Eastflight

Hi all,
I was wondering if anyone can advise if the Force 46 engine is a clone of the OS 46AX and are the internals the same as the OS 46 AX & OS 46AX II.
I can see the carb is the same design as the original OS 46AX.
Does it have the same Piston/Liner, crankshaft etc?

.......thanks for any feedback !

prigai

Try Just Engines - UK
They carry both Force and OS engines, others reported that they are very helpful.
Force 46, ABC engine – Just Engines

Eastflight

Thanks, will do

Eastflight

It appears that the Force 46 is very similar externally ie; interchangeable with OS 46 but the internals like the piston & liner, con rod are not according to 'Just Engine Ltd'.

2W0EPI

Force 46 engines are an independent Taiwanese company which has been making successful engines for nitro cars for some time and they have just entered the aero glow engine market and as far as I could tell, info on their engines longevity is rather new but reports that I've seen, give it ++positive rating and as a result of their price point, I bought 2 engines which contain a double bearing crank shaft, meaning they are serious about quality. However, they do not come with a supplied glow plug, that up to the end user to decide, they recommend a cold plug.

On the other hand, the OS 46 engine is Japanese, which means you are getting unquestionable quality but at 35% increase in price.I doubt very much that their parts, between the two engines are interchangeable.

Also, note, Taiwanese quality is often higher than Chinese mainland made equivalents.

CW-(ClippedWings)

OS's piston/liner metallurgy is ABN (nickel), I believe Force is ABC (chrome).
ABC is always the preferred choice, many OS 46FX engines are still around because they use the ASP .46 ABC piston/liner combo.
The original OS piston/liner had QA issues and a high failure rate due to peeling of the nickel in the liner.

1967brutus

Double ball bearing is not really an "indication of seriousness"... It is more a matter of marketing. Ball bearings run cleaner but need replacement every X-number of hours, where plain bearing crankshafts basically never wear out whatsoever.
Ball bearings just run nicer, cleaner and without a crankshaft that can move back and forth a bit.

Just take the Force 46 and the Force 52 and compare them side by side, especially internally. They are a world of difference in how they are designed and above all, how they are made. The 46 visually reminds of ASP designs (not a bad thing by the way, because those engines were far better than their reputation claimed) while the 52 looks like it was intended as a competition engine. In the 46 everything is made well, but just that and no extra's, in the 52 everything looks like it was polished and the conrod looks like it was made to be put on display or something.

I have run both, and they both run pretty good, with no indications of inherent weak spots.

100% positive that the liners of the Force engines are ABC, true chrome.

Eastflight

Thank you for your feedback. Some of the bits externally will swap between both types but I guess the design inside is differently manufactured. I know that the liner is a ABC according to Just Engines.

Eastflight

Indeed, I prefer the ABC any day !!

Eastflight

Hi there, Cheers for the feedback.
From your observations, Can I get away with putting the Piston & Liner from the Force 46 in either the OS 46AX/AX II.

1967brutus

That is impossible for me to tell without having my hands on both engines and trying, so while theoretically that possibility exists, I would NOT bet on it.

Eastflight

Okay thanks for that. I was hoping that the situation was similar to interchangeable like my old ASP and OS back in the day.

2W0EPI

I've been looking at Force 52 engine specs and there is not much in it with regards to power output, however the 46 must rev to 16000 rpm whilst the 52 revs to 12000 rpm.This tells me that the 52 engine should outlast 46.however the 46 can be had for as little as £85 for a complete new engine.Given the cost of the 46 new piston and sleeve at around £60 it hardly worth fixing them with off the shelf spare parts and this is why I purchased two new complete 46 engines to start with.

Eastflight

Force are well priced for a 46 size engine, however my situation is that over the years I have been consolidating my stock and have all OS branded engines now apart from x2 Irvine. The majority of the OS are 46AX and the others are mix of 50 & 55's with a couple of four strokes on the side.
I used up all my ASP Piston & Liners spares recently; which I loved using on the OS 46 in the past. I was hoping the Force 46 being an ABC liner would be a nice alternative to the OS stock liner.
Thanks for your input.

2W0EPI

I understand where your coming from, Have you thought about selling your existing accumulation of engines, perhaps on Ebay and then invest in some Force 46/52 engines new.?

