Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > Profile and Fun Flying Planes
Reload this Page >

67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

Notices
Profile and Fun Flying Planes If you're a profile fan or into fun flyers than this is the forum to discuss those topics.

67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

Old 12-17-2007, 05:21 PM
  #51  
MRMcFarlandM
Senior Member
 
MRMcFarlandM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kansas City, MO,
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

As long as everyone is venting. Thought I might well stir things up some more. Why are they selling the fusion and the Y.S. 1.10s as a
package when the new 1.10s will rip the front end right off the plane?( you don't dare idle it down for more than a few seconds) The suggestion is to fill the front end of a new arf with foam to
try and stick all the pieces back together and add enough mass so it will stay together for a few flights.

Note: Yes the covering is falling off of it also.
Old 12-17-2007, 07:25 PM
  #52  
CopperheadAV
Senior Member
 
CopperheadAV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Zhong Shan,Guang Dong, CHINA
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak


ORIGINAL: MRMcFarlandM

As long as everyone is venting. Thought I might well stir things up some more. Why are they selling the fusion and the Y.S. 1.10s as a
package when the new 1.10s will rip the front end right off the plane?( you don't dare idle it down for more than a few seconds) The suggestion is to fill the front end of a new arf with foam to
try and stick all the pieces back together and add enough mass so it will stay together for a few flights.

Note: Yes the covering is falling off of it also.
We need to use some common sense when assembling an ARF. I here things like what’s pro-bro power?? What’s the max engine I can put on this plane?? There is a touch point RC with engine selection:

Minimum engine size – Plane will fly marginally.

Maximum engine size – Huge 3D power, but do some mods to hold it all together.

In the end, we use the forums to answer these questions or the manual would look like the Webster’s unabridged dictionary. Do research and ask questions before you buy. If you want to fly 3D, please understand stuff is gonna fail. Its part of 3D, press it to the Max!!

As far as stirring the pot, feel free.

Merry Christmas to you and yours!! Oh, drink some eggnog.

Cheers
Old 12-17-2007, 08:27 PM
  #53  
AFSalmon
My Feedback: (3)
 
AFSalmon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beavercreek, OH,
Posts: 4,319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

Actually we have 100s of Fusions flying with YS 110s and Saito 125s. Even here locally we have many Fusions flying with big engines up front. My personal one has a YS 110 and flew hard for two plus years before much needed maintenance was required. Between my son, myself, and others I let fly my Fusion I bet it has 20 -30 gallons of fuel through it and it is still flying today....well not today as it is 23 degrees and snowing! The gorilla glue nose job trick was a tip provided by a customer as a way to make these type repairs when needed. It is a tip that has been provided for other models as well however I have never done it with mine personally. Still I think it is a good repair technique to pass on and I know if I ever need a quick fix like this I'll give it a try.
Old 12-17-2007, 11:55 PM
  #54  
AKFireMedic
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
 
AKFireMedic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Anchorage, AK
Posts: 808
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

Dave is of course right. My avatar is the Alaska state flag. I fly it with pride as there are only a few 3d pilots here and even fewer Pro Bros...but there are a few of us. Cool link BTW. I had no idea where the flag came from...or if I did, I forgot it all!
Old 12-18-2007, 12:36 PM
  #55  
remcl1
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
remcl1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lakeland, FL
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak


ORIGINAL: CopperheadAV


ORIGINAL: MRMcFarlandM

As long as everyone is venting. Thought I might well stir things up some more. Why are they selling the fusion and the Y.S. 1.10s as a
package when the new 1.10s will rip the front end right off the plane?( you don't dare idle it down for more than a few seconds) The suggestion is to fill the front end of a new arf with foam to
try and stick all the pieces back together and add enough mass so it will stay together for a few flights.

Note: Yes the covering is falling off of it also.
We need to use some common sense when assembling an ARF. I here things like what’s pro-bro power?? What’s the max engine I can put on this plane?? There is a touch point RC with engine selection:

Minimum engine size – Plane will fly marginally.

Maximum engine size – Huge 3D power, but do some mods to hold it all together.

In the end, we use the forums to answer these questions or the manual would look like the Webster’s unabridged dictionary. Do research and ask questions before you buy. If you want to fly 3D, please understand stuff is gonna fail. Its part of 3D, press it to the Max!!

As far as stirring the pot, feel free.

Merry Christmas to you and yours!! Oh, drink some eggnog.

