Engines Comparison
03-20-2008 | 03:52 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,789
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: El Paso,
TX
Engines Comparison
Hi to all:
I have been running a four stroke Magnum 120 size with 15% fuel and a Master Airscrew K series tacking 8,900 rpm.
this engine weights 32 oz.
I'd like to have more punch for my Carl Goldberg Ultimate and I have been thinking on the:
Two stroke
OS 120 AX which weights 31 oz.
But I do not know how it performa and which prop is it capable of turn with enough power.
Thanks for any advise.
I have been running a four stroke Magnum 120 size with 15% fuel and a Master Airscrew K series tacking 8,900 rpm.
this engine weights 32 oz.
I'd like to have more punch for my Carl Goldberg Ultimate and I have been thinking on the:
Two stroke
OS 120 AX which weights 31 oz.
But I do not know how it performa and which prop is it capable of turn with enough power.
Thanks for any advise.
03-20-2008 | 04:19 PM
#3
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,789
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: El Paso,
TX
RE: Engines Comparison
I also want to maintain the whole airframe light enough, that is why I was thinking on a 32 oz engine top weight. I am sorry I did not mention it before.
03-20-2008 | 04:55 PM
#4
Senior Member
RE: Engines Comparison
A 120 twostroke will provide more power than your 120 fourstroke and not weigh much more. I might suggest the ASP/Magnum AR 120 XL. I have this engine and it tachs exactly the same as a friends 120 AX (we have both done some mods on them, but still)
If you want to save a few bucks the Magnum is great and if you have alot of $ the AX will make you just as happy. The AX have a muffler that can be mounted inside the cowling for nice clean looks
If you want to save a few bucks the Magnum is great and if you have alot of $ the AX will make you just as happy. The AX have a muffler that can be mounted inside the cowling for nice clean looks
03-20-2008 | 07:55 PM
#6
My Feedback: (3)
RE: Engines Comparison
ORIGINAL: asmund
A 120 twostroke will provide more power than your 120 fourstroke and not weigh much more. I might suggest the ASP/Magnum AR 120 XL. I have this engine and it tachs exactly the same as a friends 120 AX (we have both done some mods on them, but still)
If you want to save a few bucks the Magnum is great and if you have alot of $ the AX will make you just as happy. The AX have a muffler that can be mounted inside the cowling for nice clean looks
A 120 twostroke will provide more power than your 120 fourstroke and not weigh much more. I might suggest the ASP/Magnum AR 120 XL. I have this engine and it tachs exactly the same as a friends 120 AX (we have both done some mods on them, but still)
If you want to save a few bucks the Magnum is great and if you have alot of $ the AX will make you just as happy. The AX have a muffler that can be mounted inside the cowling for nice clean looks
03-20-2008 | 09:18 PM
#7
Senior Member
RE: Engines Comparison
Alfred, you are going to get lots of recommendations for engines you aren't interested in when you start threads like this. The Saito club will chip in with their recommendations, the Nordic division of the Cheap and Cheerful Model Engines Enthusiasts Club will recommend the latest delights from mainland China and you might even get Motorman come in with a blanket recommendation to go with a YS 1.10 or 1.40.
So, to focus somewhat on the two engines you mention, this is what I know...
The OS AX 1.20 is a strong engine that is easy on fuel. Check out the pattern forum - a lot of guys there use the AX 1.20 in airframes like the Venus II and Excelleron as practice ships. They are very good engines. They are stronger than a YS 1.10, which is in turn stronger than an OS 1.20 Surpass, which is in turn stronger than your Magnum 1.20 FS. The AX would be a good choice for your expoits. It should pull that MA K series prop that your current engine does 8900 rpm with (I'm guessing it's a 15 x 8 or a 16 x 6) at something approaching mid to high nines - that's a big difference.
Good luck and let us know what you decide.
Edit: Prop size
So, to focus somewhat on the two engines you mention, this is what I know...
