SMALLFLY-

My Feedback: (19)

What engine did you use.
Did you really get it to come in at 11 - 11.5 lbs
How does it 3D, does it fly "light"
Are the graphics & decals on the wing or do you apply them.
Thanks

capthis

My Feedback: (67)

Me thinks I want one too! I flew the living pooh out of my sukhoi today! Man I love that plane! Its a 3-D monster for sure. Happy flying Ole Buddy!

radfly

Bought one last night. I have not decided on an engine, but am thinking OS 160 FX with 18 X 6 prop. Their web site tells you nothing about the plane, but fortunately, they had an ad in the September issue of Model Aviation.

Here's the specs:

Wing Span: 72 "
Length: 67"
Area: 960 Sq. In.
Weight: 10.5 - 11.5

This work out to 27 - 29.7 oz/sq. ft wing loading. Should have nice low speed characteristics.

snotlocker

My Feedback: (14)

This work out to 27 - 29.7 oz/sq. ft wing loading.

i think this is a little high for slow flying ?


i have one not finished yet but a YS 140 L w/apc 18X6 wide is the ticket !!!

radfly

Yes. For a plane of this size, this is a very good loading for low speed characteristics.

...for a 40 sized, this would really stink.


Anyway, I am no scientist, but will post my actual findings when I fly the thing, if anyone cares to know.

toyking23

My Feedback: (4)

Keep me informed Radfly, I have been debating on this plane?

radfly

Found out these things are made by China Models, sames guys that build for GiantScalePlanes.com, who at the moment is selling the same planes, at the same price.

Spoke with Jim at Creek, he said that these were made by a different China firm, and that GiantScalePlanes was a reseller of Creeks? Anyway, I cancelled my order until I here more info from the beta builders.

They didn't give me any hassle in the canncellation, so I must admit their customer service is good.

I have not ruled out this plane, just do not feel confortable being in the beta group.

DanS

My Feedback: (1)

I talked with Creek this morning about their ARF's. They were straight up about the planes and hardware. They said the hardware will fly the plane but I might want to upgrade for 3D or real hard flying. I would be hard pressed to build a plane for the price they want. Even if I do have to add some glue or do some mods it should be worth it.

EkRr

My Feedback: (51)

Radfly

I just finished the review for the CREEK Staudacher for RCU Magazine:
http://www.rcuniverse.com/reviews.ph...ew&reviewid=19

Please check it out before you cancel that order.

I must tell you that when I first saw the planes at the WRAM show in NY, the first question that I aske Jim was, what is up with the price? Why so inexpensive? He explained that they were made in China and were of very good quality.

I got the Staudacher a couple weeks ago and I went over it with a fine tooth comb. I was extremely impressed. The quality was awesome, as good as if not better than other famous ARFS on the market.

I got a chance to fly it this weekend against a H9 Cap 232 with a Saito 180. My Staudacher ate it up! There was no maneuver that it could not perform. 3D...No Problem. Put a 160FX and an 18 x 6 prop on it and you would think you were flying the space shuttle. Unlimited Vertical....No Lie!

I am not affiliated with Creek, but I can tell you that Jim and the rest of his staff are excellent. The Support was awesome.

Other than the directions, I could not find anything major wrong with it.

You do not know me, but I would tell you to buy that plane in a heart beat! You will not be dissapointed.

Please email me if you have any questions. [email protected].

Remember, I did not get paid to do the review, nor do I work for Creek. These are my opinions and what I see as the facts.

I would be happy to talk to you about it at any time.

Do not give up on that purchase


DANS

I used most of the stock hardware, other than upgrading the tank to a 20 oz, I used www.kangkeusa.com control horns and a H9 engine mount. I used all the stock clevis and pushrods. I also used the CA hinges supplied. We ran 6 hours worth of flights on it for the review and there was no sign that the hardware would not stand up to Hard aerobatics.

Upgrading is your call, but not necessary

Let me know if I can answer any more of your questions.

