 8200RPM. Remember Zinger Pro's, Menz S's, and Mejzlik's in the same size produce very different RPM results, with Mejzlik the highest, Zinger in the middle and Menz the lowest with the highest load/widest blade.

I have only one source of numbers on the Taurus 3.2, but his numbers are from two examples.

Mejzlik 22/10 - 7200
Menz S 22/10 - 7000
Mejzlik 22/8 - 7900

I hope this helps.

Ralph

Play nice....

I suspect [and I know you do too] Jeff was thinking double cheek single throw fully counter-balanced forged precision two piece balanced Taurus crank Assembly hung between two single-row hi-speed precision bearings from either end of the crankshaft utilizing a high temperature oil seal.

Let's see which other manufacturer's are presently offering a comparable lower end, oh yeah and lets limit it to small engines???

I keep hearing about how much lighter a certain brand of engine is. I would rather have the quality over how many ounces I can save by buying the lighter engine. I have an Aeroworks Edge with a light BME 50 (love this engine)and I still had to add several ounces of weght to the nose of the plane for balance. I also just finished a Carden 30% Extra with a Brison 4.2 and still had to add 7oz. to the nose for balance. So you buy the lightest engine on the market just so you can add more weight to the nose for balance. The Zenoah G-62 is a heavy engine by todays standards but is one of the smoothest running engines out there and cheaper at that. I want an engine that is readily available and able to get parts for it without a one or two month wait. I will not order an engine and have to wait two months for it. There are too many brands out there that are good motors and worth purchasing without the loooong wait. Of course this is just my opinion and I'm sure I'll get flamed for my view.

Carroll, guess your flaming will have to wait <G>. My attitude is that you pays your maney, and you takes your choice. Everyone's needs are different, so you buy to satisfy yourself, right? I faced a similar situation with my GP Extra 330. The recommended engine was the MacMinarelli 85cc engine which is a quality engine. However, it weighed over 2 pounds more than a more powerful BME 102cc engine. I got the BME, and moved the rudder servos (2 servos totalling 5.5 ounces) from the tail (per plans) to the fuse and used a pull-pull. Saving the 5.5 ounces in the tail also saved well over a pound of nose weight. Balance ended up perfect with zero weight added. With smoke, the plane weighs 25 pounds. I saw another GP Extra that used the Mac engine, and of course, his plane weighed over 27 pounds set up in a similar fashion, except for the engine. His plane flew very well, as does mine. The difference, though, was that his manuevers needed more airspeed than mine, owing to the fact that he needed more lift to carry the additional weight. The difference was a lot more noticeable on manuevers where the fuselage was the lifting surface. Mine can do a knife edge harrier that just creeps across the sky. My slow rolls (12+ seconds) not only have a slow roll rate, but are enhanced by a slower airspeed as well. That slower airspeed also lets 4, 8, and 16 point rolls be more gracefull. There's a video clip of a 3 turn rolling circle here: www.********.net/pages/tmills that shows how lighter weight can benefit a manuever.

I'm not a weight fanatic, but for me, light does fly better, and ounces do add up. Waiting for engines or parts is a pain, and there ARE many quality engines available. Again, you pays your money, and you takes your choice.

Carroll,

I certainly hope no one flames you for expressing your opinion.

I'm with Tim that in most cases you can typically make mods to the plane to achieve balance so you can take advantage of a light motor. I have done it numerous times, though I also know that in some cases this isn't possible, such as most scale planes, and some Suhkois are notorious for the amount of lead they need to balance.

As far as a Zenoah G-62 being smooth, you must have had a good one. The 3 G-62's I've had are some of the roughest singles I've every owned. Yes, you can readily get G-62's and other mass-market engines without waiting, but IMOH they are not in the same league as the other singles like the Brison's, BME's, ZDZ's and at the top of my list Taurus'. There's a reason you have to wait for these engines, and if it's not worth the wait to you, I fully understand, but to me it's just part of the price you pay to get the engine you want. I wish the situation was different. I can't figure out why these companies don't ramp up production if they have the demand.....but with that said, you mentioned you own a BME and Brison and unless you hit the timing just right you had to wait for these motors. Why didn't you use a Zenoah G-45 or G-62 in these cases?

