treedog

Saw this page while surfing the net gang some fairly cheap kits. What do ya think?
Td
http://www.mecoa.com/modelerdirect/index.htm

flyinrog

My Feedback: (1)

Well, none of them are 1/2A but for some reason Laniers kits are on sale on several sites..profile kits are pretty cheap too....Rog

treedog

Yes that struck me first too 50' kits for 1/2 a prices I didn't know it was at other sites also. Some thing else i noticed at mecoa, they have a line of 4 strokes with roller valves they bought the rights to.Under the name HP engines. Any 1 familiar with HP?
Td ty Personally i've been waiting a long time for some 1 to make a rotary valve 4 stroke for rc for many years. Saves weight and miserly on fuel i'll just bet. My father 20 yrs ago said once [airplane gas and diesle mechanic] said he thought there might be a 20% savings in fuel if u did away with cam shaft rocker arms and valve springs and push rods .

Bipe Flyer

I have an HP. They have been around forever. They are heavy, low powered and leaky. Mechanically they are very interesting though.

If you want a good 4-stroke, get a Saito or an OS.

hogflyer

But if you can find a NIB or really good condition HP .40 PDP or .61 PDP for a decent price, grab it. The .61 PDP (Perry Directional Porting) is one of the best engines I've run on a pipe. Rate it right up there to the Webra Speed .61 as a top engine of it's day. I'll still put one up against most .61's made today (except a Jett, or course).

Hogflyer

digital_trucker

Dunno 'bout the HP 4-strokers...I've got an early '90s model (before HP went under and so on) .61 Gold Cup that seems to put out impressive amounts of power with excellent reliability. Here's an interesting rotary valve 4-stroker for you to peruse...

http://www.rcvengines.com/rcv_modelhome.htm

Bipe Flyer

I almost forgot abour RCV. They are supposed to be very good.

soarrich

My Feedback: (98)

Ditto what BF said. I've had 2 HP .49VT, they sound good with the whirling sound of the head gears. I've had a RCV 58, the weight of a heavy 60, the power of a weak 40, and a break-in period that seemed never ending. I also had a Webra made a T80-4c that has a drive belt and the rotory valve parallel to the crankshaft. The engines where all high cool factors, the .49VT was probably the most practical of the bunch, the Wankel .30 is cooler though, but a very wet thirsty engine.

For 4C engines I like Saito, YS, OS in that order.

Raymond LeFlyr

My Feedback: (2)

I had an HP .21VT for a SHORT time. Heavy. low power - but different. I traded it back to Mecoa in one of their swap deals - for another less than remarkable engine. The lesson I learned is what my dear old mother always told me, "ya gets what ya pays for - now quit yer whining and eat your gruel." Ah, that was my sweet old ma for ya.

On the other hand I have two O.S. .26s I bought for a twin project that never came to pass. One is a honker the other's not quite up to it. I think my Saito .30 is more powerful - but then I'm partial to Saito's.

treedog

So i take it u all are not sure about the hp then he he
Td

vicman

My Feedback: (10)

I had such a poor experience with the M company I have forbid myself to type or say the name aloud.[:'(]
2 .28s aquired in the trade program... wish I had the trade-in back.[&:][sm=thumbs_down.gif]

EASYTIGER

My Feedback: (119)

The trade-in program is great...for MECOA! He re-sells the stuff through MECA.
Let me guess...WILDCAT 28? Had one. What a lemon.
The HP four banger engines are just what people say. Smooth-running, quiet, completely gutless.
Saito 30 is MUCH more powereful than OS 26. Both good engines, but totally different classes, power-wise.

Dealing with MECOA? Use caution, is all. Call for stock status first. And don't expect that if you buy somethign like an HP61 it's going to be as well made as the original. Caveat emptor.

vicman

My Feedback: (10)

ET, You stated my feelings much more eloquently than my limited vocabulary is capable of[8D]

I also must temper my posts regarding the m company as I have been served fair warning by the mods concerning the value of my opinions.

EASYTIGER

My Feedback: (119)

Belive you me, I had to temper my own post...I have MUCH more to say about MECOA, but better left unsaid!

vicman

My Feedback: (10)

I can only hope the readers can understand what is between the lines here.

MJD

My Feedback: (1)

Yes, Dog-forbid you should express an opinion based on personal experience. All hail the moderators...

