blw

My Feedback: (3)

Richard,

He may have not had it tuned right.

Matthew Allen

I have no trouble believing that Fox was innovative, but I have yet to see evidence indicating that OS copied them. What aspects of engine design do you think OS learned from Fox?

Matthew

Sport_Pilot

Did you not read where I said the OS .35 Stunt was a copy of the Fox .35 Stunt except it had a four bolt back plate? Here is what Duke said in his autobiography about OS and other imports back when they flooded the market. I think he was very fare and true about their product.

In 1982, I believe, our government passed what was called the Kennedy Round of Tariff
Reductions. At this time any foreign model airplane motor coming into this country had a 38
percent duty attached to it. For this reason, the imported motors were not considered to be
serious competition to the domestic manufacturers. Boy, that Kennedy Tariff Reduction changed
all of that! Importers blossomed on every street corner. While most of them were not as
advanced technically as our motors, they did have a major price advantage. Shortly, every
market niche that I could find quickly had a copy, and on many of these copies they corrected
our mistakes and had done a little better.

In 1964, business had dwindled to virtually nothing. We weren't selling enough even to pay our
overhead. One day I took my assembly lead man aside and told him that it was going to be up to
him to run the model engine business the best he could because I had to go out and find a way to
earn a living. I started running around the country trying to hustle job shop business. I got a job
from International Harvester, in Memphis, plus two or three local jobs."

Note the 1982 date is an obvious typo as this was the tarriff bill from the conservative Democratic President Kennedy. It is alos out of place stuck between 1959 and 1964. So I think it was supposed to be 1962.

Take a close look at some of the OS engines of the 50's through early 60's. Some look a lot like the Fox engines.

http://www.osengines.com/history/osm640/osm-1949-29.jpg

bla bla

OK OK... lets say FOX invented it all... everything.... nobody else contributed anything... clever, clever FOX.

So what?

The question is whether OS are great engines.

Or was that question answered and the case closed on page 1?
You know, I believe it was.

That's no distraction form the fact the Mr Fox was a very clever and inovative guy.
What is shamefull is that nobody took him seriously... or at least developed and mass materialize his ideas locally. It took the Jap's to do that.
You lost a model engine designer/producer.
The British lost their entire Car Industry!

Flyboy Dave

My Feedback: (21)

True....let's get back on topic. [sm=thumbup.gif]

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

----------------


Was this autobiography of Duke Fox a magazine article or a book? If a book, do you have the ISDN number or the title? I would love to read it. TIA


Ed Cregger

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

-----------------


I would say that yes, OS engines are great. Ever since Ed Thompson gave me that old crashed Ambroid Charger (1966-67) with a mud-caked, but otherwise new, OS Max .15 R/C engine in the nose, I have loved each and every OS engine that I have owned.

However, this does not mean that OS is superior to every other engine brand. It does not imply that OS engines out performs every other engine brand.

It does mean that it is reasonable to expect that an OS engine will run very well, even when new out of the box (since the lapped piston engines disappeared). It does mean that break-in time will be toward the low end of the industries' average. While not the fastest engines (most powerful), power output for the class of the engine will be toward the high side, but seldom at the top of the heap. It also means that you are going to pay extra here in the USA simply because people are willing to pay extra for an OS engine.


Ed Cregger

Rcpilot

My Feedback: (78)

I've found OS engines to be reliable and user friendly. I never had a peeling liner.

But, I haven't bought an OS engine in about 5yrs because I think they are overpriced. They are decent sport engines. That is all. They make a couple race horses, but for the most part, 98% of what they make is just average power--sport engines. They are just mildly ported sport engines for the everyday user. And thats 99% of us in this hobby.

I've had great luck with most of the Asian and European engines. I've run all the old ST big cats at one point or another. I've run the Tower engines and the new ST engines with success. I've run the TT 4-stroke 91 (great engine) and the 46 Pro. Had good luck with most all of them.

The only European engine I ever had trouble with was the MDS 1.28 and the 2.18 . I had the .68 and it ran like a scalded cat. I have an extremely low opinion of the 1.48 and the 2.18.

If I wanted a really powerful engine, I'd buy a Jett or an MVVS.

Had a K&B .48 once. Hated it. It would run 10 minutes and deadstick. Didn't matter what I did to the needles or how many times I replumbed the tank. I got to the point where I would set my timer for 7 minutes and then land. I was new to the hobby and didn't have enough money to buy my first 46FX for about 3 months. Hated that "screamin' 48" [:'(] The only thing screaming was ME --everytime it deadsticked. [sm=lol.gif]

I'm stuck on Tower engines right now. I own 3 glow engines right now. The rest of my stuff is gas. I have 3 of the TH .75 engines and like them very much. I've probably owned 50 glow engines in my 8yrs in the hobby. Just got rid of all the glow engines about 4yrs ago when I discovered gas.

Sport_Pilot

Ed,
I ripped off of the AMA site from his Hall of Fame nomination. Its also on the Flitelinesolutions website.

