cyoung450

My Feedback: (60)

Yes I had that happen with a throttle servo and it was stripped gears.....hope your plane is ok.

CY

randeanna

That was the first thing I checked when I got home. Thought maybe it was my fault because I just changed over to a pull pull using great planes stright 3.5" servo arm insted of the offset arm shipped with the kit. Thought maybe I used the wrong insert. could not find any evidence of stripped gears either. Sending it back anyway. I can accept pilot error but I hate mechanial fault especially when there is a $1500+ expenditure.

YSJunkie

Did anyone run into a huge weight problem with this plane? Mine is on the heavy side of 19 pounds fully fueled and ready to fly. Definately not the 16 pound plane advertised on the Aviation Models website. DA-50 is ok if your not into aerobatics, but not enough if you are. I doubt the plane will handle a larger engine for any lenghth of time considering the quality of the wood, the cheap chinese glue and the added weight of a larger engine. There is no way I could have made this plane lighter without weakening the structure. I used carbon gear, carbon tailwheel, lightweight wheels, 16 oz tank, carbon spinner and prop, Fromeco batteries and regs. Even after spending the extra money on all the lightweight gear I still have an overweight pig of an airplane on my hands. 16 pounds my a**

Super D

19 lbs is the norm, fly it with a broken-in DA 50. It doesnt fly heavy. Maybe at high altitude the DA 50 may not be enough.

greyhound man

My Feedback: (5)

My first one came in at 19 pounds with an Evolution 58 flew fantastic held together just fine for 150+ flights never had a loose joint or any stress cracking. Finally broke it in half when I did a waterfall too low. I put that plane to the stress test and it took it very well. My new yak with the same equipment is about 18 1/2 pounds with the same equipment and going strong.

YSJunkie

My field is exactly 6' above sea level, DA-50 is well broken in and runs strong. I think you just don't want to admit that Aviation Models cheated you as well as everybody else with the 16 pound claim. If you look at the website right now it still states 16 pounds, not approx. 16 pounds. I seriously doubt that anyone has one that weighs 16 pounds or even 17. The 16 pound claim is a marketing stategy and everyone needs to know that it's just that.

Super D

I understand your aggrevation, I like mine and do not care what it weighs, or feel I have been cheated. I've been with this thread since page 8 or so, I think your the 1st to gripe about the weight. Most complaints are about how tail-heavy it builds.

Have you flown yours yet???

If you have and dont like it, gimme a price for airframe only.

pfoot748

My Feedback: (22)

All of these heavy weights people are reporting have me a little concerned about building mine. I recently purchased the 30% that is on sale and must say it looks 10 times better in person and the quality/fit and finish seems very good. I just bought one due to the sale and I have been wanting one for a while. I am currently flying the 87 inch Extreme Flight Yak and love it and may switch everything over to the Toc this fall or winter. I think there is a pound or there about to be saved by getting rid of the very heavy wing and stab tubes, spinner, tailwheel when graphtech recieves there metric tubes. The stock landing gear is definitely no good but how many arfs have good stock landing gear? Except for Extreme Flight, of course. My E.F. is 16 lbs 12 oz with DA, KS tuned pipe, 4800 lith., 2400 lith., alum. spinner, and alum. main gear. and I know that can be lowered with a little more carbon but the pipe keeps me from removing more nose weight. I have no doubt that even at these high weights the planes fly fine but your power to weight ratio with a DA-50 really suffers. I wish I had a weight of the E.F. completely emtpy to compare with, I can't see where the xtra 2-3 pounds is coming from. Anyone out there able to find and fit theres with as much carbon as possible and get a decent weight?

Lafus Maximus

My Feedback: (48)

