M3

My Feedback: (25)

I have recently purchased a GP Wagstaff 300 and was planning on using an O.S. 1.60. I was chatting with a guy at the field yesterday and he recommended a Moki 2.10 for more power. I have a question, according to the specs on the engines, the OS boasts 3.7 bhp and a wieght of 32 oz, whereas the Moki boasts 2.36 bhp and 46 oz. Am I missing someting? It appears the OS is lighter and more powerful.

Please advise which would be better.

RJConnet

I believe the figure you are giving for the Moki is actually the horsepower per cubic inch. Since the Moki is 2.10 cubic inches, the actual output is as advertised, 4.95 hp @8800 rpm. In the real world, that Moki will pull the socks off the OS, as you would expect from the increased displacement.

Bob C.

M3

My Feedback: (25)

Thanks for the response.

Quality and reliablility wise, is the Moki comparible to the O.S. (apples to apples)? I have always used O.S. engines in both RC cars (then) and planes (now) and have never had any problems.

RJConnet

I can only speak for my own experience with a Moki 1.8, The quality is superb and the performance has been exemplary. I have been flying it for three years on a Stinger 120 and am now in the process of installing it in a H9 Edge 540.
I would tend to think the OS 1.60 might be a little marginal in the GP Wagstaff Extra.

Bob C.

Diablo-RCU

My Feedback: (1)

Before popping for the Moki, you should give some thought to a gas engine. One example would be a ZDZ-40B - cost is $430 complete with muffler, prop, ignition battery, and switch.

Any light 40-50cc gas motor would be a heck of alot more economical to run than the big Moki. Gas motors are much more reliable than glow and also won't slime up your plane.

CrashBang

My Feedback: (1)

I am flying a Moki 2.1 on a new Midwest Extra that goes about 15.5 lbs. I have about 12 flights on it now and all I can say about the Moki is that it is superb! By far the nicest large glow engine that I have run to date.