Erick Royer

JEBLE

radfly,

I just was reviewing some of the posts here at RC Universe and came across this one and wanted to set the record straight on some issues that have been brought up. Although these planes are new this year, you are not part of a "Beta Group". We personally have tested each and every one of these models ourselves with the motors that are listed in our Combo section of the magazine advertisements. The Katana as of this afternoon, has taken over as our number one seller once again. This title has fluctuated between the Katana and the Sukhoi since we first started selling these ARFs back in January of this year. We have now sold over 150 of these planes. As far as I am concerned the "Beta Group" task so to speak is now complete. Not to say that we do not have a lot to learn from our customer's input, because we are learning more and more evey day. We will continue to improve these models each and every run. I am sure that you will see more and more feedback about these models soon, on this site alone. We definately have had issues, nobody is perfect, but I can tell you and everyone else out there that we will stand behind this product line 100%, no matter what it takes. In regards to the manufacturer, I ask, does it really matter? No matter where they are made, or whomever may be selling them, the bottom line is that they are our (Creek Hobbies) line of ARF's. They are our responsibility and you will only have to deal with us and nobody else. They are constructed very well and we have not had a negative report from a customer regarding the flying characteristics. We hope that eventually you will see these ARF's on the shelves of your local hobby shop. We have dealer programs established, and these planes have been sold to dealers all over the U.S. I stress to you however and everyone else, that we (Creek Hobbies) are ultimately responsible for these planes and that we will always be there for everyone when/if the need should arise.

I do want to add that I do appreciate your interest in this line. I know that you have elected to withdraw your order with us fo now, and I hope that it is only temporary. I also appreciate that you are happy with our customer service. This is more important to us than anything else. If I can be of further assistance to you or anyone else for that matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Thanks for listening.

Sincerely,

Jim

PS We got the secured on-line ordering section of the website fixed this afternoon. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.

BAS

My Feedback: (28)

Erice , to say the least that was a excellant review i have the plane ordered and there wont be any need to fool with the cd rom now that you hav e covered all the basics for installation. I had a couple qestions i am installing a RCS 1.4 gas and it weighs around 2lbs 4 ozs with muffler and ignition i was wondering what the os 160 weight was with muffler . I am putting servos in rear also . I know the 1.4 wont give it great unlimited vertical like the 160 os and i might reconsider and get the rcs 1.8 I have heard the 1.4 is a power house but i like extra power when you need it. Thanks for the review and please let me know os 160 weight.

CrazyHerb-RCU-delete

My Feedback: (2)

The RCS 1.40 will be fine...
I have one in a 13 lb H9 Edge with Smoke.
Love that motor...

Man, I WISH I would have seen Creek's Planes before I bought this brick/hunk of....

Keep the weight down..don't go crazy with a zillion milliamp pack and take the tank down to an 8 oz.....bolt up the RCS just like you would a normal 1.20 four stroke (I run mine inverted with pitts muffler). RCS will put out over 15 lbs thrust (try a 16x8 or 17x8 ProZinger prop). I get well over 20 minutes of flying time....still haven't dead-sticked it.

Maybe I need to go bang up the H9 Edge and get me one of them Creek Katana planes....hehehe...them sure are purdy!!!

High Flights!!
CrazyHerb

BAS

My Feedback: (28)

Thanks for the info on the rcs 1.4 that was the info i was wanting to hear. You also answered my prop question thats again Weight wise i think i will be ok motor should weigh around 2lbs 8 ozs with everything included muffler ignition and mount and batt pack The os 160 weighs around 2 lbs i dont know if that is with mount or not According to Erics review the staudacher should be a good flyer from Creek Hobbies. I was a little surprised you have to set wing incidence though since it is arf, but i guess that is not a big deal . Thanks Bruce

DanS

My Feedback: (1)

Erick Royer,

Thanks for the great review. I ordered the Edge 540 yesterday after talking with Creek Hobbies. Looks like I made a good choice by going with one of their ARF's. I'll wait to see the hardware before I decide to change anything. I have a digital camera so I'll try to put together a little mini review that RC Universe can use.

Dan

seanychen

My Feedback: (4)

The weight of OS 1.60 FX is 32 oz, and it doesn't include muffler or mount weight. The stock muffler is 10oz. I am not joking! . But a Bisson Pitts muffler for this engine weighs 5oz. It turns a Master Airscrew Classic 18x6 @ 9100 RPM, and took a 13 lb Cap straight up. So your RCS should be good for this plane.

