Battle of the Brands
10-30-2012, 04:09 PM
#52
RE: Battle of the Brands
ORIGINAL: rmh
Understandable -if they did not understand the basic differences in required rx /antenna placement and the use of really adequate batteries
The requirements are VERY different
ORIGINAL: ramboy
There are fliers who never crashed with 72 Mhz but are now crashing with 2.4.
ORIGINAL: woodie
As rmh said, the first question should be 'what do I need from a radio?' Someone flying gliders may have different needs from someone flying helicopters. Since you are using a Futaba Conquest, the logical question is what does the Conquest not do that you currently need or can think of for the near future. After you determine what your requirements are, I would recommend 2 things:
1. Check what radios your fellow fliers are using. Stepping up from a Conquest to a newer radio introduces a lot of additional capability and having people around you that know how to program the newer radios is a big benefit.
2. Go to your local hobby shops and actually hold the radios you are interested in. Or ask your fellow fliers if you can hold their tx. Some are lighter or wider or whatever. Make sure you like the way the radio feels, the stick and switch positions, does the radio feel balanced for the way you hold it.
All the current major brands work very well. Sure there is the occasional issue which is typically blown way out of proportion by someone posting about a problem and all the 'experts' piling on and telling the owner they shouldn't have bought that radio, etc. In actuality, the number of successful flights vs the flights with true radio failures is staggering but to read the forums, you get the impression Radio XYZ has a high failure rate and no one should buy it.
I fly one of the major brands, have for years. Personally, I think is is a good solid radio with a solid rf link. But, that doesn't make my brand right for everyone. Local support when you are learning to program your new radio is very important. No sense in you reinventing the wheel using the programming capabilities of your new radio.
As far as the jump to 2.4G, don't worry about it. 2.4G is much more convenient (and robust) than 72mhz due to dramatically reduced interference exposure (fellow flier turning on your frequency, etc). I don't own any 72mhz gear anymore, haven't for several years.
Another thing to note (wait a second while I put my flame suit on) is the people that crashed a lot on 72mhz are still crashing a lot on 2.4G and still claiming radio failure. Funny how that works. 2.4G didn't magically fix their poor radio installations, poor airborne rx power setups, or poor piloting skills. You would think the radio manufacturers would have built systems that handled that.... ;-)
Woodie
As rmh said, the first question should be 'what do I need from a radio?' Someone flying gliders may have different needs from someone flying helicopters. Since you are using a Futaba Conquest, the logical question is what does the Conquest not do that you currently need or can think of for the near future. After you determine what your requirements are, I would recommend 2 things:
1. Check what radios your fellow fliers are using. Stepping up from a Conquest to a newer radio introduces a lot of additional capability and having people around you that know how to program the newer radios is a big benefit.
2. Go to your local hobby shops and actually hold the radios you are interested in. Or ask your fellow fliers if you can hold their tx. Some are lighter or wider or whatever. Make sure you like the way the radio feels, the stick and switch positions, does the radio feel balanced for the way you hold it.
All the current major brands work very well. Sure there is the occasional issue which is typically blown way out of proportion by someone posting about a problem and all the 'experts' piling on and telling the owner they shouldn't have bought that radio, etc. In actuality, the number of successful flights vs the flights with true radio failures is staggering but to read the forums, you get the impression Radio XYZ has a high failure rate and no one should buy it.
I fly one of the major brands, have for years. Personally, I think is is a good solid radio with a solid rf link. But, that doesn't make my brand right for everyone. Local support when you are learning to program your new radio is very important. No sense in you reinventing the wheel using the programming capabilities of your new radio.
As far as the jump to 2.4G, don't worry about it. 2.4G is much more convenient (and robust) than 72mhz due to dramatically reduced interference exposure (fellow flier turning on your frequency, etc). I don't own any 72mhz gear anymore, haven't for several years.