Cheers


I am one that does not agree with Pro-Bro power. I do not think you need an abundance of power for 3D. I would much rather have a plane with marginal 3D power that has a light wing loading than one that has an over abundance of power. For example on my P-Yak (Primo made to look like a yak) I have a saito 72. It is more than enough power for 3d. The Pro-Bro power crowd will go the saito 82 or even a 91. When you have too much power it is harder to regulate the throttle and supply smaller amounts of correction. The saying that you can always just throttle back is a myth. A few clicks of the throttle with a large engine swinging a large prop can be too much correction. A 1-1/2 to 2 (at the most) thrust to weight ratio is all that is needed. A heavier engine may just increase that wing loading enough to cause wing rock. Keep it light keep it stable. In my not so humble opinion.

I am not making any statements about the fusion and the 110. My comment is just a general one about many Bro's idea of Pro-Bro power.


Old 12-18-2007, 02:22 PM
  #56  
Zman39
My Feedback: (6)
 
Zman39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Central, FL
Posts: 582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak



[/quote]





I am not making any statements about the fusion and the 110. My comment is just a general one about many Bro's idea of Pro-Bro power.



[/quote]


Makes two of us, I have been pm'd out on this. I hope everyone has some super hoildays and try to get a flight in or two. I know I will!!!!
Old 12-18-2007, 05:16 PM
  #57  
MRMcFarlandM
Senior Member
 
MRMcFarlandM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kansas City, MO,
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

Hi Guys,
Thanks for the response. It still really didn't answer the question of why the ARF and the 1.10S were sold as a package deal for a while without any comment that the aircraft may require some mods with that engine. I feel it is unfortunate because I feel that it most surely make some folks hesitant about buying from OMP in the future.

Mike is the plane you flew for several years a Kit or an ARF .
Old 12-18-2007, 05:55 PM
  #58  
CopperheadAV
Senior Member
 
CopperheadAV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Zhong Shan,Guang Dong, CHINA
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak


ORIGINAL: MRMcFarlandM

Hi Guys,
Thanks for the response. It still really didn't answer the question of why the ARF and the 1.10S were sold as a package deal for a while without any comment that the aircraft may require some mods with that engine. I feel it is unfortunate because I feel that it most surely make some folks hesitant about buying from OMP in the future.

Mike is the plane you flew for several years a Kit or an ARF .

If your are referring to the post in the OMP forum, that was a repair not OMP telling some to reinforce their plane with that motor. I think you miss read the post; you may want to go back and read it again.


Cheers,
Old 12-18-2007, 07:10 PM
  #59  
AFSalmon
My Feedback: (3)
 
AFSalmon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beavercreek, OH,
Posts: 4,319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

We sell the Fusion and YS 110 combo all the time (when the engines are in stock) and yes we have both kits AND ARFs flying here locally with YS 110s. Read my post again and you'll see I clearly say this tip was provided by another customer as a repair technique when fixing a broken airplane.......not a building technique. This tip is not unique to the Fusion and can and has been done on any profile. Hope this clears things up.
Old 12-18-2007, 08:53 PM
  #60  
Gringo Flyer
Senior Member
My Feedback: (18)
 
Gringo Flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Formosa, ARGENTINA
Posts: 2,370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak


ORIGINAL: remcl1


ORIGINAL: CopperheadAV


ORIGINAL: MRMcFarlandM

As long as everyone is venting. Thought I might well stir things up some more. Why are they selling the fusion and the Y.S. 1.10s as a
package when the new 1.10s will rip the front end right off the plane?( you don't dare idle it down for more than a few seconds) The suggestion is to fill the front end of a new arf with foam to
try and stick all the pieces back together and add enough mass so it will stay together for a few flights.

Note: Yes the covering is falling off of it also.
We need to use some common sense when assembling an ARF. I here things like what’s pro-bro power?? What’s the max engine I can put on this plane?? There is a touch point RC with engine selection:

Minimum engine size – Plane will fly marginally.

Maximum engine size – Huge 3D power, but do some mods to hold it all together.

In the end, we use the forums to answer these questions or the manual would look like the Webster’s unabridged dictionary. Do research and ask questions before you buy. If you want to fly 3D, please understand stuff is gonna fail. Its part of 3D, press it to the Max!!

As far as stirring the pot, feel free.

Merry Christmas to you and yours!! Oh, drink some eggnog.

