Issues with BME
07-04-2005 | 10:19 PM
#1
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Bangkok, THAILAND
Issues with BME
I am not usually prone to complaints or negative posts. This post issomewhat lengthy, but I strongly feel that it needs to be made. I am reasonably active in scale competition including events such as Top Gun. I have been building and flying RC models for 20 years.
Many of my models utilize gas engines. I have purchased and used 9 engines from BME. I have also purchased and used numerous engines from 3W, DA, Taurus, Zenoah and Fuji. I make this point solely to demonstrate that I have a fair amount of experience in the installation and operation of gas engines.
For Top Gun 2005, I designed and built a Vought Vindicator. The cowl on the Vindicator is relatively narrow. I wanted to have an engine that would be fully enclosed in the cowl, and yet have adequate room for cooling. I designed the model to a scale that would accommodate a BME 110. I chose this engine as it presented the power level I felt was appropriate, and had a cap to cap measurement that would fit within the cowl. I was more concerned with size and power, than I was with one of the advertised features of the engine; light weight. In fact I was a bit concerned that the weight reduction might have impacted on the durability of the engine. A phone call was made to BME to discuss this. Since it was an impending purchase Keith Baker was surprising easy to reach by phone. I purchased two 110 engines from BME. Upon arrival of the engines in Thailand, I mounted the engines on test stands and began a 2 hour break in procedure. Both engines exhibited problems after about 45 minutes of run time. I tested the ignitions on an oscilloscope, with a pulse timer circuit to simulate prop pulses. Both ignitions were not working properly. My flying partner Ray who lives in the United States called BME several times. He was politely told that no one was available to discuss this, but that he could call CH who made the ignitions. A call to CH, resulted in confirmation that there was a known problem with the ignitions in warm climates (Thailand is quite warm). CH had us send the ignitions back, and effected modifications very expeditiously. It was disturbing that BME being aware of the problem never addressed it or gave notice to users. If the engine had acted up in flight due to a known defect in the ignition the potential consequences are obvious. The break-in process on the two engines was completed with no further problems. One of the engines was installed in the Vindicator. The Vindicator was put through 12 test flights in Thailand and no problems were encountered with the engine.
After static judging at Top Gun, the Vindicator was taken out for a trim flight. Prior to flight, all the rigging was checked, the engine was checked and run up for about 5 minutes. The petrol used for the engine was kindly supplied by Frank Tiano, and was premixed with the appropriate amount of oil. Frank was also using this petrol mix in the plane he was flying, no engine problems resulted in that plane from the petrol. Five minutes into the trim flight the BME 110 seized in the air. The airplane was landed dead stick without incident.
Upon inspection of the engine, it was obvious that the pistons were frozen. With the flying part of the competition starting the next day, a number of rather desperate calls were made to BME in an attempt to get a replacement engine. Despite promises to get back to us, no return calls were made. One of the members of Imperial RC generously provided a BME 102, and I was able to modify the cowl, exhaust and engine mounting system to use this engine. The plane flew all four rounds at Top Gun and placed within the top five in Team Scale. There were no difficulties with the replacement engine.
Post Top Gun, my flying partner made numerous calls to BME to attempt to discuss the engine issue. The lady who took the call was very polite but was not in a position to discuss technical issues; regrettably no one with any technical knowledge would return Ray’s calls. The engine was sent to BME with a request that they evaluate the engine, and consider a refund. After the engine was sent to BME, a number of phone calls were made to them to inquire after the engine. No one knowledgeable about engines was available. Again, no calls were returned. Just shy of two months after Top Gun, BME wrote a letter which said “Hi Ray, We sent you a letter regarding your engine. I am sorry but the engine has been severely overheated. We checked your carb settings and found them to be set way to lean. This type of damage only happens if the engine is run to hot,to lean or without oil. This is not covered under warranty and we cannot refund your money or repair the engine for free. As I told you on the phone engines dont do this by themselves and it is the end users responsibility to make sure they are tuned properly. The cost to repair this engine is 400.00 plus shipping. ”
Thank you
Keith Baker
BME
The phone call Keith referred to was the sole time he took a call and occurred prior to Keith receiving the engine. His “diagnosis” was done without seeing the engine and never even allowed for the possibility of manufacturing related problems. The carb settings were proven to be correct during 12 flights and a 2 hour break-in. Where the carb settings may have been and who may have turned the needles in or out after the engine was removed, who knows. Quite a few people at Top Gun handled the engine after it was removed from the plane, hence the comment on needle settings is not relevant. If Baker had taken the time to answer a phone call he would have been made aware of this. The engine was obviously not run without oil. The cooling system was looked at by a number of other participants at Top Gun, and was clearly not at issue. The same fuel and cooling configuration was used on the aircraft with a BME 102 with no difficulties.
