Notices
Glow Engines Discuss RC glow engines

My take on Thunder Tigers

Old 07-20-2011, 08:10 PM
  #1  
mike109
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
mike109's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dubbo, New South Wales, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,484
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default My take on Thunder Tigers

G'day

I wanted to make a comment on the now closed thread about Thunder Tiger four strokes but it went away before I could so here is my take on these Taiwanese engines.

I have owned four Thunder Tiger four strokes and two two strokes. I bought the first one, a 91 4C, and eventually ran it and put it in a P-47. I ran it in on a test stand for about 15 minutes (which I suspect was not enough) and then tried to fly it inverted in the P-47. It sounded OK but deadsticked about 1 minute into the flight. I ran it some more and about a year later it flew again in the same plane this time with no problems at all. It flew the plane well but I ended up selling it in another model.

Second one was a 54 four stroke with an air bleed carby. Again, it was run in on the bench and then put in a small Ryan ST/M which it flew brilliantly. I was not greatly taken by the prop lock nut which only had about three threads to hold on by but I did not have any problems with it and flew it quite often until I was talked out of the plane and the engine by a friend who also flew it a lot until he crashed it. The engine survived but I lost track of it at this point.

Next one was a friend's 54 four stroke with a twin needle carby. He just could not get it to run well. I put it on the test stand and the LSN was so lean that it would not start. Opened the needle a full turn and she ran quite well. I had to replace the prop nuts as both had been stripped. The metal and the design I think contributed to the failure. That and my friend's heavy hand. This engine ran fine once I tuned it and I eventually sold it for its owner.

The next one also came from the same source. It was a 75 four stroke. It too was WAY out of tune and also ran quite well once I opened the LSN quite a bit. It too needed tuning and running and new prop nuts. Again, I ran it, tuned it and even flew it in a trainer for a while and eventually passed it on.

The two engines from my friend had been run with fuel containing no castor and he complained that they ran hot. I did not have this problem with them but I always run a small amount of castor (usually 5%) in a total oil package of 20%.

The two strokes I really did not want but they came to me with some other stuff. I ran them and sold them and they ran quite well though one needed new bearings.

My overall impression was of engines that needed more running in than my Saitos and OSs but which ran OK once dialed in. They did take more time to set up though and more patience from me but once running in they were good engines. Saitos need quite a bit of running to run really well but will run well enough so long as you keep them a little rich when they are new.

I still like my Saitos, Enyas and Lasers better though and that, I guess, is why I don't have any Thunder Tigers at the moment. In Australia they cost about the same as Saitos, so I can't really see any advantage in buying them.

Mike in Oz

Old 07-21-2011, 01:57 AM
  #2  
jeffie8696
Senior Member
 
jeffie8696's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Muscatine, IA
Posts: 5,299
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: My take on Thunder Tigers

Mike Ihave to agree. My TT 91 FS is a good runner aside from some initial carb trouble that was repaired under warranty.
Ihave had several GP42 two strokes and they are one of the the best trainer engines in my opinion. Low cost reliable and powerful enough to get the job done.
Iflew one on my Great Planes Escapade and it flew very well .

Ihave also flown the TT GP25 on my Sig Kadet Jr and was overall impressed with it too. Very reliable, easy to tune, good fuel economy and good power.
Not in the same league with my Saito, OS or Irvine engines but good value.

Ihave heard good things about the 46 Pro but have no experience flying any, Ituned one up for a friend and it seemed a good performer but it has never been flown.
Old 07-21-2011, 06:52 AM
  #3  
NM2K
Senior Member
My Feedback: (14)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ringgold, GA
Posts: 11,488
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: My take on Thunder Tigers

My opinion of Thunder Tiger engines is pretty close to yours, Mike. They're not an OS or Saito, but they don't need to be in order to provide good service for a modeller. I put them in the Sanye class of engines. That's not a bad class to be in.


Ed Cregger
Old 07-21-2011, 12:57 PM
  #4  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: My take on Thunder Tigers

I put them in the Sanye class of engines.
I put them in the same class as OS and Saito, maybe a click down. Sanye is like just barely acceptable.
Old 07-21-2011, 01:56 PM
  #5  
NM2K
Senior Member
My Feedback: (14)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ringgold, GA
Posts: 11,488
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: My take on Thunder Tigers

Our differences are generated by our different opinion of Sanye engines. I have had no problems with the many Sanye engines that I have had and that I presently own. They remind me of some older American brands that needed some TLC during break-in. Many folks mount them up and expect them to run at peak performance right off the bat. These are usually the folks that do not like Sanye engines. I am generalizing and, yes, there will be exceptions to my observation.