Cheers


I am one that does not agree with Pro-Bro power. I do not think you need an abundance of power for 3D. I would much rather have a plane with marginal 3D power that has a light wing loading than one that has an over abundance of power. For example on my P-Yak (Primo made to look like a yak) I have a saito 72. It is more than enough power for 3d. The Pro-Bro power crowd will go the saito 82 or even a 91. When you have too much power it is harder to regulate the throttle and supply smaller amounts of correction. The saying that you can always just throttle back is a myth. A few clicks of the throttle with a large engine swinging a large prop can be too much correction. A 1-1/2 to 2 (at the most) thrust to weight ratio is all that is needed. A heavier engine may just increase that wing loading enough to cause wing rock. Keep it light keep it stable. In my not so humble opinion.

I am not making any statements about the fusion and the 110. My comment is just a general one about many Bro's idea of Pro-Bro power.



I am glad some other guys think this way. I like super power on my 3D models as much as the next guy but to me it gets to a point where more and more power becomes silly. Just because a bigger engine will fit doesnt mean its better and just because you could buy 30% nitro doesnt mean you are not a serious 3Der if you choose to fly on 5%-15% nitro. I think its a macho thing... like those guys who need a hummer to buy groceries.
Old 12-18-2007, 08:55 PM
  #61  
Gringo Flyer
Senior Member
My Feedback: (18)
 
Gringo Flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Formosa, ARGENTINA
Posts: 2,370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak


ORIGINAL: AFSalmon

I got a chance to try a Vess 17-6 on my OS 120 AX down at the NashBro event courtesy of Jerry Smith and was amazed at how much better performance that light wood prop gave me over the APC 17-6. Lighter wood props, of good design of course, are definately better in performance than heavier counterparts. I know I'm sold.
Where did you get your hands on a vess prop that small? All the vess props I have found are for gassers.
Old 12-18-2007, 09:24 PM
  #62  
Zman39
My Feedback: (6)
 
Zman39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Central, FL
Posts: 582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

ORIGINAL: Gringo Flyer


ORIGINAL: remcl1


ORIGINAL: CopperheadAV


ORIGINAL: MRMcFarlandM

As long as everyone is venting. Thought I might well stir things up some more. Why are they selling the fusion and the Y.S. 1.10s as a
package when the new 1.10s will rip the front end right off the plane?( you don't dare idle it down for more than a few seconds) The suggestion is to fill the front end of a new arf with foam to
try and stick all the pieces back together and add enough mass so it will stay together for a few flights.

Note: Yes the covering is falling off of it also.
We need to use some common sense when assembling an ARF. I here things like what’s pro-bro power?? What’s the max engine I can put on this plane?? There is a touch point RC with engine selection:

Minimum engine size – Plane will fly marginally.

Maximum engine size – Huge 3D power, but do some mods to hold it all together.

In the end, we use the forums to answer these questions or the manual would look like the Webster’s unabridged dictionary. Do research and ask questions before you buy. If you want to fly 3D, please understand stuff is gonna fail. Its part of 3D, press it to the Max!!

As far as stirring the pot, feel free.

Merry Christmas to you and yours!! Oh, drink some eggnog.

Cheers


I am one that does not agree with Pro-Bro power. I do not think you need an abundance of power for 3D. I would much rather have a plane with marginal 3D power that has a light wing loading than one that has an over abundance of power. For example on my P-Yak (Primo made to look like a yak) I have a saito 72. It is more than enough power for 3d. The Pro-Bro power crowd will go the saito 82 or even a 91. When you have too much power it is harder to regulate the throttle and supply smaller amounts of correction. The saying that you can always just throttle back is a myth. A few clicks of the throttle with a large engine swinging a large prop can be too much correction. A 1-1/2 to 2 (at the most) thrust to weight ratio is all that is needed. A heavier engine may just increase that wing loading enough to cause wing rock. Keep it light keep it stable. In my not so humble opinion.

I am not making any statements about the fusion and the 110. My comment is just a general one about many Bro's idea of Pro-Bro power.



I am glad some other guys think this way. I like super power on my 3D models as much as the next guy but to me it gets to a point where more and more power becomes silly. Just because a bigger engine will fit doesnt mean its better and just because you could buy 30% nitro doesnt mean you are not a serious 3Der if you choose to fly on 5%-15% nitro. I think its a macho thing... like those guys who need a hummer to buy groceries.


One of best moves I made was when I changed out my burrito engine from a Saito.72 to a Saito.62. It is bar far the plane I have the most precise control over in a hover. It won't torque roll like my primo and P-yak but does okay but it is a classic case of a little less power gave me much more control. the .62 is a sweetheart as well and has the grunt to pull the burrito around with authority.If you start getting into 4+ # profiles, the saito .72 is the engine to have. I am sure I will have one by time EF chinn yak hits my door I still have my YS's from the naked fusions I donated away and they run well to but you have to know or know someone to dial them in. Once dialed in, they are beast of engines but the saitos are recommended for non-tuners IMO and provide plenty of 3d power.