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

---------------


Gotcha. Thanks.


Ed Cregger

blw

My Feedback: (3)

I guess I'm kicking a beehive here, but after owning two Evolution 2 strokes I would have to say that OS is a bit over rated and over priced for what you get. Good engines, yes. But there are some other engines out there that are better and priced better, both 2 and 4 stroke. Then, there are those engines by many manufacturers that are just good engines. I would say the OS .50SX and 1.20 Surpasses are good ones from what I've seen.

superfly13_69

I know I've had a 46FX for over 3 years now and it's still a big ol' beast. I've adjusted the needles about 3 times over this past season, only because of temp changes. Does it ever quit? Only after running it out of gas!! 4 Strokes is another story, though. I'd say saito is the way to go for the 4-poppers. The Surpass series is generally less powerful & heavier than their Saito brothren. But as far as overal quality, user-friendliness, and being easy to work with, OS 2-strokes got 'em all beat. And they aren't THAT expensive. You want cheap, go and get a Super Tigre or a Fox, or the Tower special. You want a solid engine you can trust in the air, OS.

Sport_Pilot

A Fox is cheap? Only when compared to OS prices.

chashint

No doubt about it that OS is a class act right out of the box.

However, with enough running/break-in time on the Magnum, it will acquire many of the good running habits of the OS. If time is more important than money, buy the OS. If you're a retired old goat like me and you like tinkering with engines anyway, the Magnum can be a good buy. Truthfully, by the time you get done putting fuel through the Magnum for extra break-in running, the price difference has narrowed considerably between it and the OS. I still buy Magnums because I like breaking-in engines, if that makes any sense.

One thing we must keep in mind is that eventually Sanye' will figure out how to bestow OS's marvelous out-of-the-box running characteristics upon their engine products. We have to keep our eyes open to realize that it has happened already - when it happens.

OS and folks were always a class act. I hope they continue to lead the way in making great sport engines in the future. Conversely, I wish Sanye the same success.


Ed Cregger

[/quote]

The last two Magnum four strokes I have purchased were ready to fly on the second tank of fuel, this is the design with the crancase tube running to the carb. Now if they would just taper the high speed needle a little bit more they would be perfect.

Flyboy Dave

My Feedback: (21)

OS has always been very, very expensive. Look at these prices. The 40 FSR came out
in 1975, the .90 FSR in 1978. Only the top fliers at the field had OS engines.

In about '75 I bought an OS 7B carb off a 60 FSR....it was $65.00 PLUS TAX. Back then
you could buy a four barrel carb for a car for 65 bucks. The K&B engines were much
less expensive, and ran good, but never as good as the OS FSR line. I bought a brand
new Super Tiger .60 ringed about the same time period for $45.00. [X(]

The OS engines cost 2-3 times as much as the other engines.

da Rock

Are they overpriced?

Only if you haven't got the money to buy one. I think that's actually the real reason for most of the *****ing. Every one I ever bought was worth every penny. And I've still got every one of them.

asmund

I have one of the "old" 91 fx`s. It was certainly NOT worth every penny. It is great now after I fitted a different carb and got rid of that crappy, leaky remote needle carb wich gave me headaces trying to get the engine to run reliable.I have also ditched the stock muffler because it is very restrictive and also very heavy. I actually had to work alot more on this engine than any of my el cheapos to get it to perform great. I hear that the newer 91 fx is better though

Motorboy

When i bought the OS FS 40 older version in 1987, later i checked the price for a new crankcase for this engine OS FS 40, there was same price for a whole new crankcase as i paid for the whole new OS FS 40 [X(]

The OS are really overpriced in compared with Magnum/SC engines in spare parts.

Jens Eirik

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

-----------


I own an Evolution 26GT gas engine, but that has been my only Evolution engine so far. We all know that it is really an MVVS engine.

I saw the price on the .46 Evolution and did a double-take. At $129.95, IIRC, which is higher than an OS.46AX, it would have to be a pretty remarkable engine to justify the price. I haven't seen anyone typing any kind of comments about their Evolution .46 that would make me consider spending that kind of money for it. I'll stick with my cheaper Asian two-stroke engines in this size range. At least until I see some reasons to justify spending the extra money. My ASP .52 runs just fine, thank you.

I like OS .91 four-strokes. Were I going for something in the 1.20 class OR LARGER of four-strokes, I would buy the YS 1.40, which I did. Or the Sanye 1.80 four-stroke, which I did. If OS would get with the program and bring out four-strokes in the 1.80 size at a decent price, they might keep a few of us buying their products. Instead they bring out some lame size like a 2.00 so they won't have to compete directly with other brands of the 1.80 size range.

I see now that Peak Model makes absolutely no reference to the Sanye (ASP) 1.80 on their website. Nothing, nada, not at all. I wish I had made my purchase and kept my mouth shut about the great price. See what happens when you try to share good pricing information in this wonderful world of "free trade"?