To me, the Thunder Tiger engines ARE GOOD ENGINES, as are Sanye, but each requires special handling. Handling that varies from size and model to model, not to mention accomodating the different piston/liner technologies versus ringed or non ringed.

I have a Thunder Tiger 1.20 two-stroke that is more powerful than the vaulted Webra 1.20, which is also powerful and durable. My TT 1.20 has been a very reliable bear. Break-in wasn't long and it has been hanging in there for over ten years. I would still be buying mostly Thunder Tiger if they hadn't been bought out (the US distributorship) by Ace R/C and now Tower Hobbies. We shall see how things go in the future.

We're just talking here. I do not hope to convert anyone that already has an opinion about the subject to my opinion. I would like to influence those that have never bought and ran a Thunder Tiger engine before. They are pretty good, but don't expect it to run like an OS right out of the box.


Ed Cregger

Old 07-21-2011, 02:00 PM
  #6  
blw
My Feedback: (3)
 
blw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Opelika, AL
Posts: 9,447
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: My take on Thunder Tigers

I rank the Evolution engines (Sanye) over comparable sized OS engines.

I read a comment from Clarence Lee made some years ago that the Chinese were doing to Japan what Japan did to the U.S.
Old 07-21-2011, 04:59 PM
  #7  
Azcat59
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: My take on Thunder Tigers

I agree with NM2K, Ed. I have a TT 46 Pro that runs as well as any of the OS 45 FSRs that I have had, and I have two TT 120 engines, and two Webra 120s. I agree that the TT are somewhat stronger than the Webra. I recall RC Report testing both engines "back in the day", and they pointed out that the TT was actually 126 displacement, which may account for the difference in power. The first 120 had very low compression, and the service guy at Thundertiger didn't know if it was a dykes ring or not, and proclaimed it fine. I sent it to Mr. Bowman in New Mexico, who machined a new ring for it, sending back the original, which was out of round, and the engine responded very well. One engine is in the Goldberg Sukhoi, and the other in an Aeroworks Edge 540, back when the kit was still available. Hope my experience is useful to y'all.

Clair Sieverling
Old 07-22-2011, 08:04 AM
  #8  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: My take on Thunder Tigers

I have never seen an EVO engine apart, so I should say my opinion is of the current Magnum engines. They do not do many of the small things to improve performance and refinement, but otherwise fairly well built. TT does.
Old 07-22-2011, 03:27 PM
  #9  
NM2K
Senior Member
My Feedback: (14)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ringgold, GA
Posts: 11,488
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: My take on Thunder Tigers


ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot

I have never seen an EVO engine apart, so I should say my opinion is of the current Magnum engines. They do not do many of the small things to improve performance and refinement, but otherwise fairly well built. TT does.


To me, all Thunder Tiger does more than Sanye are aesthetic things like polishing the name on the side of the crankcase, polishing the upper periphery of the venturi, etc. It does look good, but it doesn't make it a better engine, as far as I'm concerned.

Now if somone wants to take pictures of other mechanical items (machining, etc.) of the internals, I would be glad to look at them and learn something new.


Ed Cregger
Old 07-23-2011, 12:11 AM
  #10  
Turk1
 
Turk1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Istanbul, TURKEY
Posts: 1,085
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: My take on Thunder Tigers

One of brand new TT 54 FS on a twin engine plane dropped valve into chamber during third sortie on a friends plane last month.It was out of adjustment and having loose screws under head cover,felt during break in and fixed.
Old 07-23-2011, 12:23 AM
  #11  
the pope
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: goolwasa, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,680
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: My take on Thunder Tigers


ORIGINAL: NM2K


ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot

I have never seen an EVO engine apart, so I should say my opinion is of the current Magnum engines. They do not do many of the small things to improve performance and refinement, but otherwise fairly well built. TT does.


To me, all Thunder Tiger does more than Sanye are aesthetic things like polishing the name on the side of the crankcase, polishing the upper periphery of the venturi, etc. It does look good, but it doesn't make it a better engine, as far as I'm concerned.

Now if somone wants to take pictures of other mechanical items (machining, etc.) of the internals, I would be glad to look at them and learn something new.


Ed Cregger
Howdy Ed the magnum I have doesnt have a machined crankcase for the the bearings. I would have prefered that instead of a nice machined ring around the outside of the head. Having said that its about 6yrs old and runs like a champ. Cheers from the pope
Old 07-23-2011, 07:21 AM
  #12  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: My take on Thunder Tigers


ORIGINAL: NM2K


ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot

I have never seen an EVO engine apart, so I should say my opinion is of the current Magnum engines. They do not do many of the small things to improve performance and refinement, but otherwise fairly well built. TT does.