A number of polite calls were made to BME after receipt of this letter, and a number of e- mails were sent asking to talk with Keith Baker.
Below is the response of Keith Baker
“Ray, I just received your message from my wife. I am sorry but my time is valuable to me and I am not going be on the phone arguing about an engine. I told you what was wrong with it and what caused it. We dont warranty burned up engines as does no other manufacturer. I dont want to loose you as a customer but either you have to take accountability for what you have done to the engine and pay for the repair charges or we can send the engine back to you as is. If you choose to sell the engine you should have no problem as we have hundreds on backorder with thousands of satisfied customers. I have taken photographs and made notes about the engine. If you feel we are unfairly treating you I would be happy to send the engine to any engine expert you choose and let them tell you why the engine failed. “
Thank you
Keith Baker
BME
At Top Gun, there were a number of engine experts. They did in fact not only look at the engine, but at the installation. The thinking was that there was a manufacturing defect, since the setup was not wrong. Notwithstanding the fact that the engine was not setup wrong, it is amazing that Baker over a two month period refused to discuss this at all. At no time was an aggressive or argumentative tone taken with his company. Since Baker would not even come to the phone, this would have been impossible in any event. The statement that his time is too valuable to him, gives a message that any potential customer needs to take note of and consider very carefully. I have had occasional problems with engines from other manufacturers, fortunately none have been of this magnitude. I have however never seen this type of behavior or response. It is truly surprising and totally unacceptable.
I am obviously not going to take any legal action against Baker or his company. Such action would ultimately be a pointless waste of time and money. Baker insisted on a payment of $400.00 to repair the engine. The value of the engine gave me no choice but to have the repair made and sell the engine off. I will use the BME engines that I now own, with the exception of the other 110, since I have no faith in this engine, its build quality or BME’s quality control. I will not under any circumstances purchase another BME engine, and I will certainly convey my view to others.
Mike Selby
Many of my models utilize gas engines. I have purchased and used 9 engines from BME. I have also purchased and used numerous engines from 3W, DA, Taurus, Zenoah and Fuji. I make this point solely to demonstrate that I have a fair amount of experience in the installation and operation of gas engines.
For Top Gun 2005, I designed and built a Vought Vindicator. The cowl on the Vindicator is relatively narrow. I wanted to have an engine that would be fully enclosed in the cowl, and yet have adequate room for cooling. I designed the model to a scale that would accommodate a BME 110. I chose this engine as it presented the power level I felt was appropriate, and had a cap to cap measurement that would fit within the cowl. I was more concerned with size and power, than I was with one of the advertised features of the engine; light weight. In fact I was a bit concerned that the weight reduction might have impacted on the durability of the engine. A phone call was made to BME to discuss this. Since it was an impending purchase Keith Baker was surprising easy to reach by phone. I purchased two 110 engines from BME. Upon arrival of the engines in Thailand, I mounted the engines on test stands and began a 2 hour break in procedure. Both engines exhibited problems after about 45 minutes of run time. I tested the ignitions on an oscilloscope, with a pulse timer circuit to simulate prop pulses. Both ignitions were not working properly. My flying partner Ray who lives in the United States called BME several times. He was politely told that no one was available to discuss this, but that he could call CH who made the ignitions. A call to CH, resulted in confirmation that there was a known problem with the ignitions in warm climates (Thailand is quite warm). CH had us send the ignitions back, and effected modifications very expeditiously. It was disturbing that BME being aware of the problem never addressed it or gave notice to users. If the engine had acted up in flight due to a known defect in the ignition the potential consequences are obvious. The break-in process on the two engines was completed with no further problems. One of the engines was installed in the Vindicator. The Vindicator was put through 12 test flights in Thailand and no problems were encountered with the engine.
After static judging at Top Gun, the Vindicator was taken out for a trim flight. Prior to flight, all the rigging was checked, the engine was checked and run up for about 5 minutes. The petrol used for the engine was kindly supplied by Frank Tiano, and was premixed with the appropriate amount of oil. Frank was also using this petrol mix in the plane he was flying, no engine problems resulted in that plane from the petrol. Five minutes into the trim flight the BME 110 seized in the air. The airplane was landed dead stick without incident.
