[AJCoholic]

OK, I have a question. I posted this on RCU to try and get some feedback on my engine reviews. I have been writing for Fly RC magazine for 4 years now - and I from time to time see complaints on how engine reviews are crap, and dont give any usefull info, etc or that I am just shilling for the various companies.

Well, my first question is... do these guys actually read my reviews word for word? over various posts I read that they would like to see "noise readings", "how the engine throttles", "how did it idle", "if I had any problems".. and so forth. All these things and more are in each and every review I do.

My reviews are based on the following format that I developed when I started:

- dissassembly and inspection
- reassembly and break in
- test running of various props and fuels and plugs
- flying the engine as much as I can, sometimes with various props

Of course I comment truthfully on the running characteristics of the engine as it behaved for me. I am pretty damn demanding of my engines - if an engine didnt idle well I will tell it like it is. If there is any small issue with throttle response, its in the review. If I had any isse with starting, etc its in there.

But the problem to me, is that many comments I see seem like the real issue is that the review was only part read or skimmed over and many valuable tidbits of info were not read! WHat can I do if the reader just misses my information than suggests I "put it in there" next time?

My next question is - as I posed on RCU - I really do want to make the reviews as best I can for you guys and I solicit any comments and suggestions. Just please, please bother to read the review in whole. Thanks!

Andrew

PS - the most often read comment is that how can every engine I review be "perfect" ? Well, thats not the case at all. From time to time I have commented on various things I disliked such as cosmetic flaws, improper clearances, poor packaging, issues with running in certain attitudes and issues with throttling, etc. ALL that info is in there. But I can say I generally am pretty good setting up engines, and I do believe when I properly break them in the performance is on average MUCH better than the guy who takes a brand new engine, mounts it on the plane and tries to fly it immediately (generally without any break in, or time to set things right) before giving it a chance. Maybe I am just lucky? Or maybe in my case treating the engines properly and a number of years of experience allows me to make my own "luck" if thatmakes any sense. But rest assured if I get a dud you will read about it.

[moo]

I've only subscribed this spring, but I do read your articles and appreciate them.
I find the how-to articles more useful and interesting than the engine reviews (I have only ever bought three new engines).
I think what I would prefer to see is engine comparisons, including info such as pitch speed and thrust. I do realize that this also would be a whole lot more work, but these are the things people need to see to choose and engine for a particular application.
I think I missed the article on how to re-build four stroke engines i.e. polishing valves and replacing springs

[luv2flyrc]

hi Andrew, Not sure if this applies to your reviews or not because, I read so many but, one of my biggest beefs is when the reviewer collects RPM data using props that no one uses. ie Zinger, MA etc,

Most guys run APC on small engines and Menz or Mejzlik on the gassers.

Use of unpopular props makes it impossible to compare data.

Regards,

Mike

[adaptabl]

Really is you look at the reviews they are the same text with a different manufacture name inserted in the article. It seems all new engines are well built and run well. I have hever seen a poor review. Maybe this is because the editor would never allow a bad review in the pages that could upset an advertiser?

I would like to see comparisons of equivilent engines run under the same conditions to identify the best of the group.

Another interesting thing I see is that every once and a while you sell some of the review motors in the for sale section. Do you originally pay for the engine and where does the money go? It can affect how others view your reviews.

https://www.rccanada.ca/bb/viewtopic.php?t=35041

I do not bother with magazine reviews of anything. If I was in the market for a new engine I would talk to several people who are already using them. With the engine being used by idiots and experts one can get a far better review of the engine than any magazine can give.

Ed S

[AJCoholic]

Originally Posted by luv2flyrc

hi Andrew, Not sure if this applies to your reviews or not because, I read so many but, one of my biggest beefs is when the reviewer collects RPM data using props that no one uses. ie Zinger, MA etc,

Most guys run APC on small engines and Menz or Mejzlik on the gassers.

Use of unpopular props makes it impossible to compare data.

