F4u5
Posts: 1819
Joined: 1/19/2002 From: Apple Valley, MN, USA Status: offline
|
I can't believe they replaced the good old 605 with the 635 Karbonite. I knew when I saw them and read about them that they could not be as good as the old 605. Mainly a newer servo with less torque, but claimed stronger material....just didn;t make sense to me. I have argued the point with Hitec for 2 straight years at Toledo. They continue to say it is a better and stronger servo than the old 605. Then you read about all of these problems. And: Initially, the top of the servo gear shaft, where the servo arm attaches, was breaking off. They contributed that to supplying too short a screw for securing the control arm (8 mm). So, they went to a 10 mm, saying that it restored the strength to the shaft. I don;t know if that was or fixed the problem. Now, in the last RC Report, I read of more gears breaking. They cintributed this to people using blue loctite to secure the servo arm shaft screw, saying that it attacks and weakens the material, causing it to fail. VKerster, did you fit in to either of these catogories above? I am curious, as I agree it is a poor servoe, exspecially compared to the old 605 it replaced. I ran 605's for the last 12 years, in planes weighing from 20-50 pounds, and never had a problem with them. In fact, I have used Hitec exclusively for the last 12 years, and have never had one go bad or break in typical flight. I have supported them vigorusly based on my experience. Now, I have shyed away from the 635, and appears I will be doing so in the future. It is too bad they may have skimped on this servo, and it may cost them in the end. I am disappointed to hear about this on the new 635, as the 605 is no longer made. However, I'm, glad your plane survived. Thx for the wake up.
_____________________________
Where's my glue?.......I gotta build.
|