Upon inspection of the engine, it was obvious that the pistons were frozen. With the flying part of the competition starting the next day, a number of rather desperate calls were made to BME in an attempt to get a replacement engine. Despite promises to get back to us, no return calls were made. One of the members of Imperial RC generously provided a BME 102, and I was able to modify the cowl, exhaust and engine mounting system to use this engine. The plane flew all four rounds at Top Gun and placed within the top five in Team Scale. There were no difficulties with the replacement engine.
Post Top Gun, my flying partner made numerous calls to BME to attempt to discuss the engine issue. The lady who took the call was very polite but was not in a position to discuss technical issues; regrettably no one with any technical knowledge would return Ray’s calls. The engine was sent to BME with a request that they evaluate the engine, and consider a refund. After the engine was sent to BME, a number of phone calls were made to them to inquire after the engine. No one knowledgeable about engines was available. Again, no calls were returned. Just shy of two months after Top Gun, BME wrote a letter which said “Hi Ray, We sent you a letter regarding your engine. I am sorry but the engine has been severely overheated. We checked your carb settings and found them to be set way to lean. This type of damage only happens if the engine is run to hot,to lean or without oil. This is not covered under warranty and we cannot refund your money or repair the engine for free. As I told you on the phone engines dont do this by themselves and it is the end users responsibility to make sure they are tuned properly. The cost to repair this engine is 400.00 plus shipping. ”
Thank you
Keith Baker
BME
The phone call Keith referred to was the sole time he took a call and occurred prior to Keith receiving the engine. His “diagnosis” was done without seeing the engine and never even allowed for the possibility of manufacturing related problems. The carb settings were proven to be correct during 12 flights and a 2 hour break-in. Where the carb settings may have been and who may have turned the needles in or out after the engine was removed, who knows. Quite a few people at Top Gun handled the engine after it was removed from the plane, hence the comment on needle settings is not relevant. If Baker had taken the time to answer a phone call he would have been made aware of this. The engine was obviously not run without oil. The cooling system was looked at by a number of other participants at Top Gun, and was clearly not at issue. The same fuel and cooling configuration was used on the aircraft with a BME 102 with no difficulties.
A number of polite calls were made to BME after receipt of this letter, and a number of e- mails were sent asking to talk with Keith Baker.
Below is the response of Keith Baker
“Ray, I just received your message from my wife. I am sorry but my time is valuable to me and I am not going be on the phone arguing about an engine. I told you what was wrong with it and what caused it. We dont warranty burned up engines as does no other manufacturer. I dont want to loose you as a customer but either you have to take accountability for what you have done to the engine and pay for the repair charges or we can send the engine back to you as is. If you choose to sell the engine you should have no problem as we have hundreds on backorder with thousands of satisfied customers. I have taken photographs and made notes about the engine. If you feel we are unfairly treating you I would be happy to send the engine to any engine expert you choose and let them tell you why the engine failed. “
Thank you
Keith Baker
BME
At Top Gun, there were a number of engine experts. They did in fact not only look at the engine, but at the installation. The thinking was that there was a manufacturing defect, since the setup was not wrong. Notwithstanding the fact that the engine was not setup wrong, it is amazing that Baker over a two month period refused to discuss this at all. At no time was an aggressive or argumentative tone taken with his company. Since Baker would not even come to the phone, this would have been impossible in any event. The statement that his time is too valuable to him, gives a message that any potential customer needs to take note of and consider very carefully. I have had occasional problems with engines from other manufacturers, fortunately none have been of this magnitude. I have however never seen this type of behavior or response. It is truly surprising and totally unacceptable.
I am obviously not going to take any legal action against Baker or his company. Such action would ultimately be a pointless waste of time and money. Baker insisted on a payment of $400.00 to repair the engine. The value of the engine gave me no choice but to have the repair made and sell the engine off. I will use the BME engines that I now own, with the exception of the other 110, since I have no faith in this engine, its build quality or BME’s quality control. I will not under any circumstances purchase another BME engine, and I will certainly convey my view to others.
Mike Selby
07-04-2005 | 10:41 PM
#2
RE: Issues with BME
Exasperating --to be sure
Was the engine/prop/fuel,flown and tested as a unit before the contest?
I presume fuel used at contest was same mix/type oil?