As far as comparing the G-62 to these other high-end motors, it is of good quality, great reliability, but as far as smoothness and power, my experience is that it's not in the same league with the other mentioned motors. A Taurus 3.2 pulls the same numbers on the same prop as a G-62, a ZDZ 60 pulls a full prop size bigger at the same RPM as the G-62. The power just isn't close, so in my view, it's a pretty easy choice if you can afford one of the specialty high-end motors, and your application needs the most power/weight, then one of the specialty high-end motors is the only way to go, even if they cost more and you have to wait for them.

Bill, I have never owned a G-62 just have a few friends that do and they are smooth running engines. I prefer the higher end engines like the BME, Brison and so on and yes it did take me about 4 to 6 weeks to get them and they are worth waiting for but , If they told me it would take two months then I would probably look else where like Fox or 3W. My main point was all the fuss about the few ounces of weight that most are worried about in their choice of engines. I do like the lighter weight but not as big a factor in the larger scale planes where a few extra ounces won't be noticed.
I worry about waiting two months for a motor and then the engine needs repair, will it take two months to get it back?
I really think all the popular gas engines today are good choices but service and parts availability are also a concern.
G-62....good engine but I like the BME, Brison much better and hope to try the Taurus, ZDZ one day.

Hi Carroll,

I tend to agree with you on weight in most cases, though there are cases where watching every ounce can make a big difference, though I think this is the extreme case, not the norm. I too think people put too much emphasis on weight.....if it is only a few ounces, but when it gets into pounds then it really does make a difference on any size plane. 3W's are great engines, but they are also in that "pound more" category, so I exclude them from consideration in the smaller sizes, for aerobats anyway. I use them all the time in 35% up planes, even though in those sizes they still have a weight disadvantage in most cases over their competition, though they are working on that with their new releases.

As far as waiting, yes 2 months is too long and I do know people that have waited that long. I know Taurus' are typically 2-3 weeks, but have been a bit longer after the Toledo show, which is a drag, but I know they are busting their butts to get caught up, and are looking at ways to increase production to shorten the wait time. Your point on repair is a valid one, and certainly should be checked on before buying someone's engine.

As far as the smooth G-62s, I have to say, you're the first one I have every heard call a G-62 smooth, but smoothness is a pretty subjective measurement so who knows.

Michael, when are you going to get your equipment setup to objectively measure vibration so we can know some reality here?

Thanks MGlavin for the correction. Had my in my ---.

Engine choices are very hard to make for me. There ARE so many good ones in todays world. So many factors go into the decision making process. I like the overall performane and weight of most of the BME's. I have not tried one YET, but ZDZ's sound pretty impressive as well. These are the types of engines that I use on performance planes. In my mind, the only place for a Zenoah is on a cub or tigermoth or something else of that sort.

I have found a new engine that for TOTAL QUALITY and GOOD PERFORMANCE it will have a plane to reside in.

TAURUS


There is NO OTHER engine with a bottom end like the TAURUS.
This results in POWER, RELIABILITY, and SMOOTH operation unlike any other. So for the plane that you want to last for a long time, the Taurus line of engines will not shake them apart like the others. As a used to be race engine builder for drag cars, I know the importance of a bottom end.


Jeff

Jeff,

Have you run your Taurus and BME engines side by side yet?

I am very interested in your findings.

Thanks,

Brian

KB1DTB

What brand is the engine before it becomes a Taurus?

>>What brand is the engine before it becomes a Taurus?

They do not come from any brand. They are not a conversion. Athough they use some "off the shelf" parts, they are designed from the ground up to be a gas R/C engine.

Taurus cylinders come from Mahle. Mahle OEM's cylinders for many manufacturer's for many applications. I would assume the piston and rod come from the same source.

Bill, I took this from Taurus' web site

Taurus Engines offer a unique service of remanufacturing of converted chain saw engines to modern lighter weight model aircraft engines. Taurus Engines also offers repair of most 2 cycle gas engine, i.e. Zenoah, Quadra, Sachs, Husquvarna. etc. Including crank straightening, electronic ignition installations and single bolt prop hub conversions.