Another thing to note (wait a second while I put my flame suit on) is the people that crashed a lot on 72mhz are still crashing a lot on 2.4G and still claiming radio failure. Funny how that works. 2.4G didn't magically fix their poor radio installations, poor airborne rx power setups, or poor piloting skills. You would think the radio manufacturers would have built systems that handled that.... ;-)
Woodie
There are fliers who never crashed with 72 Mhz but are now crashing with 2.4.
The requirements are VERY different
Or the new equipment did not work as good as the old equipment.
10-30-2012, 04:12 PM
#53
RE: Battle of the Brands
I guess the real factor is simply familiarity with the old systems
It's hard to make a positive case for using them today.
PS I am a licensed ham operator and used those available frequencies for many years with excellent results
Time marches on -
It's hard to make a positive case for using them today.
PS I am a licensed ham operator and used those available frequencies for many years with excellent results
Time marches on -
12-01-2012, 10:30 AM
#54
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Aurora,
CO
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Battle of the Brands
I used 6 Meters for years too but a few years back, the band got very dirty in the Denver area. I had a near-catastrophe at the Cherry Creek RC area, but got the airplane down in one piece, taxied in and shut down...then I turned off the TX and all the servos went full-travel. That was when I went to 2.4 GHz.
Still...spread spectrum protects you against other RC transmitters, but it doesn't protect you against every signal. There are hundreds of thousands of Part 15 devices in any metro area, and that's a pretty intimidating noise floor.
NY0F
Still...spread spectrum protects you against other RC transmitters, but it doesn't protect you against every signal. There are hundreds of thousands of Part 15 devices in any metro area, and that's a pretty intimidating noise floor.
NY0F
12-03-2012, 07:45 AM
#56
My Feedback: (2)
RE: Battle of the Brands
I have resisted for a few days getting drawn into this discussion but have succumbed. Most of the replies are opinion so here is mine based on 60 years of flying R/C and 16 years (1969-83) producing hobby R/C radios.
Prior to 1983 there were approx. 8 US companies producing R/C radios. The two best circuit designs at that time were probably 4th and 5th in overall sales. This just shows that the best designs are not always the sales leaders.
Today’s 2.4GIG technology is the best the model flyer has ever had available. We knew by the 1970’s spread spectrum was the way to go but we couldn’t afford the hardware needed at that time.
When I started flying high dollar models about 8 years ago I took a long look at my radio choice. I was flying a 9Z at that time and had never had a glitch or crash using this radio but I was very concerned about someone turning on my frequency so I looked for the best 2.4GIG RF link I could find. About this time Weatronic came out with their Micro series receivers. I felt the Weatronic design was the best RF link so I purchased a Tx module and two 12 Channel Micro receivers. After flying the Weatronic for 3 years I feel I made a good choice from the technical stand point but I can not recommend others purchase Weatronic because of the difficulty of communicating with the Weatronic factory. Hopefully Weatronic will solve this problem.
Just one modelers opinion.
Prior to 1983 there were approx. 8 US companies producing R/C radios. The two best circuit designs at that time were probably 4th and 5th in overall sales. This just shows that the best designs are not always the sales leaders.
Today’s 2.4GIG technology is the best the model flyer has ever had available. We knew by the 1970’s spread spectrum was the way to go but we couldn’t afford the hardware needed at that time.
When I started flying high dollar models about 8 years ago I took a long look at my radio choice. I was flying a 9Z at that time and had never had a glitch or crash using this radio but I was very concerned about someone turning on my frequency so I looked for the best 2.4GIG RF link I could find. About this time Weatronic came out with their Micro series receivers. I felt the Weatronic design was the best RF link so I purchased a Tx module and two 12 Channel Micro receivers. After flying the Weatronic for 3 years I feel I made a good choice from the technical stand point but I can not recommend others purchase Weatronic because of the difficulty of communicating with the Weatronic factory. Hopefully Weatronic will solve this problem.
Just one modelers opinion.