I have never seen inside a BME110 but have seen /repaired overheated/siezed/ melted engines .
Only one thing will do it
too much heat .
too much heat can be caused by
too little oil
too lean a mix
too heavy a prop load
poor airflow.
It is strange these did not show up in precontest flight tests
At a recent contest -we had a friend get a deadstick on a flight - transition had gone bad-
the obvious points were covered and we then suggested that he drop the prop size to lessen load on the engine --to reduce heat (it was a hot day).
That fixed it
The hot day and big prop load simply combined to cause a condition not previously seen.
.
Was the engine/prop/fuel,flown and tested as a unit before the contest?
I presume fuel used at contest was same mix/type oil?
I have never seen inside a BME110 but have seen /repaired overheated/siezed/ melted engines .
Only one thing will do it
too much heat .
too much heat can be caused by
too little oil
too lean a mix
too heavy a prop load
poor airflow.
It is strange these did not show up in precontest flight tests
At a recent contest -we had a friend get a deadstick on a flight - transition had gone bad-
the obvious points were covered and we then suggested that he drop the prop size to lessen load on the engine --to reduce heat (it was a hot day).
That fixed it
The hot day and big prop load simply combined to cause a condition not previously seen.
.
07-04-2005 | 11:14 PM
#3
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Bangkok, THAILAND
RE: Issues with BME
Hi Dick,
The engine was in the same configuration as here, same prop Mejlik 27x10, same cooling setup, same exhaust as the per the initial 12 flights. The fuel was obtained in the states from Frank Tiano. It was 87 octane, the oil was a 50:1 mix of Amsoil 2000. The engine seizure took place during the initial practice flight. The engine was run on the ground about an hour before flight for 5 minutes. The same fuel was used for 6 flights with a BME 102 that replaced the 110. The 102 was propped with a mejlik 26x10 The cooling system and exhaust were the same. The temperature in Florida was a good 10 degrees lower than what we were flying the plane at in Thailand.
The mix was not lean, it was slightly on the rich side. This was checked after we tached the engine.
There are potential mechanical causes including prop shaft alignment or other assembly issues that could result in this. The issue for me is a mixture of the fact that we will never really know the cause, and the response from BME which was disconcerting at best.
Mike
The engine was in the same configuration as here, same prop Mejlik 27x10, same cooling setup, same exhaust as the per the initial 12 flights. The fuel was obtained in the states from Frank Tiano. It was 87 octane, the oil was a 50:1 mix of Amsoil 2000. The engine seizure took place during the initial practice flight. The engine was run on the ground about an hour before flight for 5 minutes. The same fuel was used for 6 flights with a BME 102 that replaced the 110. The 102 was propped with a mejlik 26x10 The cooling system and exhaust were the same. The temperature in Florida was a good 10 degrees lower than what we were flying the plane at in Thailand.
The mix was not lean, it was slightly on the rich side. This was checked after we tached the engine.
There are potential mechanical causes including prop shaft alignment or other assembly issues that could result in this. The issue for me is a mixture of the fact that we will never really know the cause, and the response from BME which was disconcerting at best.
Mike
07-04-2005 | 11:26 PM
#4
My Feedback: (69)
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Fort Smith,
AR
RE: Issues with BME
A friend of mine was having bad problems with his 110, it would shake violently, tried everything, so BME sent him a different type of carb to try, installed it, motor ran fine on the ground on the rich side, took off, and immediately completely leaned out and seized the motor, sent back to BME, and they dont want to stand behind it. I dont understand it. My 110 ran flawlessly. It is very easy to see why everyone flys DA.
07-04-2005 | 11:37 PM
#5
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Bangkok, THAILAND
RE: Issues with BME
Response and treatment by a manufacturer is clearly as important as the core performance of their product. BME is clearly below par in this area.
Mike
Mike
07-05-2005 | 07:21 AM
#6
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Boca Raton,
FL
RE: Issues with BME
Mselby;
Has it occured to you that these long periods of running on the ground might be the culprit? Most gas people I know say never to run on ground for long cause it just doesn't cool as good as in the air and the load on engine is more. I've seen people burn engines this way. Just wondering
ifshnee
Has it occured to you that these long periods of running on the ground might be the culprit? Most gas people I know say never to run on ground for long cause it just doesn't cool as good as in the air and the load on engine is more. I've seen people burn engines this way. Just wondering
ifshnee
07-05-2005 | 09:10 AM
#7
My Feedback: (31)
RE: Issues with BME
Mike
You didn’t mention if you performed the pre-requisite tuning ritual in Florida?
