Evo 61nx vs O.S. 65AX
01-01-2011, 12:32 PM
#51
My Feedback: (66)
RE: Evo 61nx vs O.S. 65AX
If the plane will take a regular size 60 then to me there no reason to not put the OS 75-95 ax same size bolt pattern. As far as the eve engine go I will never buy them because of the crank pin failures........
OS Hanno Special man I loved that engine. I had one gave it away to a club when I moved to Cali. Now they are over 400 bucks for them. If you guys every find one buy it...
OS Hanno Special man I loved that engine. I had one gave it away to a club when I moved to Cali. Now they are over 400 bucks for them. If you guys every find one buy it...
01-01-2011, 12:34 PM
#52
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Everett,
WA
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Evo 61nx vs O.S. 65AX
ORIGINAL: blw
Parts are about 40% of what OS charges.
The liner has fairly hard chrome that takes a few tanks to start loosening up. OS uses a nickel plate process.
Performance of any Evo glow engine that I've seen beats OS. Be sure to run a hotter plug than the OS 8.
I know these opinions will step on toes, but I'm being honest.
Parts are about 40% of what OS charges.
The liner has fairly hard chrome that takes a few tanks to start loosening up. OS uses a nickel plate process.
Performance of any Evo glow engine that I've seen beats OS. Be sure to run a hotter plug than the OS 8.
I know these opinions will step on toes, but I'm being honest.
All the best
Konrad
01-01-2011, 01:26 PM
#55
Senior Member
My Feedback: (494)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Palm Bay, FL
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Evo 61nx vs O.S. 65AX
Hey thanks Konrad for helping me rephrase my last post, you’re right.
That's interesting to see Tower specs use both phrases in different engine lines, case in point http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXBZ02 Nickel in this case, must be a single layer then and not the "advanced" double layer noted in ABL?
Right from Tower, "Advanced Bi-Metallic Liner. This process uses a double layer of plating material, rather than one thicker layer. This helps the metal to bond to the cylinder, and is more durable. Also, the plating process is more consistent, resulting in a more precise fit between piston and sleeve, for better compression, longer life."
ORIGINAL: w8ye
ABL = ABN
ABL = ABN
Right from Tower, "Advanced Bi-Metallic Liner. This process uses a double layer of plating material, rather than one thicker layer. This helps the metal to bond to the cylinder, and is more durable. Also, the plating process is more consistent, resulting in a more precise fit between piston and sleeve, for better compression, longer life."
01-01-2011, 01:56 PM
#56
RE: Evo 61nx vs O.S. 65AX
I flew several brands of engines in the last 9 years, having more success with some better than others. The OS is the benchmark to rate other engines by. Thunder Tiger is adequate, but the FX61 did outlast it. Super Tigre has as much power, but break in took a long time. I had bad experienced with GMS, Evo, Tower, Magnum, and ASP in this size. That's a lot of wasted money to try it and see. What I like about the FX61 is the variety of fuels and props run well on it, you can mount ANY aftermarket muffler on it and easily tune it again in seconds, and other engines just for some reason, refuse to be that user friendly. It's no NovaRossi, but it never was intended to be one. It's a very forgiving engine for any sport plane you can throw at it. You can concentrate on your plane, not worrying about the engine transitioning bad one day, it just is a consistent engine every day. For in cowl planes, pitts muffler, I wouldn't use anything else.
01-01-2011, 01:59 PM
#57
RE: Evo 61nx vs O.S. 65AX
When I say User-friendly I mean, if you look at the Evo engine, I don't think that it clearly states anything on breaking in the engine, I'm an intermediate pilot but am basic with glow engines, relied on one guy to help me out, that didn't work, so now its on me, on my recently purchased Saito 100GK the manual was so much better than the EVO, detailed information on everything including break-in, I find that much more user-friendly than the EVO
01-01-2011, 02:31 PM
#58
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Everett,
WA
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Evo 61nx vs O.S. 65AX
ORIGINAL: w8ye
ABL = ABN
ABL = ABN
For years OS and her apologist have been denying that fact! I posted many time that I did an chemical analysis on the then new ABL and found it was nickel. You should have heard the noise (I would use another name but this is a family rated sight) a got. Most thinking that OS had some new proprietary plating. Other than my analyses do you have confirmation from a secondary source as to my and that of others that ABL is in fact the same as properly applied electroless nickel? Like I said I only did a chemical analysis. I did not look at the micro structure of the plating as I knew nickel was not suitable for my application. Again nickel is not suitable for my engine but it may be adequate for the sport flier.
Again thanks for confirming what I already knew years ago.
All the best,
Konrad
P.S.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THE HYPE TEXTED LINK IS NOT AN ENDORSEMENT BY THE AUTHOR FOR ANY PRODUCT OR BRAND!
01-01-2011, 02:38 PM
#59
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Everett,
WA
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Evo 61nx vs O.S. 65AX
ORIGINAL: rambler53
Hey thanks Konrad for helping me rephrase my last post, you’re right.