12-03-2012, 11:13 AM
#57
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: , PA
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Battle of the Brands
ORIGINAL: Just_a_noob
What are your favorite Tx/Rx and component brands? What are the major difference between the big names like Futaba, JR, and the like? I have yet to conform to the 2.4Ghz revolution; my trusty 72Mhz 7 channel Futaba Conquest hasn't left my side since I got it and seems to be bullet proof (fingers crossed). Anyone else out there still rockin the old skool Tx's?
What are your favorite Tx/Rx and component brands? What are the major difference between the big names like Futaba, JR, and the like? I have yet to conform to the 2.4Ghz revolution; my trusty 72Mhz 7 channel Futaba Conquest hasn't left my side since I got it and seems to be bullet proof (fingers crossed). Anyone else out there still rockin the old skool Tx's?
12-03-2012, 01:12 PM
#58
RE: Battle of the Brands
ORIGINAL: sidgates
I have resisted for a few days getting drawn into this discussion but have succumbed. Most of the replies are opinion so here is mine based on 60 years of flying R/C and 16 years (1969-83) producing hobby R/C radios.
Prior to 1983 there were approx. 8 US companies producing R/C radios. The two best circuit designs at that time were probably 4th and 5th in overall sales. This just shows that the best designs are not always the sales leaders.
Today’s 2.4GIG technology is the best the model flyer has ever had available. We knew by the 1970’s spread spectrum was the way to go but we couldn’t afford the hardware needed at that time.
When I started flying high dollar models about 8 years ago I took a long look at my radio choice. I was flying a 9Z at that time and had never had a glitch or crash using this radio but I was very concerned about someone turning on my frequency so I looked for the best 2.4GIG RF link I could find. About this time Weatronic came out with their Micro series receivers. I felt the Weatronic design was the best RF link so I purchased a Tx module and two 12 Channel Micro receivers. After flying the Weatronic for 3 years I feel I made a good choice from the technical stand point but I can not recommend others purchase Weatronic because of the difficulty of communicating with the Weatronic factory. Hopefully Weatronic will solve this problem.
Just one modelers opinion.
I have resisted for a few days getting drawn into this discussion but have succumbed. Most of the replies are opinion so here is mine based on 60 years of flying R/C and 16 years (1969-83) producing hobby R/C radios.
Prior to 1983 there were approx. 8 US companies producing R/C radios. The two best circuit designs at that time were probably 4th and 5th in overall sales. This just shows that the best designs are not always the sales leaders.
Today’s 2.4GIG technology is the best the model flyer has ever had available. We knew by the 1970’s spread spectrum was the way to go but we couldn’t afford the hardware needed at that time.
When I started flying high dollar models about 8 years ago I took a long look at my radio choice. I was flying a 9Z at that time and had never had a glitch or crash using this radio but I was very concerned about someone turning on my frequency so I looked for the best 2.4GIG RF link I could find. About this time Weatronic came out with their Micro series receivers. I felt the Weatronic design was the best RF link so I purchased a Tx module and two 12 Channel Micro receivers. After flying the Weatronic for 3 years I feel I made a good choice from the technical stand point but I can not recommend others purchase Weatronic because of the difficulty of communicating with the Weatronic factory. Hopefully Weatronic will solve this problem.
Just one modelers opinion.
Today the really big sellers have the edge in getting latest chip technology and this stuff works 99.9999% of the time right out of the box - It has to .
Nothing hand wired- nothing tuned - etc.,
The really smart guys use latest stuf from toy/game/ miniature phone technology-
WouldI buy the highest price stuff anymore -
No way ! Why? - the effective life (keeping current) keeps getting shorter .
The hobby electronics market is one of extremely rapid change today.
PS I used your stuff and our old friend Greg C and I flew together here for years .
12-03-2012, 03:48 PM
#60
RE: Battle of the Brands
He was spot on
My choice in radio stuf is Spektrum- for I think good reason- They have adopted a plan which advances radio and feature technology which simply leaves the others behind
There are plenty of excellent systems on the market -which all work as advertised
BUT how many have the Bind n Fly- model match , AS3X features?