Regards,

Mike

MIke,
Thats a point I will try and remedy in the future. The reason I have always used Zingers is becuase, well, I actually use them myself. Also, I buy all my testing props out of my own pocket. When I needed to buy a dozen various large scale props, I chose not to shell out $50 to $100 a pop for the big names (I did ask some manufacturers if they would like to donate some props for testing but they declined). I guess I should buy some APC's in the under 16" sizes though. Good point. But there is no way I can spend over a grand on props to test for the gassers.

AJC

[AJCoholic]

Originally Posted by moo

I've only subscribed this spring, but I do read your articles and appreciate them.
I find the how-to articles more useful and interesting than the engine reviews (I have only ever bought three new engines).
I think what I would prefer to see is engine comparisons, including info such as pitch speed and thrust. I do realize that this also would be a whole lot more work, but these are the things people need to see to choose and engine for a particular application.
I think I missed the article on how to re-build four stroke engines i.e. polishing valves and replacing springs

Moo, the 4 stroke overhaul is coming... promise!

AJC

[Guest]

Originally Posted by adaptabl

Another interesting thing I see is that every once and a while you sell some of the review motors in the for sale section. Do you originally pay for the engine and where does the money go? It can affect how others view your reviews.

https://www.rccanada.ca/bb/viewtopic.php?t=35041

Dave from experience I have been asked to build, review certain items and honestly it’s not worth my time and effort pay wise. One of the perks is most times you get to keep the item you are reviewing. So it becomes yours to do with as you please. As long as you are up front and explain the items history I think selling a reviewed item is within acceptable standards. Most of the reviewers for the larger mags get a whole plane, engine and servos as recommended by the kit manufacturer. These come up for sale by the reviewer all the time. Its common practice.

Dennis

[Peter Gordon]

Andrew,

At the risk of being un-popular here, I was wondering if some of the latest engines might make it to the review stages. What I'm referring to are the 3MM TOC 53's, DL 50's, Peak engines, etc. These are gaining a decent %'age of the market due to their costs, but I'm also hearing good things about the quality too.

As for the review, I read every one. I enjoy the tear-down details, and the summary review at the end when you compare it to some of the other similar displacement engines you have run. And as for "insert engine name here" - type reviews, I know that is not the case. I read one not too long ago when you scolded them for the poor job of using an oversized drill bit to countersink. Too right! You still went easy on them IMO.

Peter

[AJCoholic]

Originally Posted by adaptabl

Really is you look at the reviews they are the same text with a different manufacture name inserted in the article. It seems all new engines are well built and run well. I have hever seen a poor review.

Another interesting thing I see is that every once and a while you sell some of the review motors in the for sale section. Do you originally pay for the engine and where does the money go? It can affect how others view your reviews.

https://www.rccanada.ca/bb/viewtopic.php?t=35041

Firstly,
This is the thing I am talking about - do you personally read my reviews? I always (with few exceptions) have some suggestions on what I'd like improved, or if there were any things I had issue with they are noted. Its a fact that today, 99.9% of engines ARE well built and if you see me at a fun fly, I am generally the guy who hand flips the engine and gets it running then flying. Not the guy who is sitting there struggling to get running only to dead stick. Yes, most engine's (not all but the vast majority) run really well if you know what you are doing.

Unfortunately, I think its the general view that no engine review is honestly written. Thats too bad, because if you ask the guys I fly with who sometimes are at my shop and at the field whern I am testing engines they can confirm what I do is all true.

If you havent seen a poor review then take a look back this winter... I wont pick on the engine but I had a lot of negatives in print.

Secondly,
I do get to keep the majority of engines as part of my payment. Its no secret, thats how 99% of the magazines work. WHat I do with the engines afterwards is my own business and in no way has any effect on the review - how could it? I dont have a use for 12 new engines a year, so I sell most of them (or give them away) mainly to guys in my own club.


AJC