Hades

Just bought my first 4 stroke a Saito FA-82a.

Ken6PPC

Add me to the list. After experiening Saito's warranty serivce, I am a TRUE Saito fan! So far, only two FA82a, but they won't be the last ones!

[link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_4669289/tm.htm]How is Saito's Warranty Service?[/link]

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

The APC 16x8 obviously turns easier than the Mejzlik 16x8.
Saito 1.50-15% PowerMaster===8,990
Enya 1.55--15% PowerMaster===9,150
Irvine 1.50-5% nitro/20% castor=9.050
Webra 1.20-5% nitro/20% castor==8,890.

JPal101

My Feedback: (32)

Bill

Took the back plate off my Saito 100 and found that the connecting rod was hitting the side of the case. How can I tell if it is the rear bearing or connecting rod pin or the connecting rod. Or anythingelse you might think of

William Robison

My Feedback: (3)

[/b]
OK, all, post number twenty thousand. Where are the blaring trumpets of the brass band? The unforgettable fireworks display? Oh well, whoop-te-do, rah-rah sis-boom-bah. I think “Bah” sys it best.

New members:
369 Hades
370 Ken6PPC
Welcome. Glad to have you.

Jpal:

When the big end of the con rod hits the inside of the case it’s almost always a failure of the rear crank shaft bearing. Unless you can see a lot of play in the rod to crank fitting there’s no question. Time to call Paul at RC_Bearings.

Or, if it’s still in warranty, time to send it to Horizon.

Bill.

Kimhoff

My Feedback: (22)

I notice my FA80 has the carb centered, my FA91 has the carb off to the left. Does anyone know why Saito made this change?

w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

When you lay the engine over on it's side, on the 80, the carb will be lower than when the engine was upright.

On the 91 & 100, the carb will be the same height relative to the tank if the same thrust centerline is maintained.

Hades

Was worried they dident send my a muffler turned out it was alittle hidden on the side of the box

N1EDM

My Feedback: (2)

Plasticjoe,
I can't tell from the picture, but make sure that the end of the rod is actually seated in the rocker arm adjusting screw. In one of my engines, there was enough room for them to slip out once (and I didn't notice) and had the same problem.

If this has happened, check the ends to make sure that they aren't gnarled up.

Bob

khodges

My Feedback: (1)

Another Saito 1.00 question: Ever since I started running this engine (mounted sideways), It had made poor power at full throttle, and all indications were that it was leaning out between about 80% and full throttle(pinch testing throughout throttle range). Initially, I had run it with a flex pipe exhaust, but went back to the stock muffler, thinking that maybe there wasn't enough back pressure to pressurize the tank for optimum fuel flow (pressure tap on the flex pipe was at the end of the elbow, and the setup had worked fine for the .80 that the 1.00 replaced). The stock muffler didn't improve things, so I just continued to fly the plane, since the 1.00 was performing about the same as the .80 had.

Yesterday, I took off, flew around a couple of minutes, and then, the exhaust note changed. I determined that the end of the muffler had come loose/come off. But boy, howdy, did this thing run good. When I used full throttle, it was like it had grown another cylinder. I was getting the performance all of a sudden that I had expected when I decided to upgrade the plane to the 1.00 engine. When I landed, I discovered that the long bolt holding the muffler end on had broken, and the end had come off.

Now, when I had tried to correct the "lean" condition, I had replaced all the fuel and vent lines with larger tubing, bigger hole in the clunk, to allow for more fuel flow, to no avail. It appears that exhaust back pressure was the culprit, why would this cause a lean condition at full throttle, and if this is truly the cause, would the flex pipe have more back pressure than the stock muffler with the end removed? As good as it runs, I'd be tempted to just run the muffler with no end on it, but that allows hot exhaust to blow against the firewall bottom and doesn't allow it to clear the plane underside.

Thoughts/ ideas/ comments?

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Saito guys, I decided to look for a reason why my 1.50 did not make the power I expected yesterday, I think I discovered it. The exhaust lifter has been rotating all these years but it appears that the intake lifter rotated until recently and stopped. It looks like the intake cam is worn considerably more than the exhaust cam. This engine still has awesome compression and all bearings are still smooth and tight. That piston looks pretty good for a piston the has never seen all synthetic fuel. The exhaust cam is indexed to the intake cam with a square nub, the cam is not one piece.

William Robison

My Feedback: (3)

Kim:

All the later design mid block Saitos have the offset carb – the 72, 82, 91, 100, and 125.

As W8YE Jim said, it keeps the carb at the same approximate height when the engine is mounted on its side, but I think this is just a side effect. More likely some engineer looked at the FA-80 intake pipe with its double bend to center the carb, and realized that a single bend was cheaper to make than the pipe with two bends. Therefore, the carbs are now offset on the mid block engines.

The big block engines, the FA-120, FA-150, the FA-180, and now the FA-220, have had the carbs offset from the start of production.

KH:

Sounds like you went from too little muffler pressure to too much.