If cutting edge technology -which the electric powered market keeps presenting, is NOT your cup of tea - then plenty of other choices are available
If you think this approach is "just another choice "
guess again.
I see flyers at the fields here who fly other brands of 2.4 (and a very few still using 72/50 etc..)
most also have a Spektrum compatible setup and they fly these more often than the other types .
All this stuf works -if it is used correctly- The old horror stories have for those who really looked into them have been shown to be - without merit.
I saw some copter stuff today brand "?" which were auto stabilized - flew well and worked well out of the box.
To purchase a radio system which simply replicates the functions found on the old 72 - really does not interest me.
Maybe some older flyers will disagree - plenty of choices .
My choice in radio stuf is Spektrum- for I think good reason- They have adopted a plan which advances radio and feature technology which simply leaves the others behind
There are plenty of excellent systems on the market -which all work as advertised
BUT how many have the Bind n Fly- model match , AS3X features?
If cutting edge technology -which the electric powered market keeps presenting, is NOT your cup of tea - then plenty of other choices are available
If you think this approach is "just another choice "
guess again.
I see flyers at the fields here who fly other brands of 2.4 (and a very few still using 72/50 etc..)
most also have a Spektrum compatible setup and they fly these more often than the other types .
All this stuf works -if it is used correctly- The old horror stories have for those who really looked into them have been shown to be - without merit.
I saw some copter stuff today brand "?" which were auto stabilized - flew well and worked well out of the box.
To purchase a radio system which simply replicates the functions found on the old 72 - really does not interest me.
Maybe some older flyers will disagree - plenty of choices .
12-05-2012, 09:17 AM
#61
My Feedback: (2)
RE: Battle of the Brands
ORIGINAL: abelard
I used 6 Meters for years too but a few years back, the band got very dirty in the Denver area. I had a near-catastrophe at the Cherry Creek RC area, but got the airplane down in one piece, taxied in and shut down...then I turned off the TX and all the servos went full-travel. That was when I went to 2.4 GHz.
Still...spread spectrum protects you against other RC transmitters, but it doesn't protect you against every signal. There are hundreds of thousands of Part 15 devices in any metro area, and that's a pretty intimidating noise floor.
NY0F
I used 6 Meters for years too but a few years back, the band got very dirty in the Denver area. I had a near-catastrophe at the Cherry Creek RC area, but got the airplane down in one piece, taxied in and shut down...then I turned off the TX and all the servos went full-travel. That was when I went to 2.4 GHz.
Still...spread spectrum protects you against other RC transmitters, but it doesn't protect you against every signal. There are hundreds of thousands of Part 15 devices in any metro area, and that's a pretty intimidating noise floor.
NY0F
12-05-2012, 10:18 AM
#62
RE: Battle of the Brands
I shot down a friend - on 53.3 - gave him my plane -on the spot . ( Identical planes - I had built both!)
I wouldn't go back to discrete channels on a bet .
I wouldn't go back to discrete channels on a bet .
09-13-2013, 06:51 PM
#63
Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: La Crescenta,
CA
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i have had futaba radios since the gold series in the seventys never had a problem went to a large field in pasadena ca someone in the area turned on his radio and it was my channel after that went to 2.4ghz futaba radios again and never had aproblem.
09-15-2013, 01:45 PM
#66
My Feedback: (14)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Noblesville,
IN
Posts: 1,503
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I currently own and fly 6 different brands of 2.4 equipment. Within those brands, a couple have several different protocals of there 2.4 modulation. I also still fly 72mgz. I have had no issues or problems with any of them. They all work. I have flown 72 for many years and never had any problems with it either, still don't. I learned way back how to mount equipment and maintain batteries. I range check and test constantly, and stay out of trouble. There is no issue with staying with 72 except peer presure form your fellow flyers. Choose what you are comfortable with and what you can afford. Don't let hype drive your decision.