Z
Old 12-19-2007, 07:45 AM
  #63  
AFSalmon
My Feedback: (3)
 
AFSalmon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beavercreek, OH,
Posts: 4,319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

I got the Vess prop from Jerry Smith who joined us at the NashBro event. Vess dos make the smaller props although they are not on his website last I looked. Just give a call or shoot an email his way.
Old 12-19-2007, 02:25 PM
  #64  
remcl1
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
remcl1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lakeland, FL
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak


ORIGINAL: AFSalmon

Dave, If you plan to run a 4 stroke then make sure your props are balanced and the engine is tuned properly. Unlike 2s engines the 4s variety are not forgiving for bad tuning or props. They will vibrate excessively. Like all ARFs it is a good idea to go over the entire airframe to look for areas that might need a little extra attention. This is especially true when using very strong engines. I would recommend checking the engine area, wing tube sockets, wing attachment locations, and where you glue the tail on. Be sure all areas are properly glued and secured. Some extra CA around the wing tube sockets to ribs and more importantly the wing tube sockets to shear webbing is a good tip. Injecting the engine mount area with Gorilla glue is up to you but would be a nice tip as well. Vibration kills an airframe.....especially a light high performance airframe.

ORIGINAL: AFSalmon

We sell the Fusion and YS 110 combo all the time (when the engines are in stock) and yes we have both kits AND ARFs flying here locally with YS 110s. Read my post again and you'll see I clearly say this tip was provided by another customer as a repair technique when fixing a broken airplane.......not a building technique. This tip is not unique to the Fusion and can and has been done on any profile. Hope this clears things up.
Sounds like you are recommending this tip as a building technique. You don't say it is a must, but you do say it would be a nice tip and Dave is talking about a new ARf. Now I am confused.
Old 12-19-2007, 02:44 PM
  #65  
CopperheadAV
Senior Member
 
CopperheadAV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Zhong Shan,Guang Dong, CHINA
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak


ORIGINAL: remcl1


ORIGINAL: AFSalmon

Dave, If you plan to run a 4 stroke then make sure your props are balanced and the engine is tuned properly. Unlike 2s engines the 4s variety are not forgiving for bad tuning or props. They will vibrate excessively. Like all ARFs it is a good idea to go over the entire airframe to look for areas that might need a little extra attention. This is especially true when using very strong engines. I would recommend checking the engine area, wing tube sockets, wing attachment locations, and where you glue the tail on. Be sure all areas are properly glued and secured. Some extra CA around the wing tube sockets to ribs and more importantly the wing tube sockets to shear webbing is a good tip. Injecting the engine mount area with Gorilla glue is up to you but would be a nice tip as well. Vibration kills an airframe.....especially a light high performance airframe.

ORIGINAL: AFSalmon

We sell the Fusion and YS 110 combo all the time (when the engines are in stock) and yes we have both kits AND ARFs flying here locally with YS 110s. Read my post again and you'll see I clearly say this tip was provided by another customer as a repair technique when fixing a broken airplane.......not a building technique. This tip is not unique to the Fusion and can and has been done on any profile. Hope this clears things up.
Sounds like you are recommending this tip as a building technique. You don't say it is a must, but you do say it would be a nice tip and Dave is talking about a new ARf. Now I am confused.
I’m not sure where you’re trying to take this? Well that’s not true, I do know. Let me be clear, there is no weakness in the airframe that necessitates having to hit it with gorilla glue. The are no hidden weakness in the Fusion that will be ferreted out in this thread. Will Using a Poly in an airframe make it stronger, sure. You know that we use poly on the Arfs we build at my factory and I’m the only one I know of that dose this. This doesn’t make every one else’s ARF’s a problem.

Cheers,

Tim
Old 12-19-2007, 06:15 PM
  #66  
remcl1
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
remcl1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lakeland, FL
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

ORIGINAL: CopperheadAV


ORIGINAL: remcl1


ORIGINAL: AFSalmon

Dave, If you plan to run a 4 stroke then make sure your props are balanced and the engine is tuned properly. Unlike 2s engines the 4s variety are not forgiving for bad tuning or props. They will vibrate excessively. Like all ARFs it is a good idea to go over the entire airframe to look for areas that might need a little extra attention. This is especially true when using very strong engines. I would recommend checking the engine area, wing tube sockets, wing attachment locations, and where you glue the tail on. Be sure all areas are properly glued and secured. Some extra CA around the wing tube sockets to ribs and more importantly the wing tube sockets to shear webbing is a good tip. Injecting the engine mount area with Gorilla glue is up to you but would be a nice tip as well. Vibration kills an airframe.....especially a light high performance airframe.