Was a complete engine tuning procedure completed at Top Gun? I’d suggest it was paramount to re-tune the engine. After all it had a couple hours break-in time and twelve flights on a different fuel in another country.
Tuning the engine on the ground makes no allowance for loads and rpm realized in the air. Careful attention must be aimed at the needle settings with this in mind.
Was the engine previously run with synthetic oil for break-in? Changing the oil from petroleum based to synthetic would have required a hard look at the needles in of itself.
You didn’t mention if you performed the pre-requisite tuning ritual in Florida?
Was a complete engine tuning procedure completed at Top Gun? I’d suggest it was paramount to re-tune the engine. After all it had a couple hours break-in time and twelve flights on a different fuel in another country.
Tuning the engine on the ground makes no allowance for loads and rpm realized in the air. Careful attention must be aimed at the needle settings with this in mind.
Was the engine previously run with synthetic oil for break-in? Changing the oil from petroleum based to synthetic would have required a hard look at the needles in of itself.
07-05-2005 | 11:43 AM
#8
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 4,890
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Left Coast ,
CA
RE: Issues with BME
It ran well for 12 flights with no problems besides ignition.
How hard did you push it on your 5 min. ground run?
You changed environments and that can be enough to drastically change needle settings causing lean/rich running (as Mike stated). Density altitude changes with temp/humidity/altitude. I can almost bet you went lean d/t this. You did mention it was cooler.
As for BME service, I have always had OUTSTANDING dealings with Keith.
It must have been frustrating having that happen at a big event. This is not meant to be mean, but I don't understand how anyone can ask a manufacturer to cover a cooked engine d/t operator error.
How hard did you push it on your 5 min. ground run?
You changed environments and that can be enough to drastically change needle settings causing lean/rich running (as Mike stated). Density altitude changes with temp/humidity/altitude. I can almost bet you went lean d/t this. You did mention it was cooler.
As for BME service, I have always had OUTSTANDING dealings with Keith.
It must have been frustrating having that happen at a big event. This is not meant to be mean, but I don't understand how anyone can ask a manufacturer to cover a cooked engine d/t operator error.
07-05-2005 | 07:12 PM
#9
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Bangkok, THAILAND
RE: Issues with BME
Hi Mike,
Yes the engine was retuned, and checked. That was the purpose of the ground run up. Having done this for quite a few years I am rather familiar with possible differences between in the air performance and on the ground. In answer to your other question the oil was the same as used in Thailand post breakin.
The climate differences between here and Florida necessitate readjustment every year. You can never run it out of the box after shipping half way around the world. RTK, yes it was certainly frustrating to have this happen. BME's lack of responsiveness was also frustrating. I also would not understand how anyone could ask a manufacturer to cover an engine which was ruined due to operator error. Having said that, I do not think that was the case here.
Mike
Yes the engine was retuned, and checked. That was the purpose of the ground run up. Having done this for quite a few years I am rather familiar with possible differences between in the air performance and on the ground. In answer to your other question the oil was the same as used in Thailand post breakin.
The climate differences between here and Florida necessitate readjustment every year. You can never run it out of the box after shipping half way around the world. RTK, yes it was certainly frustrating to have this happen. BME's lack of responsiveness was also frustrating. I also would not understand how anyone could ask a manufacturer to cover an engine which was ruined due to operator error. Having said that, I do not think that was the case here.
Mike
07-05-2005 | 08:57 PM
#10
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
RE: Issues with BME
I can vouch for MSelbys ability and knowledge of gas engines. I also know him to be a very resonable, stand up guy. I also was at Top gun and saw the incedents leading up to this thread. Mike is no fly-by-night, just-picked-up-his-first-gas-engine type of guy but rather he is an experienced modeler that has more gas engine experience than some who may be considered "experts" in certain circles.
I would bet that perhaps if he, (MSleby) had been able to communicate more freely with BME during, and since the engines failure, that he would have never posted a single word. I have built and flown models with gas engines for quite a while and I gotta be honest, you have to work really hard to fry a gas engine that is proven and default free. By this I mean you have to ignore oil content, or minimal cooling requirements or a host of other things that by themselves will not completly seize and engine in one flight. If Mike had done this he would accept responsibilty for it and just go on. I saw the model, and the motor installation and subsequent flights with the 102 which by the way used the same fuel in the same environment, in the same cowl and did so flawlessly for at least four flights that I saw. So why didn't the 102 fry also?