The OS AX 1.20 is a strong engine that is easy on fuel. Check out the pattern forum - a lot of guys there use the AX 1.20 in airframes like the Venus II and Excelleron as practice ships. They are very good engines. They are stronger than a YS 1.10, which is in turn stronger than an OS 1.20 Surpass, which is in turn stronger than your Magnum 1.20 FS. The AX would be a good choice for your expoits. It should pull that MA K series prop that your current engine does 8900 rpm with (I'm guessing it's a 15 x 8 or a 16 x 6) at something approaching mid to high nines - that's a big difference.
Good luck and let us know what you decide.
Edit: Prop size
03-21-2008 | 07:49 AM
#8
RE: Engines Comparison
Hi!
The cheapest way of getting good performance is getting rid of that Master A prop and instead invest in a APC prop.
You should be using a 15x8 or 16x6 prop for your Ultimate.
The cheapest way of getting good performance is getting rid of that Master A prop and instead invest in a APC prop.
You should be using a 15x8 or 16x6 prop for your Ultimate.
03-21-2008 | 04:48 PM
#11
My Feedback: (79)
RE: Engines Comparison
ORIGINAL: Harry Lagman
Alfred, you are going to get lots of recommendations for engines you aren't interested in when you start threads like this. The Saito club will chip in with their recommendations, the Nordic division of the Cheap and Cheerful Model Engines Enthusiasts Club will recommend the latest delights from mainland China and you might even get Motorman come in with a blanket recommendation to go with a YS 1.10 or 1.40.
So, to focus somewhat on the two engines you mention, this is what I know...
The OS AX 1.20 is a strong engine that is easy on fuel. Check out the pattern forum - a lot of guys there use the AX 1.20 in airframes like the Venus II and Excelleron as practice ships. They are very good engines. They are stronger than a YS 1.10, which is in turn stronger than an OS 1.20 Surpass, which is in turn stronger than your Magnum 1.20 FS. The AX would be a good choice for your expoits. It should pull that MA K series prop that your current engine does 8900 rpm with (I'm guessing it's a 15 x 8 or a 16 x 6) at something approaching mid to high nines - that's a big difference.
Good luck and let us know what you decide.
Edit: Prop size
Alfred, you are going to get lots of recommendations for engines you aren't interested in when you start threads like this. The Saito club will chip in with their recommendations, the Nordic division of the Cheap and Cheerful Model Engines Enthusiasts Club will recommend the latest delights from mainland China and you might even get Motorman come in with a blanket recommendation to go with a YS 1.10 or 1.40.
So, to focus somewhat on the two engines you mention, this is what I know...
The OS AX 1.20 is a strong engine that is easy on fuel. Check out the pattern forum - a lot of guys there use the AX 1.20 in airframes like the Venus II and Excelleron as practice ships. They are very good engines. They are stronger than a YS 1.10, which is in turn stronger than an OS 1.20 Surpass, which is in turn stronger than your Magnum 1.20 FS. The AX would be a good choice for your expoits. It should pull that MA K series prop that your current engine does 8900 rpm with (I'm guessing it's a 15 x 8 or a 16 x 6) at something approaching mid to high nines - that's a big difference.
Good luck and let us know what you decide.
Edit: Prop size
I was not even going to post on this, but I could not resist after reading your smart a** statement.[sm=punching.gif]
03-24-2008 | 03:03 PM
#13
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,789
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: El Paso,
TX
RE: Engines Comparison
ORIGINAL: Harry Lagman
Alfred, you are going to get lots of recommendations for engines you aren't interested in when you start threads like this. The Saito club will chip in with their recommendations, the Nordic division of the Cheap and Cheerful Model Engines Enthusiasts Club will recommend the latest delights from mainland China and you might even get Motorman come in with a blanket recommendation to go with a YS 1.10 or 1.40.
So, to focus somewhat on the two engines you mention, this is what I know...