Come to think of it, when our industry is full of self-serving magazine product reviews where the slightest negative is swept under the rug for fear of irritating the paid advertisers ---- you know the type: "I had one very minor problem with the wing saddle, which did not appear to remotely match the wing profile and made it impossible to mount the wing, but it only took a four hours to strip off the covering, move the rear former, graft in some balsa, duplicate the wing profile with careful sanding, then recover the area.. no sweat!" or "the model at first seemed twitchy and somewhat difficult to control at the recommended CG and control throws, but after moving the CG 3 inches ahead, reducing throws by half and adding 85% expo, things settled down a bit and allowed flight testing to continue"---- a fellow would like to think there is at least some place in this world to express one's feelings openly and honestly about products and services. Sure, perhaps personal vendettas should be kept at bay, but other than that..

vicman

My Feedback: (10)

For the record I don't have any un-resolved issues with the mods and am thankful for the job they do to keep this an excellent site.[8D]

Now back on topic about how wonderful the M engine company is...not.

EASYTIGER

My Feedback: (119)

There needs to be a balance, too. Often I wish the mods did MORE about manufacturer bashing.
Look at the threads about Nitromodels/Raidentech or about World Hobby over on RCgoofs. It's ugly. Nobody can say ANYTHING about those companies without the same three or four people chiming in and bashing. It's not good.
I think there needs be to a point where you have to say, "okay...you don't like such-and-such company. WE GET IT!" I've said my bit about MECOA, it's not the first time I have said it, I'm sure, and I don't want to turn into one of these constant bashers like CyclicHardover or TaeKwonDo..the COMPANY ends up looking like the victim!

So...you just say your bit once or twice. People will read it, and make their own judgement, it's not worth getting into trouble over it.

Magazine reviews, well, try some of the Traplet British mags. They are very straight up.

MJD

My Feedback: (1)

I have now and again, and from what I recall you're right, they do call things as they see them.

My jadedness (is that a word?) about US mag reviews started in earnest about 15 years ago when I worked for another hobby manufacturer, and the designer of a new aircraft had a friend who as it turns out did reviews for a model mag.. well of course it was a highly positive review that left little doubt as to the level of perfection of the model. The designer told me it was pretty standard practice and that I should never take reviews too seriously. I have since had a chance to compare a few reviews to my personal experiences and found more of the same. Is this true of all reviews? I doubt it very much, and as well there are some really good products out there that deserve all the positives they get. Although - how many reviews do you see for products that have a shopping list of deficencies? I know they are out there..

Your point about bashing is well taken - for sure, vent and state your case clearly and concisely, covering what cheesed you off and why, then move on. There are a couple of forums/newsgroups I partake of, where it is nigh impossible for any subject to come up without the same idiots chiming in with the same old sour grapes. Ruins it for every one else.

EASYTIGER

My Feedback: (119)

Excellent post, MJD.
It really depends who is for writing, and for who. I think it's somewhat rare to have a really bad product get a positive review...maybe some flaws are glossed over, but a complete snowjob is, I think, a real rarity. More often, if the product is a problem, the review will just not get published.
About bashing, you got it. Absolutely.

rainedave

My Feedback: (1)

Don't forget that guy with the eagle avatar and something about "Truth" in his signature that calls everyone a stupid idiot and trolls for the sole purpose of bashing everything OS.

EASYTIGER

My Feedback: (119)

Don't know THAT guy! There are a few like that, though. Northeast Sailplanes had it really bad over on RCgoofs...it should have been stopped long before...it ended up badly.

treedog

Golly gee fellas i was gone for a day and i come baqck to see lions and tigers and bears lol, about my post on mecoa. See what i miss when i'm away for just a few hrs woot! All i said was hey check out these cheap prices he he. Had no idea i'd stir up such a hornets nest
Td

vicman

My Feedback: (10)

CH isn't too bad a guy once you get to know him. He also calls a spade a spade.

soarrich

My Feedback: (98)

I've found R/C Reports gives a pretty straight review.

I fly with a famous RCer and remember being at the field when he tested a Davis Diesel head maybe twenty years ago. The OS's piston broke, the piston pin bent, and the review was, works great, a little learning curve, but a nice product! [:@] I have been reading between the lines since, loops with a little dive means this thing is really underpowered, landing gear could be stiffer means you can't land without breaking a prop or picking the wheel pants out of the bottom of the wing.