DiscoWings

My Feedback: (76)

Which 100 cc engine do you think is the best in its class? Aerobatic performance ofcourse (throttle response/torque)?

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

They're all good.

Let the P-----g match begin[8D]

Bob Laine

My Feedback: (91)

That is a totally subjective question that willo be impossible for more than ONE, person to answer.

flyinrazrback

My Feedback: (69)

The easiest way to figure this one out is to buy a 3w 106, DA 100, BME 110, and the Kroma 100 and figure out which one you like best. The reason for this is because every single person here prefers and swears by what they are flying. You got the 3w crowd, DA crowd, etc, and they all think their motors are best. So, look at your budget, what you are trying accomplish, and go from there.

DiscoWings

My Feedback: (76)

well how about someone that has flown, ran some 100 cc class engines, what do they have to say, which one did they like and would like to run on their plane then[&:]

flyinrazrback

My Feedback: (69)

I have had all the above mentioned engines except for the Kroma, but hear very good things about them so far. I had zero problems from my 3w 106s, BME 110s, and DA 100s. They are all very good, and they should be considering the cost. Powerwise they are all very close, giving the edge in the following order: 106, 110, and DA 100. Not sure where the Kroma falls yet. You cannot go wrong with any of them. The 110 has its definite advantage over the others, its about 1.5lbs lighter than the others. This can be a good or bad thing. You may not be able to get the plane to balance with it, or you might, just airframe dependant. Most of your 35% planes are designed around the 6lb engine, ie DA and 3W, however, you can balance some with the BME 110, especially if you use cannister exhaust, then it weighs the same as a DA or 3W with stock mufflers. Maybe if you tell us what airframe you are considering, we can help you out a bit more.

Rcpilot

My Feedback: (78)

Do a search. You'll be busy reading for about a month.

This has been beat to death about 50 times.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

Aww, come on! I'm patiently waiting for the fur to finally start flying

I'm sorry, it's just that we've all seen this so many times before, and this time I just want to watch.

flyinrazrback, ya missed a couple of brand names, ya know.

Pat

flyinrazrback

My Feedback: (69)

Yeah, there are those "other" motors too, aka zdz 100, brison 6.4, mvvs 116, etc. Of all of them, there is not one bad engine, nor one that is truely better than the other. Each is different in what it offers. For the average joe who doesnt know jack, get a DA.

H. Wayne S

My Feedback: (18)

Fur, fur, fur----- razrback, what you mean by those "OTHER" engines ?----fur, hair, teeth, skin and eyeballs all oner the screen.
Happy now Pat ?

rmh

make it easy -limit it to 100 cc - not "sorta around 100cc".
My favorite 100cc engine is still the 80 cc ZDZ single.

Buzzard Dave

i know it's sorta off base, but i agree with Dick. i bought a 80 single ZDZ several years ago, and with what i saved (over buying a 100 twin), i went out and bought a DA50 for another plane......


all in what you want....David S. - Tampa, Fl

DiscoWings

My Feedback: (76)

I hear the BME 110 has great top-end, however it is mid range is iffy and not as smooth as the 106 3w or the 100 da.
The zdz 80 probably has a lot more vibration then the twin, I'm sure just as powerfull, however how is the aerobatic powercurve? Do twins have more torque generally?

I'm thinking the 3w 106 or the DA 100 would be the way to go; razer you said the 106 was the most powerfull out of them all? Yes most likely I will be running canisters; regardless of the engines used to keep noise down to a minimum while still have good performance.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

H. Wayne S.

It was a good start. Now this thread is starting to go the right diection. Almost better than a drive in but there's no back seat.

Pat

flyinrazrback

My Feedback: (69)

Disco, what plane are you going to put the engine in?

DiscoWings

My Feedback: (76)

I'm looking at either the Somenzini 100 cc Yak,
The Airwild Extra 300L
Wilhare 300 lx

Basically any of the known 33-35% planes.

RTK

My Feedback: (1)

I am currently running the 110 on a comp-arf. (22-23lbs) The mid range seems just as fine as my 3W's and "maybe" better than a DA. Most of this stuff is really dependent on who tunes the engine and whether they know what they are doing or not.
Silversurfer has used more manufacturers engines than I and he has also flown my plane as much OR more than I have[X(] He thinks the mid range and idle are excellent. (how's that for dragging you in Pat, "I'll just sit on the side and watch")
2lbs is 2lbs. and I believe the 110 is still lighter than the zdz super 80.

All these engines are very good, it all depends on the operator.(again) I would pick the lightest engine that will fit your application. I am just waiting for the next super duper engine to come along so I can give it a try. I don't care who make's it.

flyinrazrback

My Feedback: (69)

For the planes you mentioned any of the motors you mentioned will work, and people have flown the above mentioned airframes with the motors we have mentioned, with exception to the air wild extra as its pretty new, and dont know what people are running in them yet.

3D ONdaEDGE

Disregard the not as smooth as a DA in the midrange. DA midrange sucks. I have seen all run. If I had the option now, with limitless money, the order I would go is 3w 106, Kroma 100, ZDZ 100 or 80 (depended on whether I need noseweight or not), BME 110, DA-100 and Brison 6.4. If cost is no issue, then that is the route I would go. If cost was an issue, then the ZDZ-80 single all the way, no question. If weight is an issue then the BME 110 is the only way to go. if you do not know anything about a gas engine, then get the DA-100 since it will run out of the box with no adjustment. So decide what your application calls for and go from there.
.

Antique

My Feedback: (4)

Gas engines are not "plug and play"..A BIG reason for many problems with engines is "run out of the box with no adjustment"...
No manufacturer has ESP...Props vary...Altitude varies...Atmospheric conditions vary...Fuel mixtures vary...You can't blame the engine manufacturer when an engine doesn't perfom well if the new owner can't or won't at least TRY to adjust it..PERIOD.....My .02, BEEN THERE..

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

RTK,

Ain't gonna work. I have waaay too much on the plate in front of me at the moment to actively participate

DiscoWings

My Feedback: (76)

Ok,

Still what do you guys think about the twin vs single issue? Or is their even an issue I hear twins run smoother and better than singles for aerobatics[&:]

xcellheli

My Feedback: (1)

I have the QQ yak with the BME 110 and canister exhaust. It balances with the batteries forward. The engine runs like a top, with good transition and lots of power. I am sure the other engines run great too, but would like to say with experience you would be happy with this configuration.

flyinrazrback

My Feedback: (69)

I will take a 100 twin over the 80s, any day, for a simple reason. IMO the 80s do a good job on a 21-24lb airplane, but if even with a tuned pipe I think it lacks the all out power of a 100 on cans, for the larger 28-30lb planes out there. I like the singles for the 33% size planes, ie H9 planes, etc. Each one has their own place. I dont think you would be happy with say a QQ yak with an 80 on a can, unless you took every measure to keep it light.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

I agree.