If it were me, I too would be a little miffed at BME for at least not considering that there may have been a problem with the engine. I too am a manufacture and I know what it is like to get a tech call and immeadiately begin to think that perhaps the customer just can't read instructions but the fact is, it is better to listen and try to work through any issues and let the customer know you want to make it right.
Good luck Mike.
I would bet that perhaps if he, (MSleby) had been able to communicate more freely with BME during, and since the engines failure, that he would have never posted a single word. I have built and flown models with gas engines for quite a while and I gotta be honest, you have to work really hard to fry a gas engine that is proven and default free. By this I mean you have to ignore oil content, or minimal cooling requirements or a host of other things that by themselves will not completly seize and engine in one flight. If Mike had done this he would accept responsibilty for it and just go on. I saw the model, and the motor installation and subsequent flights with the 102 which by the way used the same fuel in the same environment, in the same cowl and did so flawlessly for at least four flights that I saw. So why didn't the 102 fry also?
If it were me, I too would be a little miffed at BME for at least not considering that there may have been a problem with the engine. I too am a manufacture and I know what it is like to get a tech call and immeadiately begin to think that perhaps the customer just can't read instructions but the fact is, it is better to listen and try to work through any issues and let the customer know you want to make it right.
Good luck Mike.
07-06-2005 | 10:51 AM
#13
Senior Member
RE: Issues with BME
Just so you know, I really tried to find a new BME 110 for my 35% extra. Luckily, it seems that there was not one to be had anywhere, so I had to settle for a DA 100. I am not usually that lucky.
Thanks for taking the time for this informative post. I am so glad that Chief had DA's in stock and was out of BME's. I was very interested in the lightest engine possible, but seems that luck one out for this old Irishman for once. I know first hand about the outstanding service DA provides. So I guess BME has lost another potential customer due to your experience.
Happy Landings
Thanks for taking the time for this informative post. I am so glad that Chief had DA's in stock and was out of BME's. I was very interested in the lightest engine possible, but seems that luck one out for this old Irishman for once. I know first hand about the outstanding service DA provides. So I guess BME has lost another potential customer due to your experience.
Happy Landings
07-07-2005 | 06:03 PM
#15
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Toms River,
NJ
RE: Issues with BME
Mike
I have thought about this post for two days and I am concerned that we some times lose our sense of fair play. I'm sorry you have had such a bad time with your BME-110. I'm sure BME has many engines that run without any problems.
We who read this post only have your side of the story but if it is true then it seems that Keith and BME would use some common sense and take a different course of action.
Even if you are 100% responsible for the damage to this engine, it seems it would not cost BME much to meet you at least halfway. A good business man thinks of his next sale, knowing that some times todays hot product becomes tomorrow's dog. you would think that Keith would know this and take a different course of action then you have described.
Hope all turns out well
Thanks
I have thought about this post for two days and I am concerned that we some times lose our sense of fair play. I'm sorry you have had such a bad time with your BME-110. I'm sure BME has many engines that run without any problems.
We who read this post only have your side of the story but if it is true then it seems that Keith and BME would use some common sense and take a different course of action.
Even if you are 100% responsible for the damage to this engine, it seems it would not cost BME much to meet you at least halfway. A good business man thinks of his next sale, knowing that some times todays hot product becomes tomorrow's dog. you would think that Keith would know this and take a different course of action then you have described.
Hope all turns out well
Thanks
07-07-2005 | 06:48 PM
#16
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Bangkok, THAILAND
RE: Issues with BME
Hi Mike,
Thanks for your comments. I have a number of other BME engines, and have had no problems with them. I have only had difficulties with the 110 as well as the ignition issue that I described. I made as much effort as possible to keep my post balanced and to present the story in full. I do not think it could be characterized entirely as my side of the story. I have included in quotes all correspondence with Keith Baker. I invite him to comment if anything I have said is incorrect, miscast or in any way slanted. I do not think that this is the case. Any manufacturer can have periodic difficulties with a product. This is a normal risk for both a supplier and a purchaser. When a problem does arise it should not necessarily create grounds for immediate opprobrium, but is certainly governed by the relative behavior of both parties.
