Just wondering if anyone has any "on-hand" experience with the new OS 200 Surpass......not the FI version?

According to Model Airplane News it looks like a APC 18-8 is the sweet spot?

Top Flite 16 X 8 ----8700
APC 16 X 8 --------9000
17 X 8 ------------8600
17 X 8N -----------8000
Top Flite 18 X 6 ---8100
18 X 8 ------------7900
APC 18 X 8 --------8400
Zinger 18 X 8-14 --7000
Top Flite 20 X 8 ---6400

Apparently 9,000 static rpm is considered too fast for this engine?

I read in the RCU Pattern forum last year that Jason Shulman was given one to test. He posted some photos of the one he received, but I don't remember the follow-up posts. This was way back last year sometime. You could try to search the Pattern forum, I guess, and see what he thought of it.

David

edited to add link (post #8)

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_50...tm.htm#5004679

There is a review with video over on r c p o w e r m a g. c o m. Hope the link shows up.

The power figures I'm seeing seem very poor for an engine of this size. My old tired YS 140FZ will match those #'s .

Don, I read a test of this engine on another site, my Saito 1.50 has more power than the 2.00 tested there has. I think that other test was bogus. I like my 1.50 but there's no way it should be stronger than anybodies 2.00.

How long would a ringed engine of this size likely need to run before really breaking in and producing nearly all of its potential horsepower?

The HP peak is at 9,000.

The torque peak is probably more likely below 7,000?

It would unlikely be very good above 9000?

It should be propped with a 20 X 8 to 18 X 8 ?

Hey Hobbsy,
I have recently bench run my OS 200, and it is awaiting some better weather for test flying in my big Stinger. I normally dont like to say much here for various reasons, but I cant keep quiet on this one....

I will say this - the OS 200 I ran, on the same props (18, 20, 22" in various pitches) and fuels (10, 15 and 30% nitro, 18% oil), just under or equal to my Saito 2.20. And, it is 3/4 pound lighter. The Saito 2.20 is a sweet engine. I have no bias to any brand, but I generally prefer Saito's for my own planes. But the 200 from OS has to be, in my honest opinion one of the nicest running engines I have EVER ran. Very, very smooth, easy handling and powerful. A real gem in every respect and the build quality leaves nothing to be desired. My full review will be out soon in the mag - thats all I can say for now.

Thats my story and I'm sticking to it!

AJC

Andrew, what mag is that ? I would like to see some more #'s. I actually had my heart set on this engine but first impressions are not that inviting.

Smooth running and 12 oz lighter? That sounds like a winner if it can make power on 5% nitro.

w8ye,

what % nitro were those figures run on and do you know if that was the APC 18X8W or regular N? That makes a huge difference. If it is the wide 18X8 that is excellent considering you don't need a two stroke size muffler.

Is this engine available now?

The MAN test was done with 20% nitro
18 X 8W

That's good news AJ, that other test is on a site we ain't allowed to mention here.

That's a good rpm for the 18X8W blade. I wonder how it would do on 5% with that prop. If it still got 8100 I think it would be good.

AJ, since I have a Saito 2.20, this became my next two engines. My good friend Bobby is going to get an OS 2.00 soon. A Martin D3R

Hobbsy, what % nitro do you run in that?

Ken, its been known to run on a little New York Port, no castor.

Hobbsy, maybe you could post the details in the alternative fuels thread.

The word from the Far East dealers and pattern scene is that the standard 200 is putting out about the same, maybe a fraction less than the YS.140L but certainly far less than the old 1.40 DZ.
It's obviously been down tuned to make the 200FI seem worth the extra money. It's rather sad in some respect yet at the same time, delivering what the L achieved on 30% with 15% and without super charging, yet in the same 1.20 size package is nothing to laugh about. Very usable power in a very small and light package.

The FI on the other hand seems to be putting out some major serious power, needing some serious props to absorb all that's availble.
Here's a link to our top Norwegian F3A Pilot thats testing one.
http://home.online.no/~ofremmi/F3A/T..._fs_200_fi.htm

The FS-200S is a naturally aspirated engine.

The FS-200-FI is supercharged via the crankcase just like YS engines. This would certainly make a difference in the power output. The two engines can't be compared.

I would take EASE OF HANDLING with ok relative performance over a PITA YS or a finger eating Saito anyday.

What are you doing to mess up the excellent starting characteristics of your Saitos?

Mine are the easiest starting engines I own.

- fuel up
- glow-clip on
- throttle to idle
- touch of the starter and she's away.

Or

- fuel up
- throttle to full
- flip 2-3 times with finger over the exhaust
- throttle to idle
- glow clip on
- twist the spinner backwards against compression and they're away

How can engine-starting get any easier than that?

My only problem with Saitos is that some of their engines have/had unusually high compression making them kick back harder than other brands. I may be behind the times, Saito has made changes to existing engines and introduced many more since I owned them.

Kweas, you're about 18 years behind the times, I have two of the High Compression variety, an .80 and a 1.50 neither is a problem. As X mentioned, firing them up is a no brainer. If my memory is correct the .80 is 15.6 to 1 compression and the 1.50 is 14.4 to 1. If I had my way they would all be that high. I'd venture to say that my Enya 1.55 is very close to those numbers.

I love low nitro engines. Give me the high compression any day and I'll back flip start 'em. What do european guys do to run thier Saitos with low nitro if they have to purchase low compression engines or are they made differently for the euro market?