That's interesting to see Tower specs use both phrases in different engine lines, case in point http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXBZ02 Nickel in this case, must be a single layer then and not the ''advanced'' double layer noted in ABL?
Right from Tower, ''Advanced Bi-Metallic Liner. This process uses a double layer of plating material, rather than one thicker layer. This helps the metal to bond to the cylinder, and is more durable. Also, the plating process is more consistent, resulting in a more precise fit between piston and sleeve, for better compression, longer life.''
I was reading someone say “friends don’t let friends fly nickel†for years, so I started pulling my SF and FX engines apart to take a look. I have witnessed VF and FX engines with failures in the liner plating regardless of what ABL name OS gives it, it has happened to SOME of my OS engines. What percentage I can't say, but ONE I ran with a pipe (46) and ONE with a pitts muffler (61) that I flew heavily for about 5 years because I loved the plane it was bolted to. Somewhere in that period of time it peeled, but ran fine anyway going undetected, until I actually took the engine apart.
I've posted this picture many times, it's the only one I have a photo of a peeled nickel liner (Pumped VF 61 on an Ultra Sport 60). I never saw this happen on a true ABC engine.
[img][/img]
Hey thanks Konrad for helping me rephrase my last post, you’re right.
ORIGINAL: w8ye
ABL = ABN
ABL = ABN
Right from Tower, ''Advanced Bi-Metallic Liner. This process uses a double layer of plating material, rather than one thicker layer. This helps the metal to bond to the cylinder, and is more durable. Also, the plating process is more consistent, resulting in a more precise fit between piston and sleeve, for better compression, longer life.''
I was reading someone say “friends don’t let friends fly nickel†for years, so I started pulling my SF and FX engines apart to take a look. I have witnessed VF and FX engines with failures in the liner plating regardless of what ABL name OS gives it, it has happened to SOME of my OS engines. What percentage I can't say, but ONE I ran with a pipe (46) and ONE with a pitts muffler (61) that I flew heavily for about 5 years because I loved the plane it was bolted to. Somewhere in that period of time it peeled, but ran fine anyway going undetected, until I actually took the engine apart.
I've posted this picture many times, it's the only one I have a photo of a peeled nickel liner (Pumped VF 61 on an Ultra Sport 60). I never saw this happen on a true ABC engine.
[img][/img]
Lets keep trying to to bring the truth to light be it favorable or uncomfortable. The Truth shall prevail. Hopefully before any more quality engine OEMs fail.
To be fair I have rarely if ever (many engines I look at aren't mine so I can't say their history prior to failure was fully understood) seen properly applied electroless nickel fail in a sport application. Please note the two key terms, properly applied and sport application
All the best,
Konrad
01-01-2011, 02:44 PM
#60
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Everett,
WA
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Evo 61nx vs O.S. 65AX
ORIGINAL: RcPlaneLover777
When I say User-friendly I mean, if you look at the EO engine, I don't think that it clearly states anything on breaking in the engine, I'm an intermediate pilot but am basic with glow engines, relied on one guy to help me out, that didn't work, so now its on me, on my recently purchased Saito 100GK the manual was so much better than the EVO, detailed information on everything including break-in, I find that much more user-friendly than the EVO
When I say User-friendly I mean, if you look at the EO engine, I don't think that it clearly states anything on breaking in the engine, I'm an intermediate pilot but am basic with glow engines, relied on one guy to help me out, that didn't work, so now its on me, on my recently purchased Saito 100GK the manual was so much better than the EVO, detailed information on everything including break-in, I find that much more user-friendly than the EVO
All the best,
Konrad
01-01-2011, 03:02 PM
#61
RE: Evo 61nx vs O.S. 65AX
I'm a sport pilot, I have 3 nitros and 4 electrics.
Its not just the manual, I brought this forum out so I could get opinions on both engines, and I sure have, but I still have not decided if I want to go with the EVo or O.S.
Its not just the manual, I brought this forum out so I could get opinions on both engines, and I sure have, but I still have not decided if I want to go with the EVo or O.S.
01-01-2011, 03:11 PM
#62
RE: Evo 61nx vs O.S. 65AX
ORIGINAL: Konrad
What do you mean by ''intermediate pilot''? How many engines and types have you run. I suspect that you are still a novice modeler but a fair pilot that can keep a ship out of the dirt. So by ''user friendly'' you are look for an all inclusive operator's manual? I think you found one of the best, in this site. A few of the members are truly engine experts. They can help you far more than any manual can.