Regards
Mike
Thanks for your comments. I have a number of other BME engines, and have had no problems with them. I have only had difficulties with the 110 as well as the ignition issue that I described. I made as much effort as possible to keep my post balanced and to present the story in full. I do not think it could be characterized entirely as my side of the story. I have included in quotes all correspondence with Keith Baker. I invite him to comment if anything I have said is incorrect, miscast or in any way slanted. I do not think that this is the case. Any manufacturer can have periodic difficulties with a product. This is a normal risk for both a supplier and a purchaser. When a problem does arise it should not necessarily create grounds for immediate opprobrium, but is certainly governed by the relative behavior of both parties.
Regards
Mike
07-07-2005 | 06:54 PM
#17
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 4,890
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Left Coast ,
CA
RE: Issues with BME
I do have to agree with Mrt1750. I have had dealings with Keith and everything has been great for me. I doubt he will respond in this forum and I don't blame him for not, we don't know both sides of the story. In this day and age of the internet it is easy to be mislead either way. It always seems to turn into a pi$$ing contest that no one will win. I am not banging the drum for BME, just letting everyone know that my experiences have been just the opposite. I would not hesitate to buy another 110 and I might for my next project. Everyone boasts about DA service, well I have had just the same service from BME. My opinion only from the other side.
Ralph
Ralph
ORIGINAL: Mrt1750
Mike
I have thought about this post for two days and I am concerned that we some times lose our sense of fair play. I'm sorry you have had such a bad time with your BME-110. I'm sure BME has many engines that run without any problems.
We who read this post only have your side of the story but if it is true then it seems that Keith and BME would use some common sense and take a different course of action.
Even if you are 100% responsible for the damage to this engine, it seems it would not cost BME much to meet you at least halfway. A good business man thinks of his next sale, knowing that some times todays hot product becomes tomorrow's dog. you would think that Keith would know this and take a different course of action then you have described.
Hope all turns out well
Thanks
Mike
I have thought about this post for two days and I am concerned that we some times lose our sense of fair play. I'm sorry you have had such a bad time with your BME-110. I'm sure BME has many engines that run without any problems.
We who read this post only have your side of the story but if it is true then it seems that Keith and BME would use some common sense and take a different course of action.
Even if you are 100% responsible for the damage to this engine, it seems it would not cost BME much to meet you at least halfway. A good business man thinks of his next sale, knowing that some times todays hot product becomes tomorrow's dog. you would think that Keith would know this and take a different course of action then you have described.
Hope all turns out well
Thanks
07-07-2005 | 06:58 PM
#18
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Bangkok, THAILAND
RE: Issues with BME
RTK,
I am pleased that your experience with BME has been good. As I indicated in the post to Mike, I believe that my recital of events is factual and even handed. Absent evidence to the contrary I think that this will stand as presented. I hope your experience with BME continues to be as good as it has been in the past, and that the episode with me is a simple anomoly.
Mike
I am pleased that your experience with BME has been good. As I indicated in the post to Mike, I believe that my recital of events is factual and even handed. Absent evidence to the contrary I think that this will stand as presented. I hope your experience with BME continues to be as good as it has been in the past, and that the episode with me is a simple anomoly.
Mike
07-10-2005 | 08:15 PM
#20
Junior Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: , AUSTRALIA
RE: Issues with BME
Mike I can sympathize with you the same thing happened to me, if you read the forum BME 110x problems see what you think, it turned into a shi/fight at the end of the day and still cost me $400.00.
Mike did you notice fuel dripping from the carby at idle? If so, this could be your problem. The main fuel needle comes off from the rocker arm/part of the diagram. This makes the engine run rich at idle and lean at higher revs.
Mike did you notice fuel dripping from the carby at idle? If so, this could be your problem. The main fuel needle comes off from the rocker arm/part of the diagram. This makes the engine run rich at idle and lean at higher revs.
07-11-2005 | 02:11 AM
#21
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Bangkok, THAILAND
RE: Issues with BME
Hi John,
I am sorry you had a similar problem on your 110. I did not notice fuel dripping from the carb at idle. I hope the engine is working well now.
Mike
I am sorry you had a similar problem on your 110. I did not notice fuel dripping from the carb at idle. I hope the engine is working well now.
Mike
07-11-2005 | 08:46 AM
#22
Senior Member
My Feedback: (6)
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Hensley,
AR
RE: Issues with BME
Could you go into more detail on this?