Ed Cregger

spotter

My Feedback: (3)

Years ago, I thought I couldn't afford OS. But, I like to build, and $50, even $100 more for an engine that I believe will keep my painstakingly built plane in the air with less problems, that's like a dollar per day per build. Like I said in another thread, I don't bring tools to the field.... But Ed- some day, I do want to set up a stand to play with engines. Then I'll be more comfortable and knowlegible. For now, I am busy with the build, finish, gear, radio, etc. And flying.

Nerevar

Interesting thread.

A few VERY passionate posts. [sm=lol.gif]

My perspective is, I see many different engines at the flying field. I haven't seen ANY that gave problems.

When they ALL run good and they ALL power the plane good, it comes down to price, or bang for the buck, in my opinion.

I think several here have already said the OS is overpriced. Which is also my view right now.
If you want an OS, fine, then pay their high price. For now, I will buy the better value engines.

There is a guy named Clarence Lee (I think it's the right name), that is supposed to be a very knowledgeable man on model airplane engines, that is said to say that the GMS and Tower engines are some of the best values on the market.

I tend to believe him, no matter HOW much others argue, or no matter HOW passionate the get about their favorite engine.
Why? Because I see the engines performing flawlessly at the field (my main influence) and also because he is acknowledged as an 'expert' in this field.

The engines don't seem to care which country they were made in, they still run fine at the local field.

The OS engines aren't bad. On the contrary, the run fine too. It's just that the others are every bit as good at powering the plane as the OS.

A couple of things I have noticed is, the Super Tigers seem to be more powerful than the others of the same size, and the Saito 4-Strokes not only sound great, but are very easy on fuel. If the OS 4-Strokes do any better (haven't seen one yet), they must run on just the fumes.

Those Saitos aren't a cheap engine ether. To me they are also a VERY EXPENSIVE engine. But then, I haven't compared their price to an OS 4-Stroke.

The thread title asks "OS engines overrated?"
It seems 'overpriced' would be true, but 'overrated'????
I guess the answer to that is up to the person that is laying down his hard earned cash for the engine.

NI

Ed_Moorman

My Feedback: (1)

I think I can run any single engine and I have at least one of nearly every type that I fly to back that up. I own OS, Thunder Tiger, Webra, Tower, Magnum, MVVS, GMS, SK, Evo 2-strokes (and maybe a couple of others I have overlooked). On a single engine plane, they all run pretty well. The OS engines do break in quicker and seem to be easier to get dialed in. Several of my OSs have never had the low end needle touched.

However, when it comes to multi-engine, I am OS all the way. A couple of my early twins had Magnum .52XLS engines and GMS .47 engines. I just could not keep both engines dialed in and running without messing with them every flight. I finally bought 3 more OS .46AXs-I already had one-and all my problems went away. Pour in the fuel, flip and fly. Did I mention they hand start easily?

I see a lot of trainers at my field. One lady who flies with us-she has her own equipment, engines and planes separate from her husband's-has an OS .40LA in a Kadet. I was talking to her today as she was shooting landings and she said she has never had a dead stick with the OS. That's not what I see on other trainers.

Bottom line is you pay your money and take your choice. I just bought 3 SK engines, 2 .91s and a .50, so I'm not all OS. The SKs seem to run very well, are dirt cheap and turn a big prop. But, in the final analysis, I think to sell as many engines as OS does, they have to be making a really good product. You can't sell an inferior product on reputation this long. Neither can you command the higher price unless you give the purchaser what he perceives as value for his money.

Cambo

My Feedback: (2)

I think that their engines run good, i have a couple of them. But i do think they jack up the price, alot. Ed, I just baught one of the sk 90's and am anxious to see how they work. Unofortunatley i can't open it untill christmass []. I was definatley shocked at the price, considering i got one with a pitts muffler for 140 out the door plus shipping. That is as much or maybe less as a os 55 ax with the stock muffler [X(]. Not that anything is wrong with the 55ax as i have heard great things about them. My 46 ax still runs strong going on its 5th gallon. I really love it has never dead sticked and has good power. The fl 70, was a bad experience and took a very long break in. It runs fine know but lacks in the power department. That engine has also never dead stiked. I also recently baught a cheap st 40 for a highschool science experiment thinking it was going to be a POS. I was shocked [X(] at how well it ran. It is turning an apc 10-6 13,500 with only 5 tanks of gas through it. It is now going into my dads new trainer. It was then that i realized that OS was overpriced. I had just payed 50 dollars for and engine that ran great.

MyWay

Its not that OS engines are over priced its that other engines are under priced. They are literally giving them away.

blw

My Feedback: (3)

Ed,

Where are you getting those prices on the .46NT? I'm not believing that. Look here: http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products...rodID=EVOE0460
$89.99. Comes with glow plug.

I had a .46FX on a plane and had a lot of problems with it. I bought the .46NT and it had more power right out of the box on the same plane. It was easy to compare the two engines that way. I also had a TT Pro .46 on the plane before the .46FX.

The Magnums are probably taking longer to break in because they have chrome liners.