|
|
||
|
Quote:
Straightening a bent shaft is best left to a skilled operator. |
|
Latest blog entry: YS 1.60 Zero Nitromethane
|
||
|
|
|
I know you are right but what I meant was that I really did not want to spend any more money on it, as the cost of repair will begin to out way the value engine. I do not have dial indicator, but I will try the feeler stock method. thank you, for you quick replies i will let you know what I find
|
|
|
|
|
|
I like this Saito 65 so much that I am thinking of getting the 82 AAC.
How have this engine been holding up? For the F4U .50. |
|
|
|
|
|
The Saito 65 is in a class of it's own IMHO. Compared to some other Saitos , the 65 is a bit overbuilt. It is in a fairly large case for a 65 and runs like a sewing machine . The mild state of tune adds to the fine operating qualities of the 65. The 82 is a powerhouse of an engine and a somewhat different animal. Still has the Saito qualities but not in the same proportions.
|
Latest blog entry: YS 1.60 Zero Nitromethane
|
|
|
|
|
Gary, I've never owned a .65 but can see where the smallest in a series of engines, for example the Saito .65, .80 and .91 are in the same case. The smallest could very well be the sweetheart of the group. The .50, .56 and .62 differ in that each is a sweeetheart in it own way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
So I should look for the older FA 80 or FA 91
Sounds good, I will have to watch E-Buy |
|
Last edited by critter1340; Aug 25, 2011 at 08:09 PM.
|
|
|
|
The Hanger 9 F4U-1D .60 size, they say Saito 82, But I would go 80.
I have a YS 110 but that is going on my BH P-40 in place of the 91 Magnum. |
|
Last edited by critter1340; Aug 25, 2011 at 08:12 PM.
|
|
|
|
I have an .82 on a Four-Star 60...I probably have put over 200 flights on it over that last 5 years & it's still going strong. It clearly has more power than the .80, but both are great running engines....either one would be fine on your F4U...start shopping as see what comes along for the best deal.
There was a subtle design change over the years....if you look at the older engines, the case drain is a fitting in the middle of the back plate on the engine. In newer models, they put the drain at the bottom of the back plate & I think the excess oil (along with other ugly residue) drains more efficiently. It might be better for the bearings when the engine is in storage. Sorry to throw a wrench into your decision process, but I do think it was a design improvement. If the engine is mounted sideways then that change doesn't make any difference (not sure off hand if you can rotate the back plate to compensate). Dan |
|
|
|
|
|
The case vent at the front is far better . In fact we were doing that for years before Saito caught on ! The vent on the rear cover allows for the blowby residue and moisture to collect in the bearing/cam area. Not a good spot. It also tends to inhibit efficient oiling up front. We noticed a huge improvement in bearing life, less rust and less cam, gear and lifter trouble. The front location makes an excellent location to introduce some after-run oil as well. It flushes the nasty stuff away and gets some fresh oil onto the bearings.
A worthwhile modification for many of the earlier models with the rear vent. |
Latest blog entry: YS 1.60 Zero Nitromethane
|
|
|
|
|
Actually Dan, the vent on most of the back plates is positioned so that it os in the same relationship when rotated 90 degrees. Of course some are in the center and the position makes no difference. No matter where the vent is the same amount of oil resides in the crankcase. This is my 2.20 which I have since sold, the oil is from WildCat 10% with 18% syn/castor blend and is actually not the red in real life, somehow my camera does that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The issue is not so much about the amount of oil in the case. It is more about where the oil migrates, how easily it migrates and how well the moisture is drawn away from the critical bearing/camshaft area. By moving the vent towards the front all above is much improved over the rear cover location. Some fellows like the convenience of the rear vent but the front functions a lot better IME .
|
Latest blog entry: YS 1.60 Zero Nitromethane
|
|
|
|
|
I've never experienced a failure because of where it is located, in fact I haven't had a Saito failure except for a new .50 I bought that had a casting flaw that let compression leak around the intake valve. I sent that engine to Horizon on Wednesday and had it back the following Tuesday with a new cylinder. The 2.20 I had had a place on the cam box for a vent but the vent was on the backplate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Didn't say they ALL failed just that the overall success rate is far better. We got to see a good cross section as well as a lot of very high time engines that had a good variety of running conditions. Overall there was quite a noticeable difference in gear/cam/ and bearing life once the vent was moved up front. The corrosion level was consistently lower across the board. The front vent is indeed an improvement over the rear one more often than not.
It seems Saito agreed since they too saw fit to move the vent. No doubt to help with warranty claims. |
Last edited by Gary Cee; Aug 28, 2011 at 06:09 PM.
|
|
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | |||||
Category | Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Composites Forum on RC Groups? | TGoodwin | Composites Fabrication | 9 | Oct 01, 2004 03:49 AM | |
PLEASE KILL ACTIVE X on RC Groups. | windsurfer | Site Chat | 7 | Apr 19, 2004 02:16 PM | |
Help! Large font on RC Groups! | Lenny970 | Site Chat | 4 | Mar 20, 2004 11:52 PM |