I have compared my AM yak to one of my friend's EF yaks, and you can see on the EF yak the extremes they went to to save weight. The wings are much lighter, but they are also much more fragile, not under flying stress, but he said he has accidentally cracked the balsa sheething on the leading edges of the wings by the root a few times just picking the wings up. They even cut lightening holes in the foam in the turtle deck. I seem to remember that the pipe tunnel was balsa instead of ply. The whole hatch is thin molded plastic and painted, the canopy is one piece with the hatch. The EF yak is an extremely well engineered and refined ARF, one that I think can only be matched by the new Airwild Extra 260 and Edge 540, which are supposed to come in at 14.75 lbs with a DA-50. Now, that being said, my AM 30% yak flies amazing, it weighs 18lbs but flies very light. The only time you notice the weight is pulling out of a hover, which is getting better and better as the motor breaks in. I also just got a new Vess prop for it, but didn't get to try it out yet, but that should be pretty awesome. The Extreme Flight 87" Yak created the market for the 87" yaks, it was the first and has yet to be duplicated in my opinion. And nothing against Aviation Models with this statement, or any other company that has produced an 87" yak after EF did, but it seems that the AM 30% yak was a little rushed to get onto the market due to the 87" yak craze started by the EF yak. You can tell that this plane was a little rushed just due to the weight. EF was not at all rushed when they designed and refined their 87" yak because there was no market for it yet until after they released theirs. I heard rumors of a high performance version of the AM 30% yak to be released in the future. They found ways to refine the plane and remove unnecessary weight, which can only be done with time, research, and testing. Look at the 1st generation BME Yak compared to the second generation, that is a perfect example. The plane is lighter now and built better. Xtraflyer flies one and it is awesome, but BME took the time to refine the plane and improve upon its faults. The 85" QQ yaks were being built on the tables that the EF yaks were supposed to be built on, literally, which is why there are no more 87" EF yaks, and the QQ yak features a lot of the weight saving methods found in the EF yak. Everyone jumped on the 87" yak bandwagon, not just AM. Lanier, Aerotech, Aeroworks, and they all came out heavy due to rushing them to the market. But none of them, with maybe the exception of the QQ, flies as well as the AM, no matter how heavy it is. If you have an AM yak, and you are hesitant about the weight, don't be, they fly awesome. That is my rant for the evening...

bobzilla

My Feedback: (63)

Amen..Lafus!!

Banche

kick ass post!!!!!!

bobzilla

My Feedback: (63)

I nominate Lafus to the KickAss Hall of Fame Poster. (If we don't have one..let's make one!)
bobz

BaldEagel

Just to add my two penny worth, one of the chaps on the QQ 85" Yak forum has an MVVS 45 in his and it weighs 15.5lb.

Mike

Touchdown

My Feedback: (1)

Well I don't know what steroids you got your yaks on but mine weighs 16.5 pounds dry. I have all the standard tubes, and gear with 4 cell nimh batteries.

xtraflyr

My Feedback: (11)

Maybe you have less gravity "Down Under"

Banche

I might have believed you if you said 17, what kind of scale and can you prove it?

Bald Eagel, have you ever flown a AM Yak?....lol

somenzini yak has a 1330 square inch wing where as the AM Yak has 1440, AM's Yak has two more inches on the somenzini and it is longer too........ bigger, heavier...duhh

BaldEagel

Ok Banche

110 sq ins more and approximatly 3lb heavier that equates to 2.3onz/sq in, it certainly is heavier your right, Now if you multiply the extra weight by the wing area, you get an aircraft that weighs 207lb, Now that is heavy.

And yes I have flown and owned an AM Yak.

Mike

Lafus Maximus

My Feedback: (48)

I was trying to find a way to explain that too baldeagle, and you did it for me. The difference in wing area between the two is negligible in terms of the weight difference, duhh... I hate when you try to belittle people's posts banche.

YSJunkie

No thank you Super D, but thanks for the offer. I'm going to strap a 3W 70 to it and fly it until it explodes. Shouldn't take long !

greyhound man

My Feedback: (5)

As long as it doesn't flutter to death from going too fast or if you don't aim for the ground it will probably survive quite a while, these yaks are built strong....and therefore heavier than some others.

YSJunkie

I agree, they are heavier.

azhar

My Feedback: (19)

Ok folks. I did a little bit of weighing of the airplane (barebone):

The airplane with everything except spinner, engine and elctronics : ~152 oz

Servoes (six count at 2.2oz each): 13.2 oz

DA50 all up (muffler, standoff, ignition): ~60oz

Batteries (3): ~ 14oz

spinner: 4 oz

Misc: ~16oz

Total: ~ 16.2 lbs.

Potential weight savings, beyond the spinner, is possible. CF tubes, CF gear, etc.


This looks promising. Did I miss anything?

NCIS

I've had a 30% yak 54 purple since december and have only opened the box once. never even took anything out. I can't find the extra cash to get it in the air. But I love the way it looks and what you guys are saying about it. I'll maybe buy the engine, radio, and servo's for my christmas present this year. When I bought it I didn't even belong to AMA or a club and now I fly well and am a member of both AMA and a Club in Janesville, Wi. I will have her up in the air next summer.
Gibbs

rcrick

My Feedback: (6)

Hey guys,

How close to the bends are landing gear mounting holes ? Is their 2 or 4 bolts that mount the gear to the fuse.


THANKS,

Rick

Super D

On mine a 1st generation I believe there is 4 bolts for the main gear.