All the best,
Konrad
ORIGINAL: RcPlaneLover777
When I say User-friendly I mean, if you look at the EO engine, I don't think that it clearly states anything on breaking in the engine, I'm an intermediate pilot but am basic with glow engines, relied on one guy to help me out, that didn't work, so now its on me, on my recently purchased Saito 100GK the manual was so much better than the EVO, detailed information on everything including break-in, I find that much more user-friendly than the EVO
When I say User-friendly I mean, if you look at the EO engine, I don't think that it clearly states anything on breaking in the engine, I'm an intermediate pilot but am basic with glow engines, relied on one guy to help me out, that didn't work, so now its on me, on my recently purchased Saito 100GK the manual was so much better than the EVO, detailed information on everything including break-in, I find that much more user-friendly than the EVO
All the best,
Konrad
Thats funny because I actually think the EVO manuals are better than OS's manuals.
01-01-2011, 03:40 PM
#64
RE: Evo 61nx vs O.S. 65AX
ORIGINAL: RcPlaneLover777
When I say User-friendly I mean, if you look at the Evo engine, I don't think that it clearly states anything on breaking in the engine, I'm an intermediate pilot but am basic with glow engines, relied on one guy to help me out, that didn't work, so now its on me, on my recently purchased Saito 100GK the manual was so much better than the EVO, detailed information on everything including break-in, I find that much more user-friendly than the EVO
When I say User-friendly I mean, if you look at the Evo engine, I don't think that it clearly states anything on breaking in the engine, I'm an intermediate pilot but am basic with glow engines, relied on one guy to help me out, that didn't work, so now its on me, on my recently purchased Saito 100GK the manual was so much better than the EVO, detailed information on everything including break-in, I find that much more user-friendly than the EVO
The 4 strokes like Saito do specify a more detailed break in and run differently than 2 strokes. I agree that the Saito manual is good, but so are the OS and Evo manuals that I've seen.
edit for grammar
01-01-2011, 07:19 PM
#66
Senior Member
My Feedback: (14)
RE: Evo 61nx vs O.S. 65AX
ORIGINAL: rambler53
Many in the hobby started out with glow, and shifted power choice to electric, using Hobby City as the same source you found your ignition engine and ASP engines. Many are praising how much easier it is now that they made the switch, no clean up, no tuning, no fuel costs, yadda yadda. Purchasing glow engines are my target at the swap meet, along with discontinued kits. Whatever my truck can carry, comes home with me as prices have never been better in the privately owned market that I regularly deal in, and use for almost all my hobby needs.
Many in the hobby started out with glow, and shifted power choice to electric, using Hobby City as the same source you found your ignition engine and ASP engines. Many are praising how much easier it is now that they made the switch, no clean up, no tuning, no fuel costs, yadda yadda. Purchasing glow engines are my target at the swap meet, along with discontinued kits. Whatever my truck can carry, comes home with me as prices have never been better in the privately owned market that I regularly deal in, and use for almost all my hobby needs.
Now I understand. Thanks.
Ed Cregger
01-01-2011, 11:07 PM
#70
RE: Evo 61nx vs O.S. 65AX
Anyone here have a 75AX, same mounting dimensions as the 61FX, like the 65AX, and I think it uses the same process 65AX, any thoughts on it?
01-02-2011, 10:43 AM
#71
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Swedesboro,
NJ
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Evo 61nx vs O.S. 65AX
Yes, I have 2 75AXs mounted in some warbirds (in place of 61s). I bought them before the 65AXs were available. If you're thinking of a 65AX then better to spend the extra few dollars for the 75ax. The 75ax is an exact size/mount match for the OS 61 and 65. The 75ax dropped right in where there were OS 61s before. Didn't even have to recut the cowls. And the main reason is the 75AX has a bunch more power and spins a bigger prop. My warbids can get going at about 3/4 throttle. I rarely use full throttle on them since 3/4 is more than enough.
01-04-2011, 05:35 AM
#75
RE: Evo 61nx vs O.S. 65AX
ORIGINAL: carrellh
Ed, after I read your comments I looked it up.
There is a 60NX and a 61NX
60NX http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products...rodID=EVOE0600
61NX http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products...rodID=EVOE0611
The 60NX is a small case, light weight (17 ounces) design. They do not list a benchmark prop. Prop range listed is 10x7 - 13x6
The 61NX is the replacement for the 61NT. It is normal size and weight for a 61. HH says it has higher compression and more power than the NT. The benchmark prop is 12x6 @ 12000. Prop range listed is 11x7 - 13x7
Ed, after I read your comments I looked it up.
There is a 60NX and a 61NX
60NX http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products...rodID=EVOE0600
61NX http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products...rodID=EVOE0611
The 60NX is a small case, light weight (17 ounces) design. They do not list a benchmark prop. Prop range listed is 10x7 - 13x6
The 61NX is the replacement for the 61NT. It is normal size and weight for a 61. HH says it has higher compression and more power than the NT. The benchmark prop is 12x6 @ 12000. Prop range listed is 11x7 - 13x7
I have a .36 and a .46 EVO also and like them. I have lots of OS also and like them, but I am not sure they are worth their cost.Sincerely, Richard.