The OS AX 1.20 is a strong engine that is easy on fuel. Check out the pattern forum - a lot of guys there use the AX 1.20 in airframes like the Venus II and Excelleron as practice ships. They are very good engines. They are stronger than a YS 1.10, which is in turn stronger than an OS 1.20 Surpass, which is in turn stronger than your Magnum 1.20 FS. The AX would be a good choice for your expoits. It should pull that MA K series prop that your current engine does 8900 rpm with (I'm guessing it's a 15 x 8 or a 16 x 6) at something approaching mid to high nines - that's a big difference.
Good luck and let us know what you decide.
Edit: Prop size
Alfred, you are going to get lots of recommendations for engines you aren't interested in when you start threads like this. The Saito club will chip in with their recommendations, the Nordic division of the Cheap and Cheerful Model Engines Enthusiasts Club will recommend the latest delights from mainland China and you might even get Motorman come in with a blanket recommendation to go with a YS 1.10 or 1.40.
So, to focus somewhat on the two engines you mention, this is what I know...
The OS AX 1.20 is a strong engine that is easy on fuel. Check out the pattern forum - a lot of guys there use the AX 1.20 in airframes like the Venus II and Excelleron as practice ships. They are very good engines. They are stronger than a YS 1.10, which is in turn stronger than an OS 1.20 Surpass, which is in turn stronger than your Magnum 1.20 FS. The AX would be a good choice for your expoits. It should pull that MA K series prop that your current engine does 8900 rpm with (I'm guessing it's a 15 x 8 or a 16 x 6) at something approaching mid to high nines - that's a big difference.
Good luck and let us know what you decide.
Edit: Prop size
I quoted the Harry Lagman post because it clarifies my original post.
But all other posts are creative and interesting as well so I thank you all.
I really do not want to spend a bunch of money trying engines that easily could fly my CG Ultimate.
It fly just ok with my XL 4 stroke Magnum that can swing a 16 x 6 Master airscrew K series at almost 9,000 but if a try a wooden prop I have to use a 15 x 6 because the lack of punch of this engine.
When I say that it fly just ok I mean that it go up and down with enough power but it needs more power to do some acrobatic routines and vertical is very poor.
A friend of mine use to have the same airframe in the ARF version which was overpowered with a YS 140 but it was also a very heavy combo and when he had the first death stick it was also the end of his biplane, I just remember that it feel from about 200 ft like a brick.
I just thought that I could go with an alternative kind of cheap and lighter engine, that is why I thought about the OS AX 1.20 and I wish to know the tach readings and behavior of this particular engine.
Thanks again for your help.
03-25-2008 | 03:11 PM
#15
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,789
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: El Paso,
TX
RE: Engines Comparison
I had a webra engine 15 years ago, I had good luck on that one. Aparently Horizon does not carry this brand anymore. Do you know any distributor in America?
03-26-2008 | 12:30 PM
#16
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Floro, NORWAY
RE: Engines Comparison
OS AX 1.20 and I wish to know the tach readings and behavior of this particular engine.
Thanks again for your help.
Thanks again for your help.
I have this engine and gets 9700 RPM on 16x6 or 8500 on 17x6. Easy to start, runs great and a very practical muffler. Maybe the muffler is the best reason to buy the O.S AX 120. It will most likely fit under the cowling on the CG Ultimate ( I had one...). Weight of the O.S A.X is actually 870 grams / 31 oz.
Trimming: Runs great with O.S "F"-plug, removed baffle and headshim. 15% nitro.
03-26-2008 | 12:41 PM
#17
Senior Member
My Feedback: (14)
RE: Engines Comparison
ORIGINAL: alfredbmor
I had a webra engine 15 years ago, I had good luck on that one. Aparently Horizon does not carry this brand anymore. Do you know any distributor in America?
I had a webra engine 15 years ago, I had good luck on that one. Aparently Horizon does not carry this brand anymore. Do you know any distributor in America?
--------------
IIRC, there is a dealer in Canada that handles Webra engines. Can't for the life of me remember his name at the moment, but I'm sure someone here on the group will come up with it.
Ed Cregger
03-26-2008 | 05:18 PM
#18
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,789
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: El Paso,
TX
RE: Engines Comparison
ORIGINAL: yallaair
Hi!