To me, all Thunder Tiger does more than Sanye are aesthetic things like polishing the name on the side of the crankcase, polishing the upper periphery of the venturi, etc. It does look good, but it doesn't make it a better engine, as far as I'm concerned.

Now if somone wants to take pictures of other mechanical items (machining, etc.) of the internals, I would be glad to look at them and learn something new.


Ed Cregger
Many Magnums have a swedged in crankpin that could come loose. My TT has a machined crankpin.TTcarb has a better choke assembly on the carb. Machined bearingcrankcase area on the TT. TT's valves are canted slightlyon most TT four strokes, Magnum is not. One thing Magnum has better than TT is the rocker cradle is more secure. The TT has a single screw that has backed out and snapped off on one of my TT .91's.


Here is an old SPA newsletter comparing the OS and Magnum .91 four strokes.

http://www.seniorpattern.com/newslet...RAPR2007NL.pdf
Old 07-23-2011, 07:48 AM
  #13  
blw
My Feedback: (3)
 
blw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Opelika, AL
Posts: 9,447
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: My take on Thunder Tigers

ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot

I have never seen an EVO engine apart, so I should say my opinion is of the current Magnum engines. They do not do many of the small things to improve performance and refinement, but otherwise fairly well built. TT does.
I have had a few apart, and changed some bearings. They all seem to share the same qualities and close tolerances in machining. Everything has an excellent fit. The cranks are bar stock with pressed pins. Connecting rods are polished. Hard chrome liners. No collet on the crankshaft. Timing is for sport flying.

Parts are cheap. Very cheap!!! I ordered pistons and liners for both the 46FX and 46NT. The Evo parts were about 40% the cost of the OS parts. And considering the chrome liner over the nickel plated OS liner, the value difference becomes even bigger.

Edit to add: Clair, is your Sukhoi an ARF or kit? I have the kit, waiting to be built. There are some long threads on RCU about both kit and ARF versions.
Old 07-23-2011, 03:50 PM
  #14  
Azcat59
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: My take on Thunder Tigers

blw, my Sukhoi is the kit, the earlier version with the gear mounted in the wing......I have heard that later versions were modified to mount the gear in the fuselage, which would be better. The wing mount was very fragile, even if one beefed it up as much as possible, which I did. Both of mine flew well, the first with a Moki 1.5, and some extra beefing of the fuse, at 12.5 lbs, and the second with a TT 120 at a little over 10 lbs. It flew as well as the Moki version, both flew very well. Sold the first one, and still have the second. Too bad the kit was discontinued.

Clair
Old 07-24-2011, 01:08 AM
  #15  
NM2K
Senior Member
My Feedback: (14)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ringgold, GA
Posts: 11,488
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: My take on Thunder Tigers

ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot


ORIGINAL: NM2K


ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot

I have never seen an EVO engine apart, so I should say my opinion is of the current Magnum engines. They do not do many of the small things to improve performance and refinement, but otherwise fairly well built. TT does.


To me, all Thunder Tiger does more than Sanye are aesthetic things like polishing the name on the side of the crankcase, polishing the upper periphery of the venturi, etc. It does look good, but it doesn't make it a better engine, as far as I'm concerned.

Now if somone wants to take pictures of other mechanical items (machining, etc.) of the internals, I would be glad to look at them and learn something new.


Ed Cregger
Many Magnums have a swedged in crankpin that could come loose. My TT has a machined crankpin. TT carb has a better choke assembly on the carb. Machined bearing crankcase area on the TT. TT's valves are canted slightly on most TT four strokes, Magnum is not. One thing Magnum has better than TT is the rocker cradle is more secure. The TT has a single screw that has backed out and snapped off on one of my TT .91's.


Here is an old SPA newsletter comparing the OS and Magnum .91 four strokes.

http://www.seniorpattern.com/newslet...RAPR2007NL.pdf


Thank you, my friend.

If all will remember, I did suggest not pushing a Magnum (Sanye) four-stroke by using high nitro some years ago. Probably about the time of the SPA newsletter's evaluation that you referred to. I don't think I would push a Thunder Tiger .91 too hard with nitro over 15% either, until finding out how it handles that much nitro and maybe reducding the compression a tad.

Of course, I imagine that both Sanye and Thunder Tiger four-strokes have been undergoing continuous improvement since 2006, so it might not be fair saddling the latest production runs with info from half a decade ago


Ed Cregger

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.