Icarus

Sod the 'lord'. How did he get the land? Taken by force by his family generations ago? what does he do that's of use to anyone except live off his inherited ill gotten gains... they make my blood boil

...it costs about 12p more per litre for high octane fuel. at a burn rate of 4lph that's less than 50p per hour. over 100hrs of flying, that's less than £50 engine costs around £2000 seems like a no brain decision to use the best fuel and oil to me?

There's no power difference between the factory and plus. Unfortunately one of the most obvious features is also it's weak point. The Titanium exhaust. looks stunning, cracks between 15 and 20 hrs. This was replaced under warranty for me twice now, sadly the replacement looks like they've done nothing to fix what is clearly a problem (yet). but,. As they've been free replacement - and take about 10m to do, well I'm still delighted. If I have to pay for one myself,then I may well put a regular steel pipe on it. I've now spoken with 4 people who've experienced the same problem with exhaust at the same hours of fly time. (And none that haven't). Still, I'd buy the same engine again. Looks, power, weight, and aside from exhaust, totally reliable. Even if I have to put the regular steel pipe on it, I'll still have the billet engine case etc, and as they've taken good care of me on warranty, I've enjoyed every minute of that very light engine. ...But if you want to make the best of it - you should also consider a Scout carbon shaped home for it

Just 'upgraded' from an Ozone Roadster2 to the Speedster. 'test' flew the Speedster2 and that was enough to convince me to spend. as a qualifying statement, I love the R2 wing - and would say it was going to take something special to make me change,. But the S2 is a lot more agile using just the tip steering and still provides a good dose of that lovely confidence inspiring (bombproof) 'feeling' of the R2. BUT where I would wholeheartedly recommend the R2 to a new pilot as a sensible step from a school wing, I would not say the same for the S2. It's certainly a lot livelier than the R2, and I felt it requires a more delicate touch than the R2, it's also got some more specific flying do's and donts - eg with the R2 you can use the brakes whether on slow/fast or acellerated trim, whereas the S2 specifically warns against it, also reading between the lines in the manuals, it says recovery from a collapse on the S2 will require moving back to slow trim, whilst I'm sure this would aid recovery on the R2, I've flown in some really nasty conditions in on the R2 which has created some pretty gnarly wing shapes and collapses, but almost before you even realise it's gone, it is back flying again. I suspect the S2 may not be quite as forgiving. launch is usual Ozone fare, that is to say, faultless. Comes up easy and predictably - similar to the R2. And has no tendency to overfly. i was surprised that I used some fairly deep brakes on takeoff on the S2 to create lift, if anything (and converse to the tip steering) I'd swear that the brakes are not quite as responsive as the R2, though I think I'll be able to dial out a bit of slack that was present in the demo I tried. But the range of trim is rather huge, so finding a compromise to get reactive brakes and still leave enough slack to allow for full acceleration may be a challenge - it might just be a case of dial out the slop using a wrap on brakes. I'll figure this out over the next few flights. i also flew the spyder and the original speedster 1 recently - and have a Hadron xx to compare it to. i won't go into depth on the spyder, except that I didn't feel that it was obviously a light weight R2! Has quite a different feel, and while certainly lighter than the R2, I wouldn't swap my R2 for the spyder, despite all the positive press for that, I prefer the feel and known durability of the roadster. as for the Speedster1 - nice wing, pretty fast, but feels old in comparison to any of these wings. Not as easy to launch, not as nimble and somehow feels a bit bulky. the Hadron xx - is the wild child - I only flew mine 5-6 times before deciding to sell it on. Too much crazy for me - it's super agile - but never made me feel 'confident' in the air, and is a real sensitive little beastie to launch. More a reflection of my ability (intermediate) than the wings true capability, but I'm certain that I'll do better flying on the S2 than I would have on the Hadron. overall I voted for the speedster2 by plonking down a wedge of money for a new one, so I give it a solid thumbs up as an intermediate wing, and without any doubt a good step forward from the S1. - for reference I've somewhere over a hundred hours of flying, perhaps flown about a dozen different wings and fly with a Scout/moster combo. after trying out many recent offerings from Paramania, dudek and ozone, I'd confess to having a preference for ozone wings. ps - at time of this post, my black/red/white roadster2 is for sale on Facebook group 'UK Paramotor stuff for sale'

I know the above might be too late for the original poster, but I'm guessing the question is still relevant for many looking at engines.

Just though I'd chime in on this old thread as I've now owned both these engines and flown them both for >30 hrs each. I'll start out with saying I prefer the Moster, for the following reasons. 1. It's lighter (although I have the moster factory which amplifies the difference in weight) 2. Not just lighter, but I'm sure the weight is carried closer to your back which makes it feel MUCH lighter 3. In my experience over time the moster has proven to be far less finicky with regards to carb settings or plugs. It just keeps running and runs well - I think that vitorazzi uses their own specific configuration of walbro carb which just seems to work. The 190 is far fussier and seems very susceptible to flat spots in the rpm range. 4. Reliabilty - I have actually owned two Thor 190s as the first one had to be replaced under warranty as it lunched itself - I've also lost hours of flying time because of niggles with carburettor and spark plugs. The moster just starts and delivers. THOUGH on the negative, the moster titanium exhaust has cracked on me and needed replacement (also warranty) but this was handled in an extremely efficient manor and was much easier to replace than the battle I had getting Polini to accept that my brand new engine which only ran for <30 mins deserved to be replaced with new rather than just rebuilt. 5. Power is much smoother- the combo of the vito eprop and moster is just very very nice, linear and I'd be willing to bet produces a little more than the 190 light and Helix combo I've been flying. Could be the prop that makes the difference, but can only say that the moster feels like it has more. 6. packaging, the moster is just altogether a neater package aesthetically than the 190 7. Noise, subjective this, and as mentioned I've got the titanium pipe and carbon muffler of the factory moster, but I prefer the sound of the Moster. I'd judge that it's slightly quieter in flight too. as for the 190 it does have a couple of advantages. 1. Fuel economy - flying the same me on the same wing, I've achieved better fuel economy with the 190 Thor than I've ever managed with the moster. 2. Electric start, well it's not really an advantage in itself, BUT, the 190 Es has a built in generator, to keep charge in the battery, which has provided very useful in flight power (via adding a small 12v USB widget from eBay (about £6 if I remember rightly) which is super handy for keeping iPhone charged to use for navigation on long XC flights.

Hey all, Just joined the forum, so only polite to say hello... I'm a 'new' pilot, (still training) with Skyschool (Zeb)- - busy logging as many hours as I possibly can in preparation for the Icarus Trophy in October. For anyone who hasn't heard of the Icarus Trophy, it's a paramotor race, taking off near the northern tip of the USA westcoast, and flying to basically the southern border(ish) over 2 weeks Based in Beds/Bucks area, still trying to find good flying locations / and witnesses for my inevitable mistakes. Best, Ben