A while back we had a new Saito with the cast muffler reported to run fine at idle, and it would run a bit higher in rpm but would die at full throttle. Every time. It turned out to be the muffler cover, it had not gotten the internal drillings to connect the expansion chamber with the outlet. So how was it able to run at all? All we can figure is the entire exhaust was going out the muffler pressure nipple. Enough flow to run at idle, but off idle the back pressure was just too high. There should be six holes, about 4-5 mm diameter drilled at an angle around the boss for the through bolt, going from the expansion chamber side into the outlet pipe.

If you recovered the muffler cap you can check it, if it’s lost we can only speculate that there might have been fewer holes, or smaller holes, than the design calls for.

Hobbsy:

The cam shaft is assembled from three pieces. The exhaust lobe and the gear are one piece, the intake lobe and its drive coupling in the second piece. After these are pressed together the bronze bearing is pressed it, and peened on the ends to complete the assembly. In theory, it should never come apart. Yours is the first I’ve heard that has broken.

From the looks of the rest, you will need only the camshaft and a set of tappets to get running again.

All will note the push rods with the aluminum shafts. All the big block engines have the alloy rods with steel ends inserted, the all steel push rods are in the small block and mid block engines only.

Now for the hackers among us. Let’s consider the storage of post counts at RCU. Almost without question it’s stored in 16 bits, or two bytes. That gives a maximum count of 65535 posts. When I get to 65536, if it is just two bytes, the post count should then say zero. Of course, at my present rate that should take about nine more years so I don’t think I’ll have to worry about it for a good while yet.

Still for the hackers, if you have a “Glass teletype” terminal the 20,000 (decimal) will come up as 4E20 in hexadecimal (base 16). Or if you’re using one of the 12 bit machines, like the Motorola 4000 series or the DEC PDP-8, you will see the same number presented as 47040 in octal, which is base 8 numbering. Or even, if you’re using a real antique like the Heath H-8 with “Split octal” the number will show as 016-040. Finally, if you’re a dyed in the wool bit whacker who thinks only wimps use assembly language, then you will see 0100111000100000 in binary. All these different ways to say the same number. Aren’t you glad you don’t have to bother with anything but decimal numbers?

Haw.

Bill.

IronCross

Bill
That brings back memories... Haven's seen Octal since my 8080a -Z80 asembly language days

Question if I may... I an considering a flat twin (Saito of course) for a cub... As I understand it a twin etc does
not put out the poser of a comperable single ?.... For example I have been told a Saito 100 flat twin is roughly
equivilent to a .72 in power.... Is there any rule of thumb to use in figuring the equivilent power in these ?... Something
to help decide what size twin to get ?...
Thanks
IC

JPal101

My Feedback: (32)

More Saito trouble, a good friend of mine is running 180 and as he was flying yesterday I noticed that tell tale metallic sound I had in mine. Today we removed the back cover and low and behold the connecting rod was contacting the back plate. Now this is the third Saito in a month that had to be returned to Horizon. I have two, one brand new 125 with carb problems and a fairly recently serviced 100 with issues of either rear bearing problem or connecting rod problem. Can you say YS

wagen017

So, this then must be Saito member #371, am I right?? Been flying FA-72 for some years now, but now on my newest plane replaced it by a FA-82. I love flying Saito, any weather, any time, they always run well.

The Saito FA-82 is great. I just have one question. It is now flying with a APC 13x6 on 5% nitro, 18% oil (Klotz), and it is at 10.600rpm, and not yet really broken in. I am afraid over-revving the engine with this prop. What would be a better choice 13x7 or even 13x8? I prefer to be in the 9800 rpm range (that is the three clicks richer setting for eternal life).

Another question (sorry!): I have been reading about adding, or being at 100% Castor oil iso. synthetic oil. I was surprised reading this; I always felt (and heard) Castor in a 4-stroke is a no-no, clogs up your engine. Or does it also depend on the quality of synthetic you are using??

khodges

My Feedback: (1)

Bill, I tried an experiment today. I had a muffler from a .91, and took the end off and mounted it on the 1.00 muffler. I figure that the ends are very similar, if not identical, in the size of the outlet holes. I took off, and the performance was the same as before losing the muffler end. I took the muffler end off, and measured the diameter of the holes, which was a tight 7/64 in. I drilled all six holes out to 9/64 and re-mounted it to the muffler, flew the plane again. What a difference. I had the same power increase that I got with no muffler end at all. The rpm's went from 8750 to 10,250 with just this change. I did not re-tune the carb or make any changes except the muffler outlet holes enlargement. It allowed me to go from a 14-6 2-blade to a 14-7 3-blade prop and the flight performance difference is astounding. The sound is not noticably louder, but the note is a bit deeper than before, sounds great.

BTW, since everyone is posting their Club #, I'm Club Saito member #2.

blw

My Feedback: (3)

Bill,

You forgot that real programmers load and store their accumlators....and rotate bits left and right..... Thanks for reminding me to brush up on my hex.

