osaka45

FNQFLYER
PM sent

charlie1960

aww dude, you're no fun...

Rv7garage

My Feedback: (10)

He's a Hoarder

skypup50

I just recently became aware of the [h=1]Saito FG33 R3! [/h]What's the situation on it's availability? Thanks in advance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdfI9ZrrNdM

Rv7garage

My Feedback: (10)

If it runs anything like my glow 120R3, you will love it

skypup50

I was just reading where some people were sending them away for expensive mods to get all cylinders at even temps , better mid range acceleration and a 500 rpm increase. Don't think it would be worth that. They sure sound great. Saw a vid of one in a GP Waco that was beautiful and someone else ran one in the same plane and gave the engine a negative based on his experience. Seemed like a nice engine. I have an FG 21 and like the sound of that engine.

SrTelemaster150

Considering some people spend over $70 on a Turboheader muffler for their Saito singles, the modification that you are speaking of isn't all that expensive. Especially when the vastly improved performance is takin into account.

It is a shame though that Saito didn't do the R&D themselves. I'm having the mod done to a 12.2:1 high compression methanol version of the FG-83R3 built on an FA-450R3 core.

skypup50

I'm guilty of the turboheader. I have no idea how much the mod for the 33 is. Just saw a video and someone said it's expensive.?

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Performance enhancement was not the original intent of the TurboHeader. A compact easy to hide in a cowl, exhaust, was the real intent. The extra 200 to 300 rpm, (depending on which engine) was an added bonus.

SrTelemaster150

Regardless Dave, $70 for a muffler is a lot when for $100 more one can get a complex modification that boosts power of the FG-84R3 by over 40% all the while increasing fuel economy & reliability.

Given the best street price of $1300 USD for the engine, the added cost is about 13%. Far less % wise than a $70 muffler on a Saito single. Not saying the Turboheader isn't worth it, just saying the Ray English mod is still $$$ well spent IMO. Especially when the engine is used to power heavy, round engine warbirds where power to weight is a priority.

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

I'm not arguing a at all, there is a weight saving with the TH also, for example the 2.20 exhaust weighs 3.6 oz, the TH for the 2.20 weighs 1.8 oz. I.m a fan of things that work and appreciate your efforts.

SrTelemaster150

I absolutely HATE the new cast Saito mufflers. They are fugly as sin.

All of mine have the machined "tomato can" muffler that I drill out from the rear W/a 5/16" drill bit. You can stil find them under an FA-120 parts search. Part #SAI120S74B

That last modification doesn't seem to alter the performance by any measurable amount, but the exhaust sounds slightly better to my ears. Not so much louder as a bit crisper.

I would like to try a Turboheader on my big block Saitos to see if they perform better than my current set-up. I just don't have the $$$ to spend on something that might not improve performance over my current exhaust.

Rv7garage

My Feedback: (10)

My Saito multis all have Keleo exhausts. Superfine...

SrTelemaster150

Unfortunately, they don't make a system for the dual carburetor FA-300TTDP.

skypup50

[TABLE="class: tborder user-postbit-left-user, width: 100%, align: center"]
[TR]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: alt2"]I'm wondering if anyone is using the Saito FG 14C? I have an FG 21 and like the concept. I will be building an old Dave Platt 60" span Waco and realize an 82 Saito nitro would be perfect in fit and power. I also have a Blackhorse Birdog which uses a 60 2 stroke or 90 four stroke. It's a high wing trainer type with flaps. I'm trying to kill 2 birds with one stone and am wondering what the FG 14C with a 14" prop will do. I know it will fly an 8 to 9 # Meridian ok. Thanks for the help.
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: user-postbit-bottom-user, bgcolor: #404040"]



[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Rudolph Hart

The fg14 would be fine,if like me you are a bit of cowboy when it comes to these things you'll put the nitro 82 in.It can;t be beat

skypup50

..
Hmmm.....I'd been eyeing a NIB Saito FA 82 B Golden Knight on ebay that came with a new tach,prop and filter and ended up winning that last night before it got away. Now I may end up with both at some point. I do find the smell of nitro less odiferous. Thanks for the help!

SrTelemaster150

I fail to see the advantage of these small "gas" Saito engines.

Rv7garage

My Feedback: (10)

Agreed. Heavier, less powerful than glow, more complex due to the need for ignition batteries... and if I have to choose, I'd much rather NOT have the gasoline smell lingering in my shop.

Now for someone who has already invested in a gas engine or two, it makes sense - no need to buy into another fuel technology.

skypup50

I've always enjoyed tinkering so I'm game for anything new. We've really just come full circle having started with spark ignition before glow. The biggest advantage is fuel savings. Proper air frames can offset the weight disadvantage IMHO.

SrTelemaster150

Once you you get into 40 size airframes, in which a gas 4-stroke much under about 20cc is practical, space for the module becomes hard to find.

The rule of thumb is that it takes about 15% more displacement in gas to make the same power as a glow ignition Saito.

Since it takes a 60 glow 4-stroke for a 40 size airframe, that means you would need a gas Saito of 14cc IF there is room for the module/battery & the module must be kept as far from the radio equipment as possible.

The added weight of the module/battery is not an issue as the weight can be offset W/a much smaller (4oz?) fuel tank. Mounting the smaller fuel tank as far rearward as possible MIGHT help the space issues.

acdii

I store my DLE powered 4* in the basement and not once have I ever smelled gas fumes from it. Trick is to drain the tank and plug the vent lines. The line from tank to carb is the only thing with fuel in it at that point and with the throttle closed no fuel escapes. Now those without Walbro carbs, they might not fully seal and let fumes escape. If you fly 40-60 class, these smaller gas engines work fine and give you at least twice the air time a glow can, even if it lacks some of the power, that is a big advantage. How they compare to a Saito Gas though, cant say. Evolution came out with a small one recently that would be perfect in a trainer sized plane.

I fly both gas and glow, glow needing the most in accessories, but once you have the glow stuff, all you need is another can and pump for the fuel. I love the cost advantage of gas, but glow has a nice smell to it and you just can't beat the beat of a 4 stroke.

skypup50

Yes, it does get difficult there. Best to fly a Quaker!

SrTelemaster150

I have aver the best of both worlds. CDI/glow fuel.

The added power of nitro/methanol, no gas smell or fire hazard when transporting in an enclosed vehicle & the ease of handling/reliability as well as the fuel savings of CDI.

20 to 25% more power output than a similar size gas engine, 5% more power output than a similar GI engine & 25 to 70% better fuel economy than a similar GI ignition.

taildragger1589

My feelings exactly!
People made the same remarks back in 1981 when I bought the "innovative" OS .60 four stroke.
They said it was too heavy and too underpowered and a good 2 stroke 30 would put out as much power for 1/3 the money.

All this was true but I loved the sound and the big prop ability so much that I didn't care.
I wound up with the .40, .60, .90, and 1.20 and flew them all till I retired from the hobby and loved every minute of my underpowered fleet.
(Ok, the Smith wasn't exactly underpowered, but it wasn't fast, it just climbed straight up)

Now I've re-entered the hobby with the electric boom in '05 and found it a little wanting until Good old Saito shook things up a bit.

I've pulled the Balsa USA Taube that held the OS .40 fs out of the attic and put the FG11 on it.
Love at first flight, though it's a bit over powered, I usually fly it at 1/2 throttle.
Now we're building a Quaker for it.
The Irony is that the Quaker is the ship we used for the OS .60 four stroke. (see the pic)
So I too have come full circle. (Nice part is the gas is $3 a gallon instead of $30)

Nick