I am a little surprised that Fox engines are being suggested for a new guy. My suggestion would be in the order you listed them. I would also strongly suggest one of the first two. Get a 10x6 prop some 10% nitro fuel and give it a go.

just my .02 , David

Ihave found all my Fox engines to be very user friendly and Iconsider that the biggest factor in a beginners engine. My favorite .40 size Trainer Plane engine is the Thunder Tiger GP42.

IMO, the Evolution .45 TPS is one of the best beginner engines. They put out a ton of power, parts are dirt cheap, and they are very forgiving with tuning.

Im not a complete newb haha.  Ok so im about to pull the trigger on the magnum xls for $50. Should I?

This is 2011 not 1971.  These are not the hand lapped tight engines that take forever to break in that must have castor oil.  These are modern CNC engines that run strong, break in fairly quickly, and last a long time.  With the new carbs I recommend them for any beginner.

go for it, its a good engine, i have 2

Anybody know of a good aftermarket muffler for the XLS? I want a lot of power/speed

"This is 2011 not 1971. These are not the hand lapped tight engines that take forever to break in that must have castor oil. These are modern CNC engines that run strong, break in fairly quickly, and last a long time. With the new carbs I recommend them for any beginner. "

I believe you and hope you are correct. It's just hard for me to recommend an engine that I have seen cost a flyer several hours of tinkering ,only to dead stick. To be fair this was the early 80's. I will hold my tongue for future references to Fox engines.

David

strange, Ihave a Fox 45 from way back that is super easy to tune and makes great power. Ihave had some old baffle ported .15s that were excellent.

It's amazing in one thread, some praise an engine make like it's superior to all others, and others condemn the same ones saying it's junk, temper-mental, don't get the old one, don't get the new one, and so on.

Bottom line reference everyone seems to benchmark other engines by is the OS engine. "Runs as good as OS" is always the phrase. Wonder why that is?

I personally have enjoyed OS, Super Tigre (both new and old), and Rossi engines as my personal preference, depending on what I'm mounting it to (Not to mention Saito 4 strokes).

Changing exhaust for more power leads to usually sacrificing running quality to some degree on a sport engine. Maybe it's the balance in it's design that's compromised. Stock mufflers are fine for most general flying. But if you make a change, change ONE thing at a time, use a tach, and if it improves, great, if not, I go back to what it was and try something else. I do this with props, plugs, fuel, and mufflers. OS can handle 10-15% nitro content. Super Tigre's that I've owned for decades like FAI or 5%, just like my Rossi engines. The Rossi like small props, my Super Tigre's like big props. The only engine I ever wore out was an OS. I never wore out a Rossi, even abusing it severely, it seemed to run better all the time.

The only thing I think is junk is the Super Tigre glow plug. They go right in the trash and a OS A3 plug, Enya 3, McCoy 59, or K&B 1L works great. They'll all burn out in one flight on my Rossi engines though (likes cold plugs), so again, each engine has it's recipe for reliability. I use a Rossi plug, R4 or R6. You have to learn what your engine likes and dislikes, and if you're not tinkering with it, you're going to come to conclusions others were able to resolve instead.

Indeed many of the older Fox's were easy. And even many of the difficult ones were if you followed the manual. The older carbs for example had to have the idle tuned first. If you did not know that you could spend hours dicking aound with the carb settings. But till recently they never had a carb with refined needles with positive seals. sometimesthis gaveproblems. I have a Fox .50 that runs fine. With positive tank pressure the needles do not suck air, however they do leak a bit of fuel.

Because they used to make good engines.  Now with a few exceptions they are just So So.

Based upon what personal experience do you make this claim?

My last OS had bearing problems from the get go. Friends have also had bearing problems. The FX series, especially the .46 had lots of peeled liners. Engines break in easy, but do not last very long. Seems the more popular and cheaper the worse they are. The FX 1.6 engines have been good from what friends have told me,</p>

Then save your pennies until you can afford to buy the Magnum .52 two-stroke. It will give you lots of power-speed. Especially if you can find a used muffler for a Tower Hobbies .46 two-stroke to hang onto it. Don't lug said engine down with any prop larger than a 10x6. Let her spin!


Ed Cregger

You're right, seen the same, but the FX 46 has been gone I think now about 7 or 8 years? Nickel liners and no castor in some fuels tend to cause the liner failures. It's nice to enjoy the running quality they have until they're toasted.
I have an FSR 61 and SF 61 on the second ring and bearing set just a couple months ago, good as new! The ringed engines OS makes are probably the exception. I've had great success with the 91FX ringed engine too. Ran 5 years and sold it for $40 less than I paid.

The lack of castor probably had nothing to do with peeled liners.

Other 46's had more power than the OS.

Reading the fuel forum, there was a thread discussing the fuel issues with nickel plated liners. Fact of the matter is I always use Wildcat fuel (Castor) and never had a problem personally.

Which other .46 engines are you referring to specifically?

OS, great engines, terrible liners. Unless you get a ringed one.

I always add castor to Omega 15 percent. But, I think the liners peeled on all kinds of blends.

Jeffie- I always thought the 50SX was a good engine.

The only aspect to good running quality was a quick break in. TT, Fox, and enen Tower engines seem to have better running qualities than the smaller OS engines.

My TT .46 had more power than the OS or maybe I simply tuned it better with the right prop and plug combo than the OS .46's at the field. RC Reports said the Fox .46 was the second most powerful they had reviewed, and the most powerful was the Rossi .46, but the Fox had a better carb as hard as that is to believe. Well better if you don't mind the crude needles.

I don't accept opinions of magazines and certainly not minority viewpoints on Tower engines as you posted.
Not many would agree with this, if they ever did the experiment themselves between Fox and Rossi. Lots of Fox posts reveal what truly is going on with frustrated buyers. I don't read that with Rossi unless out of ignorance they're using 15% nitro and 11X7 props on a A3 plug because they're AX 55 can.

You cannot take ONE Fox engine, and ONE Rossi and make a conclusion on tuning. I've owned dozens of Rossi and OS engines, and CONSISTENT quality with both are far superior to the dozens of junk engines I've thrown or given away. Period.

I have never had a Fox engine with a poorly working carburetor, once you read and actually understood the instructions. That old flat blade Fox carb really gave the troops a hard time with its tune the low speed circuit first and then tune the high speed circuit routine. But mine worked flawlessly.

I like both Fox and Rossi. Both makes of carbs did the job that they were designed to do - and well.


Ed Cregger

I haven't seen a post with a problem with a brand new Fox since their new carb. Before that they cleaned up their act with the head buttons and other issues that made them overcompressed and detonate, sometimes even with FAIfuel. All frustrated posts are with older engines and often because they did not have the manual and did not know the correct proceedure to tune the engine, or were using too much nitro.

Actually with the older Fox .46 and the Rossi 2000 .46 the Fox is easier to tune. That Rossi had issues with the carb. Yes the Fox had crude needles, but they worked well. The newer Fox's have even better needles than Rossi or OS.

http://www.foxmanufacturing.com/inde...oducts_id=1514

http://www.foxmanufacturing.com/imag...carburator.jpg

I have a new Fox .74 Eagle IV with the new carb. It is in GP Escapade 61. The Fox has run very well right from the beginning. It has great power and there was no problem tuning it. I also fly OS, Enya, and Magnum. The Fox is surely equal to and in fact better than the others. I have been flying Fox engines since the 50s and I have never had a bad one.

Bruce