Air-brush dude

HOLLY CRAP!! 169 pages. I'm only on page 21. I have a saito 100 in a H9 P40 and a very old FA 45 that I bought used at an auction about ten years ago. flew it in a cub which I flew into a chain link fence. I want to rebuild the 45 but where do I start? should I tear the whole thing down and start over or adjust everything and see how it runs?

stallwart

"Maidened" my FA-82a today, flew 5 times, and was pleased with it's performance, compared to the 2 strokes I'm familiar with. On landing approaches, at idle, the engine would surge a few times and then die. What should I be doing with the low end mix? This occurred on 2 otherwise uneventful flights.
High speed mix at or near 2 1/2 turns for these first flights. The engine was run-in per instructions in 2 sessions for about 45 minutes total, several days before flying.

w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

Did you adjust your low speed mixture yet

William Robison

My Feedback: (3)

IC:

The Saito flat twins are effectively two single cylinder engines hooked to the same crank shaft. And the number of moving parts is roughly double that of the single, so friction losses also are doubled. That’s the main reason the FA-100T, for example, is less powerful than the FA-100 single. I really think 70% is less than you get though, more like 80-90% power available. The smaller twins, the 60T and 90TS, are on the lower end, the 100T and larger with the “Hemi” heads are at the upper end.

The real problem is the weight. The FA-100 weighs 19.5 ounces, the FA-100T is 29. Almost 2/3 pound more to carry around. This makes the multi-cylinder engines best suited for short nosed planes that would normally need nose weight to balance – most of the popular radial engined biplanes work very nicely.

The other place they have a good fit is a plane with a low wing loading, like the Cub or Ercoupe. Nobody expects extended vertical from one of those, the twins will “Fit” nicely.

A hard rule for power comparison, no. But if the plane will accept the weight, the engine should fly it fine.

Jpal:

No explanation for the recurring bearing problems. Saito OEM bearings are known not to be the best available, but they usually last through the warranty period unless mistreated. At the first bearing change mine all get ceramics, and the bearing problem goes away. You might want to check and find out what similarities exist in the service and storage between the two engines you’ve seen the failures in, you could well find a commonality that explains it. But if you want to spend “YS Money,” go ahead. They have their peculiarities too.

Wagen017:

You called it: you are number 371 in Club Saito. Since I was let in we can’t be too picky about anyone else. Haw. I still like Groucho Marx’ comment when he refused an offered membership – said he wouldn’t join any club that would have someone like him as a member. Haw again. Really, glad to have you.

The FA-72 and FA-82 are rated to 12K rpm, your 10,500 is well below the maximum. You can go to the 13x7 or 13x8 if you want a little more air speed but I don’t think it’s necessary. If you get the performance with the 13x6 that you want leave it alone.

Castor oil in a four stroke makes the cam and tappets live a lot longer and gives greatly increased storage protection, but 4% of the total fuel volume is enough to do the job. 100% castor is OK but not necessary. If you look back at Hobbsy’s posted pictures of his FA-150, that engine spent its early life running on Fox fuel with 100% castor oil. The only real advantage of synthetics is less gum on the plane after a flying session.

My “Standard” fuel is Omega 15% nitro, using a synthetic/castor blend lubricant.

KH:

It seems I called one again, your problem was the back pressure. For those who don’t convert readily, the 7/64 size is 2.8 mm, the 9/64 is 3.7 mm. Doesn’t sound like a lot of difference, but the outlet area was increased by approx 2/3, from 36 sq. mm to 60 sq. mm by that small increase in diameter of the six holes.

Yes, your club number is two. You beat me by about 25 minutes making the second post to the thread. If I had beaten you I’d be number two and you’d be number three.

For any who might be interested, here are numbers one through ten in Club Saito:
1 SigMan
2 khodges
3 William Robison
4 GLflyer
5 hobbsy
6 Fly Nexstar
7 w8ye
8 capin
9 LaCerne
10 edgeman55-RCU


Barry:

Let’s not forget CMP and JNE – probably two of the most useful instructions available. And if you were fortunate enough to be using an 1802 CPU the SCR command made subroutines a piece of cake. Even better, on the ABS 1200 series, MDV. Hardware multiply and divide. In 1972.

Bill.

rajul

My Feedback: (58)

Did you guys get a prop nut wrench and a small screwdriver for the low-end needle with your Saito 82A? I received those in my Saito 100 but not in my 82A.

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

I did, I had gotten prop/exhaust wrenches with several of my Saitos and valve adjusting feelers and rocker wrenches with all but that was the only one that came with a screw driver. In order to remove the cylinder from my 1.50 I had to cut down an Allen wrench with my Dremel.

scratchonly

Thought I'd send in a good news story instead of a complaint. Flew my new 72 yesterday in a scratch built from my own plans chester jeep, 8lbs 62". Witha 14x6 APC it had tons of pull. After a break in on the bench I had to fiddle a bit with the low end (engine is inverted) but finally got it going well. I may try a 13x6 or 7 as it is only running about 8500. Hope for even more performance as time builds. Lots of satisfaction!!

wagen017

Rajul, no wrench, no screwdriver with my Saito FA-82a.

Bill, glad to be on-board!

Proud member of club Saito (#371)!