QQ or Toc1 yak (Full Version)

All Forums >> [RC Airplanes] >> 3D Flying!



Message

lowpass 202 -> QQ or Toc1 yak (12/10/2005 5:50 PM)

I am looking for a new model for my 3W 50 and it seems like a 30% Yak with generous wing area is the way to go.
I`ve been in touch with Aviation models and they are very nice to deal with and seem to have a good product.
But then there is the shipping from the US to far-away Norway, it might not come so cheap. So now I`m also considering the QQ Yak that I can probably get from Italy, that might be a little easier and cheaper..

So, any of you guys know if there is any signifficant difference in quality and handling between the two? I do mixed flying, some aerobatics, some 3D, all amateur [;)]

I must say i don`t care too much for the QQ colorscheme. The Aviation ones on the other hand are very nice, spcially the silver but that might be difficult to see at a distance. Anyone tried it?
We are "blessed" with a lot of grey sky where I live so I definatly need to concider it[8|]

So thats it, any thoughts will be greatly appretiated.

LP



Bob Laine -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/10/2005 6:08 PM)

Lowpass, Take a look at the AEROWORKS, website. They have a new YAK 54 that is set for delivery in January (next month).
It's is reall a nice color scheme. I'm getting one as soon as they are available. Good luck with your choice.



BRYAN01601 -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/10/2005 6:20 PM)

I have the silver yak no real problems in the sky seeing it but I usually fly in close to me. I like the scheme they did for Chief aircraft myself. It is the best Yak scheme I have seen to date.



BRYAN01601 -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/10/2005 6:22 PM)

Pictures



lowpass 202 -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/10/2005 6:31 PM)

Yoy are right about that, looks like a great value and extensive hardware. They allways find a way to screw you though, i`m sure it comes without the girl[:D]
But seriously, i`ll have to take a closer look at this one! Thanks!



krayzc-RCU -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/10/2005 6:33 PM)

on board



famousdave -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/10/2005 6:39 PM)

QQ Yak - no comparison. The TOC yak is an EF reject - not bad, but not great. The QQ Yak is a work of art and it flies like it.
As far as Aeroworks - ROLL THE DICE many of us have been absolutely burned by them and will never go back no matter what new stuff they come out with.


No offense to anyone considering AW, but I won't even put their products together for paying customers. Take that as you will.

DP




krayzc-RCU -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/11/2005 2:07 AM)

whats the link for the QQ yak?



GalenB -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/11/2005 3:15 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: desertpig
The TOC yak is an EF reject - not bad, but not great.


I have an EF Yak and my friend has the TOC1 (Aviation Models) 87" Yak 54 and I can assure you this plane is no EF reject. The KMP Yaks were well known the be EF Yaks, but not the TOC1 planes... Do you have any additional info to support this claim?

These planes are built completely differently and have little in common except that they are both Yak 54s... When you put them side by side the differences are very apparent. We did the maiden flight on the TOC1 today and it went very well. I think my EF will be lighter since it has CF tubes and composite gear (it should get its maiden flight next weekend), but the TOC1 Yak flew awesome!



STLPilot -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/11/2005 4:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BRYAN01601
I have the silver yak no real problems in the sky seeing it but I usually fly in close to me. I like the scheme they did for Chief aircraft myself. It is the best Yak skeme I have.


You mean the best trim scheme they sniped from Aerotech.

http://www.aerotech-rcmodels.com/Products/YakARF/yak.html



BRYAN01601 -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/11/2005 1:12 PM)

NO, I would say they are similar but definatly not an exact copy more of an improvement of thier scheme. Both are an offshoot of a fullscale yak that flies in Europe (i believe)

Desertpig. Have you seen both of these planes side by side? Very different from the EF yaks.

QQ or toc ? Both planes are of equal quality. I have seen both planes and I can say this

QQ yak is visably smaller than the Toc yak
qq yak is about 2-3 lbs lighter (also about 200+ sq in less wing area so it is a wash)
qq yak uses alot of foam in the fuse area (just a pain for switches etc)
Toc uses alot of laser cut light ply
covering on both planes is good (although some of the early toc schemes were butt ugly)
no hardware comes with qq yak (they offer a hardware kit in the 70+ dollar range)
no wingbags come with toc yak
the hardware that comes with the toc yak is good (although I recomend putting a carbon sleeve over the 4-40 rod)
toc comes with a polished aluminum spinner
both planes gear seems a little weak (qq uses a fiberglass gear, toc uses an aluminum gear)
My toc yak flies just awesome with no issues
My friends QQ yak flies awesome with no issues
QQ's yak is a few hunded dollars more
can't go wrong with either plane



lowpass 202 -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/11/2005 2:28 PM)

Thanks for a lot of good info, I think im still leaning towards the Toc, I like the advantage in wingsurface. Even if the QQ is slightly lighter it still has to carry my heavy 3W.
I allso like the looks of the Toc and beeing a visual sport that matters, the QQ just looks a bit "LEGO" to me[:-].
Obviously I have to concider prize in all this, you have to draw the line somewhere even if it hurts. Transport will in any case add at least $200 to the bill.
As far as the Aeroworks, I don`t think I want to take the chance of beeing a testbed for product nobody knows nothing about.

Thanks so far..



Wings-RCU -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/11/2005 2:42 PM)

Another option is the BME Yak. Almost identical to the TOC yak in size only about 1 lb lighter. It includes carbon fiber wing tube, stab tube, push rods, tail wheel, & built with carbon fiber wing spars. I don't like the ARF trim scheme, but you can get it in an ARC version.



STLPilot -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/11/2005 3:50 PM)

quote:

NO, I would say they are similar but definatly not an exact copy more of an improvement of thier scheme. Both are an offshoot of a fullscale yak that flies in Europe


Let's see it!

I know the guy that made the design for AeroTech very well. They ripped it off. Don't have a problem with someone borrowing a trim scheme from another manufacturer as it happens a lot. But credit due is credit due. No reason to sugar coat it.



BRYAN01601 -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/11/2005 4:36 PM)

Dion,

do you have anything positive to contribute to this forum as it pertains to the original question?

I do not think the original poster wants to see this turn into a he said she said flamming of others products.

Aerotech would be another I would consider good quality as well.



STLPilot -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/11/2005 4:45 PM)

Since when does discussion have to be only positive.

I positively think that he should buy the QQ, AW or AeroTech model since they all have original trim schemes.

Good enough? [:D]

BTW - Where's that European Yak?



krayzc-RCU -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/11/2005 4:54 PM)

STLPilot

whats the link for the QQ yak?

tks



STLPilot -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/11/2005 4:55 PM)

www.somenzini.com

We no longer carry it. It's a good one for sure, but there are a bunch of 54's popping up these days.



BRYAN01601 -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/11/2005 4:57 PM)

Keep in Mind STLPilot in direct competition with Aviation Models( formerly Toc) They both produce profile ARFs.

I will keep all other thoughts to myself as to keep this on topic and help the original poster decide between two models. I do not think you can go wrong with any of the proven ARF's out there QQ, Aerotech, Aviation/Toc, Aeroworks is not out yet so I will reserve judgment until it is actually available. My comparisons between the QQ and TOC/Aviation models are from real hands on experience w/o prejudice.



krayzc-RCU -> RE: QQ or Toc1 yak (12/11/2005 11:39 PM)

tks



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




SITE MAP!   : :   FORUM RULES

© 2001 - 2007 24-7 RC, LLC, all rights reserved.
0.46875