I

BAS

My Feedback: (28)

Thanks for the reply on the weight issue the rcs 1.4 i believes weighs around 2lbs. 5 ozs with everythng included batt for ignition and mount and muffler so i will probally have to add a little nose weight to balance Just got my staudacher today and looks nice Erics review will help with assembly Bruce

CrazyHerb-RCU-delete

My Feedback: (2)

One of the biggest things that many people don't think about is the size of tank your going to have to use with a large glow engine. Yes, glow is more powerful. However, they consume fuel at a higher rate. Hence, why an 8oz tank wouldn't even be considered for the OS. Unless you wanted about 4 minutes of air time. Yet, the RCS sips 8 oz in 20-30 minutes...at about .10 cents a tank.

Also, think about take off weight of a 20 oz tank FULL!! And possible CG changes that your plane will go through if your tank isn't right on the CG.

The inital higher cost difference in the gas motor compared to the less expensive glow motor will quickly be absorbed by the increased fuel consumption and cost of a glow motor this size.

Throw all these into consideration and you'll start to see....anything above 1.40 is worth looking at GAS!

So, analyzing a glow motor to a gas motor you should consider the FUEL weight and tank size. You'll see that 3-5 ounces of motor weight is easily made up for.

My personal opinion.

Hope that helps!
High Flights!

CrazyHerb

seanychen

My Feedback: (4)

Instead of adding nose weight, I plan to mount the servos over the wing instead of at the tail. I will get some composite pushrods to retain the stiffness, perhaps 1 rod per elevator. This should make the plane lighter overall if trying to achieve the same CG location. Because guess what? We can always move the servos to the tail afterwards. I will put an Enya 1.55 4-stroke in mine, which is 34 oz including muffler. I will see how things balance out.

I think this tail heavy tendency happen on 120 size aerobatic ARF's a lot because of the short nose moment, thus the engine weight doesn't counter the tail weight enough. I wish they could just make the nose moment a little longer. Maybe the nose will look stretched. Hey, but so what?

Bryant330L

My Feedback: (126)

Anyone know anything about a 3w 24? I am thinking of buying one of those for a Creek hobbies Extra 330. I want great verticle and 3D ability out of this plane. Any help or input on the power of this engine would be great. Thanks!

JEBLE

LovemyEdge,

Brian (Hollywood) from Creek Hobbies has switched his Saito 1.8 4-cycle to the 3W-24 gasser this week. He had to make some minor modifications to the firewall in order for it to adapt, but the overall fit is great. We have been running the engine at the shop this week. We ran into some minor complications, our own faults, but it will be ready to fly on Saturday. If you would like, I can report the flight report to you later Saturday evening. I am looking forward to this setup. I have a 3W-24 in an Aeroworks 25% Edge ARC and it has unlimited power. I am sure that it is going to be a powerhouse in this plane since it is slightly smaller and lighter. Until Saturday.............


Jim from Creek

LVS

My Feedback: (6)

Hello Jim,
I am definitely interested in how the 3W24 does in this plane as well. What is your opinion on an FPE 2.4? Do you know anyone who is flying an FPE? Would you have to make any modifications to the firewall? What are the measurements from the firewall to prop-hub for proper scale cowl placement? Thanks for your time and support.
Larry

JEBLE

Larry,

I have a few fiends that have the FPE 24. They really like it. I do not know anyone that has installed it in one of our planes yet. As far as I can see, I do not think any firewall changes would have to be made. I would recommend a little more support, but that is about it. In response to your question regarding correct cowl placement, the proper distance from the firewall to the prophub is 5 3/4" I hope that I have answered all of your questions, I will be in touch Saturday evening with the flight report for the 3W (weather permitting, if it rains, we will do it on Sunday) Talk with you then......

Jim

funfly2005

Do ya'll think one of these planes would be a good 3d plane with a RCS 1.4. Do you think it will get unlimited verticle. Just wondering.

thanks jim

funfly2005

What about a RCS 1.8 on one?

JEBLE

If I had to choose between the 1.4 and the 1.8, I would go with the 1.8. I know that engine has the power that you are looking for. It is worth the little extra weight.

Jim