Thanks,
Thanks,
ORIGINAL: john leigh
Mike did you notice fuel dripping from the carby at idle? If so, this could be your problem. The main fuel needle comes off from the rocker arm/part of the diagram. This makes the engine run rich at idle and lean at higher revs.
Mike did you notice fuel dripping from the carby at idle? If so, this could be your problem. The main fuel needle comes off from the rocker arm/part of the diagram. This makes the engine run rich at idle and lean at higher revs.
07-11-2005 | 11:09 AM
#23
Senior Member
My Feedback: (61)
RE: Issues with BME
Mike - first I want to say excellent write up, its a shame you had those problems. I have seen the 110 run real hot, and while tuning, baffling, and prop load obviously have a major effect on heat - most of the issues we have seen had nothing to do with those. We set one BME 110 up with a break-in prop, and ran it 400 RPM under its peak (i.e. rich) and the cylinder head temp was 260 - way too hot. One side was hotter than the other as well.. We lowered the load (smaller prop) and ran the engine under forced cooling (air conditioner) at 1/2 RPM for a gallon until it loosened up. Even with the rings seated the engine still ran incredibly hot.
The fix- BAD CARB and an exhaust adjustment. I took a tillotson from one of my 3W's and it completely fixed the heat problem. The engine ran cooler overall. I adjusted the pipe length and that dropped the heat and evened it out side-to-side. At no time did we see a CHT under 210.
My 3W-106 runs consistently at 195, a properly tuned DA100 - 180-190
If you are around this hobby long enough (as you have been!) eventually all engine brands will throw a turd at you - I had a bad carb on a DA100 recently - we almost lost a new Carden because of it. Stuff happens though and it is what the company does to stand behind their product that matters. In the case of DA I had a new carb the next day and even though the engine was used - they stood behind it!!. I had a bad carb base block on a new 3W-106 recently too - again, next day I had parts. I'm not bashing BME, but Cactus, AI, and DA will give the customer the benefit of the doubt if you present data and are honest with the events leading up to the problem. They also are 100% willing to return calls, troubleshoot and repair quickly if required as long as the request is reasonable. What we as modelers do need to understand though is that this stuff is not life support equipment!! These are small shops and they are not always free to chat. That said, no one deserves the run-around either, which it sounds like you got big time.
Obviously the engine overheated. What caused it and who caused it remains the mystery, but BME should have provided better response. I doubt you would have been posting here had it been DA or 3W.
I have the new 3W-QQ106, best running engine I have ever laid my hands on. Smoooooothe! Pretty too!
DP
The fix- BAD CARB and an exhaust adjustment. I took a tillotson from one of my 3W's and it completely fixed the heat problem. The engine ran cooler overall. I adjusted the pipe length and that dropped the heat and evened it out side-to-side. At no time did we see a CHT under 210.
My 3W-106 runs consistently at 195, a properly tuned DA100 - 180-190
If you are around this hobby long enough (as you have been!) eventually all engine brands will throw a turd at you - I had a bad carb on a DA100 recently - we almost lost a new Carden because of it. Stuff happens though and it is what the company does to stand behind their product that matters. In the case of DA I had a new carb the next day and even though the engine was used - they stood behind it!!. I had a bad carb base block on a new 3W-106 recently too - again, next day I had parts. I'm not bashing BME, but Cactus, AI, and DA will give the customer the benefit of the doubt if you present data and are honest with the events leading up to the problem. They also are 100% willing to return calls, troubleshoot and repair quickly if required as long as the request is reasonable. What we as modelers do need to understand though is that this stuff is not life support equipment!! These are small shops and they are not always free to chat. That said, no one deserves the run-around either, which it sounds like you got big time.
Obviously the engine overheated. What caused it and who caused it remains the mystery, but BME should have provided better response. I doubt you would have been posting here had it been DA or 3W.
I have the new 3W-QQ106, best running engine I have ever laid my hands on. Smoooooothe! Pretty too!
DP
07-11-2005 | 12:03 PM
#25
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Bangkok, THAILAND
RE: Issues with BME
Hi DP,
That pretty well sums it up, a little communication goes a long way. As you have said most of the engine companies are not large, and so it is understandable if there are periodic hiccups.Telling customers that your time is too valuable to speak with them, is a rather unusual PR tool.
Mike
That pretty well sums it up, a little communication goes a long way. As you have said most of the engine companies are not large, and so it is understandable if there are periodic hiccups.Telling customers that your time is too valuable to speak with them, is a rather unusual PR tool.
Mike