I have this engine and gets 9700 RPM on 16x6 or 8500 on 17x6. Easy to start, runs great and a very practical muffler. Maybe the muffler is the best reason to buy the O.S AX 120. It will most likely fit under the cowling on the CG Ultimate ( I had one...). Weight of the O.S A.X is actually 870 grams / 31 oz.
Trimming: Runs great with O.S "F"-plug, removed baffle and headshim. 15% nitro.
OS AX 1.20 and I wish to know the tach readings and behavior of this particular engine.
Thanks again for your help.
Thanks again for your help.
I have this engine and gets 9700 RPM on 16x6 or 8500 on 17x6. Easy to start, runs great and a very practical muffler. Maybe the muffler is the best reason to buy the O.S AX 120. It will most likely fit under the cowling on the CG Ultimate ( I had one...). Weight of the O.S A.X is actually 870 grams / 31 oz.
Trimming: Runs great with O.S "F"-plug, removed baffle and headshim. 15% nitro.
Ed: Thanks for the info, I have been searching trough the web with out finding any authorized dealer yet.
03-27-2008 | 02:03 AM
#19
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Floro, NORWAY
RE: Engines Comparison
I'd like to know the reason that leads you to remove the headshim and baffle.
03-27-2008 | 05:56 AM
#20
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Martinsville,
IN
RE: Engines Comparison
Unoffical Webra dealer in US would be Paul's Model Supply in Fargo ND. Moki would be a choice too. And Webra you have to add shims to run 15% reliably............
03-27-2008 | 04:11 PM
#21
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,789
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: El Paso,
TX
RE: Engines Comparison
I can see that in Europe, fuel with nitro is expensive, so you have to find the way to obtain good power with less nitro.
I had not idea about adding shims to a Webra engine but I can see the reason. Been an european engine should be fixed to run fine with less nitro. What I remember about the webra .40 sized (or so) that I had about 15 years ago is that it was a really reliable engine and very powerful.
I had not idea about adding shims to a Webra engine but I can see the reason. Been an european engine should be fixed to run fine with less nitro. What I remember about the webra .40 sized (or so) that I had about 15 years ago is that it was a really reliable engine and very powerful.
03-27-2008 | 11:11 PM
#22
Senior Member
My Feedback: (14)
RE: Engines Comparison
ORIGINAL: w8ye
If more power is what you want, you need to get a bigger engine like a Saito 180, OS 160 or a Mark 210. That way you will have certain inalienable bragging rights and you yourself will notice the difference.
If more power is what you want, you need to get a bigger engine like a Saito 180, OS 160 or a Mark 210. That way you will have certain inalienable bragging rights and you yourself will notice the difference.
---------------
I'm still puzzled as to why someone would buy the 1.20 when the 1.60 is just a few dollars more and so very, very polite and powerful.
Ed Cregger
03-28-2008 | 02:25 AM
#23
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Floro, NORWAY
RE: Engines Comparison
Hi!
The reason for buying a 120 instead of a 160 is mainly the weight. For the O.S AX 120 and the O.S 160 FX, there is a weight penalty of 335 gram or 12 oz when going from 120 to 160 (included muffler)
Also the standard muffler for those two engines are very different. O.S "power box" muffler is easy to fit inside a cowl. However, I have not any weight data on a pitts style muffler for the 160.
The reason for buying a 120 instead of a 160 is mainly the weight. For the O.S AX 120 and the O.S 160 FX, there is a weight penalty of 335 gram or 12 oz when going from 120 to 160 (included muffler)
Also the standard muffler for those two engines are very different. O.S "power box" muffler is easy to fit inside a cowl. However, I have not any weight data on a pitts style muffler for the 160.
03-28-2008 | 07:29 AM
#25
My Feedback: (1)
RE: Engines Comparison
Does anyone here own the SK 130? It's only $140 and weighs about 33ozs. Is this engine competitive with the AX 120?
http://www.kangkeusa.com/skengines.htm
David
http://www.kangkeusa.com/skengines.htm
David