Eastflight

That sounds practical but for me OS has stood the test of time amongst a few others and I'd rather continue with the fleet that I have. I might just buy one Force 46 and see for myself. i'll strip it down first and see if the liner & piston work on an OS. The cost of the internals of an OS is almost the price of the Force 46 new!
If not then I'll use it or sell it onto someone at the club. At the moment no one at the field uses one of the Force Engines......Yet!!

2W0EPI

That's just my point, if the engine spares were cheaper then fix and replace worn parts with new would be the correct route. A couple of weeks ago, I found a complete Force 46 engine built from spare parts reached £300. This is about 3.5x the price new complete engine bought new.This means to me, that old worn out engines need to go for sale on Ebay and pass the problem of very expensive parts to someone else.

1967brutus

The issue is not so much the price of an engine assembled out of spares being (much higher) than a complete engine, the issue is that some parts are simply so expensive that repairing an engine becomes simply a waste of money.
Back in the days that I was still running 1:8 nitro buggies, a Force engine cost 95 Euro, and a piston/liner set for that engine would cost 85... No hair on my head would consider rebuilding such an engine.

Don't get me wrong, I do like ABC set-ups, but the price of a piston/liner set would prohibit repairing a worn engine, with the exception of the ASP P/L set in the OS FX series, that was worthwhile (and the engine would be better than original after that).
That is why nowadays I prefer ringed engines, as they are usually much cheaper to repair.

2W0EPI

Nice one, Brutus, I never thought there is a 3rd way(option), if the engine has a ringed piston, just change to new rings but I notice the .46 range of engines don't seem to offer ringed piston engines under about 10cc? or if there are such engines, they likely to be petrol/gas engines meaning a hefty price tag for the engine.

Look, I except that .46 cu.in's Glow is bargain basement rc stuff, but it comes a long way from Cox 0.049 engines, which I messed about with as a kid.When I originally started rc, I thought my choice of plane and engine were going to be poor quality and when I stand back and look what I got for my money, well I'm pleased.

1967brutus

Nowadays, indeed most "sub .60" engines are somehow of the ringless designs, but there are several exceptions: Most .30 and .50 class heli engines are ringed, but up until the OS SF series all engines above .25 were availlable in ringless or ringed. So there should be a fair amount of older ringed engines out there and most of them are absolutely recoverable by simply cleaning them up and giving them a fresh set of crankbearings. I managed to find at least one .40 SF and one .46 SF both ringed (and they started life as glow engine but I was naughty and converted both to gasoline).

Personally, 20+ years ago I was "OS only", then for at least 10 years "Rossi only", but when Rossi closed shop, I simply went ASP and was extremely pleasantly surprised. Now that those are not around anymore either, I limit myself to what I can find cheap and used.
EDIT: that is to say, UNLESS a cute project crosses my path of course....

2W0EPI

Well, I'll say this, if Force 46/52 engines were Chinese mainland, I would have gone for OS but the fact that Force 46/52 are Taiwanese makes a big plus for me.I know that Force 46/52 engines will give me a long engine life with no funny business.

1967brutus

That is a bit of a weird statement, given that the only "chinese mainland production" currently on the market that I can think of, IS that very same OS....

The one I knew of, ASP, well, those have always given me all I wanted from an engine, (reliability and longevity) and I cannot exactly claim that I run them as the manufacturer had envisioned....

2W0EPI

Yes, there are a lot of first world countries which are located/invested in mainland China, no quality issues but if it is designed and manufactured in China, then I worry and start gambling, there are a few exceptions...

Eastflight

I still use the OS 50SX Ringed which is a fab engine. They take longer to break-in but they go on and on compared to non-ringed. Thanks to the Heli Flyers parts are readily available (common components) even though the aero version is a discontinued engine. It seems nowadays that the manufactures WANT you to buy a new engine by making the spares so expensive. We are really a 'use and throw away society!!!.
I never buy OS stock replacement bearings. Not only because I can get them cheaper by third party suppliers but because the ones I purchase are better quality (eg SKF). Plus they last longer. Nevertheless, I have a great time with OS motors but that's just my preference and they never let me down on the field......so far! :-)

Eastflight

I'll give one a try and see how it goes. But I do like my OS and Irvine engines. (ASP 8 Enya were also a good choice but I got rid of them when I consolidated).