w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

Could you telephone Aero Naut about parts?

estradajae

After looking, I could download a price list...but not sure about which is the manifold that I need because they don't use saito part numbers there, they have their own numbers, But I'll contact them on monday

Thank you very much.

w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

Gorge, there's three of those manifolds that size

One is straight and all threads

Older one is bent 30 degrees and has threads at each end

The newest one has threads at each end but is only bent 15 degrees

estradajae

Looks like they want 36EU for the manifold....in that case I don't know what to do...
I just can't believe that sending a letter overseas cost about 35 dolars!!

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Will either of these work for you?

estradajae

The one on the left !

Is it M12x1mm thread?

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Yes sir, both are 12mm, I tried them in my Saito .80 to make sure.

w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

The straight one on the left is all threads

beaver180

My Feedback: (10)

Hiya,

Could you not go to a local engineering company and ask if someone could make one for you?? A fellow club member or flyer should be able to put you on to someone.

I'd imagine it could be just a case of having the correct threads cut into a suitable size bit of steel pipe??

A thought anyway....

Cheers, Paul

TT123

This may have come up before and I have seen a few options but I have a new Horizon-Hobby Pulse XT 60. In a prominent place up front is a Saito .91 GK I have been looking for just the plane to put it on. Now is my question with this new 4-stroke the vent. How would I go about venting it to keep the oil from finding its way into the fuselage. A rookie question I know but that is where I fit although I have been in the hobby since '98 after my dad died and I got my first trainer. I have seen a few brass tubing arrangements I might adapt. I just wonder how much oil I might expect and if it is worth the trouble and if any ideas are out there.

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

Simply put a piece of fuel tube on it about 4" long and let it vent below the fuse..

triumphman49

My Feedback: (149)

Hi there, was wondering if anyone might voice an opinion of choice over the FA91 vs the FA82. they seem to be so close in all specs except weight. Is it that one is a long stroke & other a short stroke? & what's the difference? Know a little bit of ignorance is showing, but was sure curious of what the differences were. Many Thanx - T-man49

w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

the 82 has the bore of the 100 and a stroke less than that of the 72 so it is a short stroke

The 82 has nearly the power of a 91

There is a new redesigned 82 coming out very soon. They redesigned the crankcase.

No difference in power

triumphman49

My Feedback: (149)

Hi W8ye, so does the 82 rev quicker? They both seem to swing the same props. Have noticed that Horizon Hobby has the FA82 for some $230, any idea the advantages of the newer model? Would the 82 be better for 3D & the 91 better for scale flying? Also there is the weight difference? Again, Many Thanx - T-man49

Hobbsy

My Feedback: (102)

It does rev quick because it has great mid range torque. At first blush one would think it only a revver but is a torquer. People tend to forget that valve timing has more to with the revver/torquer characteristics than does the bore and stroke. So, while a longer strokes provides more leverage a larger bore provides more surface area for combustion pressure to push on, so the difference is not as great it would appear.

w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

The 82 has a 100 bore but the valves and carb are 91

The cam is the same in all three engines

As Hobbsy is saying, the valves of the 82 are the same as the 91, they are less shrouded and breath better because of the larger bore

Ken6PPC

I have three Saito .82's and I used to own a Saito .91. (I traded my .91.) My response is based on my own personal experiences, which is admitedly limited.

I think the .91 is a little smoother than the .82, and power is nearly equal.

If you need the weight in the nose, such as in a warbird, the .91 might make sense. If you DON'T need extra weight, I would choose the .82. The slight additional vibration isn't enough to be a problem, in my opinion. Actually, if I needed more weight, I would probably pick the 1.25 over the .91.

Too much power is usually just about right!

w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

The 50, 56, 62, 72, and 82 all have the same mounting bolt pattern but the 72 and 82 are a little wider across the crankcase

The 65, 80, 91, and 115 all have the same mounting bolt pattern as does the OS FS 70 and Magnum/ASP 65 and 70

The 100 and 125 have the same mounting bolt pattern as does the OS, TT and Magnum/ASP 91's

PacificNWSkyPilot

My Feedback: (19)

I've flown both and I can say without a doubt the .91 has a fair amount more power than the .82.

The 1.00 has quite a bit more than that.

What are you planning on bolting it up to, is a question I guess we should ask you? Sometimes the plane tells you what engine it likes.....


Jim

Larry175

My Feedback: (11)

I am currently the not so proud owner of a Saito 3.00 twin with the twin everything......carbs and plugs and for certain twin devils.
My particular engine came with the crankcase pressure system but did not have the exhaust pipes tapped for a pressure line.
After struggling for innumerable hours and trashing several religious ideologies for lack of adequate terminology, I sent the eng
to Saito and was soon told the engine was running just fine on their bench! First they advised me to throw away the pressure system,
stating that it was something of a failed experiment by Saito. Next the suggested a tap in my exhaust pipes which they say will
provide adequate head pressure for the tank.
I now have the engine back and it is awaiting installation in it's old home.....that being a Fly Baby Bipe. I hope I soon feel better about
this significant investment than I do now.
Me thinks twin carbs and twin plugs are a bit of an over-kill for what can never be more than a sport power engine. Had I to do it over again
I think the single carb version would have allowed me to inflict less brain damage upon myself.
Anybody else have one of these critters and care to join me in the "Confessional"?
ljc

triumphman49

My Feedback: (149)

Thanks Ken6PPC, Your input appreciated. Have heard of the 82 just being a bored out 72 with a little more vibration. Do have an older 91 NIB except is mounted in a Cloud Dancer that I included Robarts on(seems like most my planes lack just some little something to be finished). But do have a number of kits & plans for engines in the 60 2-stroke range & was considering picking up another 4-stroke. Again, Many Thanx - MeB

Larry175

My Feedback: (11)

P.S.
To my previous I wanted to say that Randy (I hope I recall correctly) at Saito engines is a pleasure to work with and a good engine man.

He helped me make sense out of the Saito 3.00 twin and had some excellent suggestions and the price was right and the service was honest
and timely.

ljc

ljc

w8ye

My Feedback: (16)

The dual carb 300 has more power than the single carb version but the single carb may have been a better choice for you,

Those pumps were more trouble than they were worth. Sait still sells those things

mike109

My Saito 90 TS disgraced its self today. It has been sitting since April so I checked the plane over, checked that the engine would turn freely and that the valve clearances were close to right which they were and went flying.

She started with no problems and I gave the needle a tweak and off we went. About 30 seconds into the flight the engine suddenly cut and I landed (if that is the word for it) in a field of oats which took the ouch out of the landing but stopped the plane very smartly.

Nothing appeared damaged so I prepared to start the engine again when I noticed that it did not feel quite right. So it was put into the vehicle and onto the bench for a look see.

I decided to check to see whether the valves were opening correctly and there was the problem. One of the valve adjusting screws (exhaust) on the left cylinder was broken and the nut and half of it were wandering round inside the tappet cover. The other half had started to unscrew and had reached the point where the valve was not opening.

I have a very early FA-45 so I pulled an adjusting screw out of it and it fits perfectly in the FA-90TS so she is ready to go again. I will buy some spares as soon as I can.

I have heard of pushrods jumping out of the end of the adjusting screws but this one was cleanly fractured.

Anyone else ever had this happen?

Mike in Oz.

mike early

Can anyone confirm that the exhaust thread on the 90 3-Cylinder Radial: TT is 9mm x .75mm? That is the same thread size on the .30 and .40 Saitos.....