ORIGINAL: AFSalmon

We sell the Fusion and YS 110 combo all the time (when the engines are in stock) and yes we have both kits AND ARFs flying here locally with YS 110s. Read my post again and you'll see I clearly say this tip was provided by another customer as a repair technique when fixing a broken airplane.......not a building technique. This tip is not unique to the Fusion and can and has been done on any profile. Hope this clears things up.
Sounds like you are recommending this tip as a building technique. You don't say it is a must, but you do say it would be a nice tip and Dave is talking about a new ARf. Now I am confused.
I’m not sure where you’re trying to take this? Well that’s not true, I do know. Let me be clear, there is no weakness in the airframe that necessitates having to hit it with gorilla glue. The are no hidden weakness in the Fusion that will be ferreted out in this thread. Will Using a Poly in an airframe make it stronger, sure. You know that we use poly on the Arfs we build at my factory and I’m the only one I know of that dose this. This doesn’t make every one else’s ARF’s a problem.

Cheers,

Tim

You took what I asked wrong. I am not trying to say that the fusion has any defects or weaknesses. Mike said in one post that it would be a nice tip to add gorilla glue to a new arf and then came back and said he only said it applied to repairs. It just confused me.

I personally do not see any reason why the 110 and the fusion would not be an ideal combo. Actually if you are a YS guy it is your only option.
Old 12-19-2007, 07:11 PM
  #67  
Zman39
My Feedback: (6)
 
Zman39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Central, FL
Posts: 582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

ORIGINAL: remcl1

ORIGINAL: CopperheadAV


ORIGINAL: remcl1


ORIGINAL: AFSalmon

Dave, If you plan to run a 4 stroke then make sure your props are balanced and the engine is tuned properly. Unlike 2s engines the 4s variety are not forgiving for bad tuning or props. They will vibrate excessively. Like all ARFs it is a good idea to go over the entire airframe to look for areas that might need a little extra attention. This is especially true when using very strong engines. I would recommend checking the engine area, wing tube sockets, wing attachment locations, and where you glue the tail on. Be sure all areas are properly glued and secured. Some extra CA around the wing tube sockets to ribs and more importantly the wing tube sockets to shear webbing is a good tip. Injecting the engine mount area with Gorilla glue is up to you but would be a nice tip as well. Vibration kills an airframe.....especially a light high performance airframe.

ORIGINAL: AFSalmon

We sell the Fusion and YS 110 combo all the time (when the engines are in stock) and yes we have both kits AND ARFs flying here locally with YS 110s. Read my post again and you'll see I clearly say this tip was provided by another customer as a repair technique when fixing a broken airplane.......not a building technique. This tip is not unique to the Fusion and can and has been done on any profile. Hope this clears things up.
Sounds like you are recommending this tip as a building technique. You don't say it is a must, but you do say it would be a nice tip and Dave is talking about a new ARf. Now I am confused.
I’m not sure where you’re trying to take this? Well that’s not true, I do know. Let me be clear, there is no weakness in the airframe that necessitates having to hit it with gorilla glue. The are no hidden weakness in the Fusion that will be ferreted out in this thread. Will Using a Poly in an airframe make it stronger, sure. You know that we use poly on the Arfs we build at my factory and I’m the only one I know of that dose this. This doesn’t make every one else’s ARF’s a problem.

Cheers,

Tim

You took what I asked wrong. I am not trying to say that the fusion has any defects or weaknesses. Mike said in one post that it would be a nice tip to add gorilla glue to a new arf and then came back and said he only said it applied to repairs. It just confused me.

I personally do not see any reason why the 110 and the fusion would not be an ideal combo. Actually if you are a YS guy it is your only option.

And there lies the problem. Any question in reference to a fusion, other than bowing down and kissing its butt, is taken in a defensive way. I was poisened penned pm'd by one of OMP's owners to the max earlier this week and still never received an apology even though I clearly took the high road on it the whole time. No matter, an apology to me wouldn't have meant near as much to me as it would have to future potential OMP customers so that was his business choice, not mine. Bob, I suggest we just leave this whole fusion thing alone and just be happy you were not suckereed into buying one and I can just go on with life knowing I got screwed but there is a teenager out there with a half naked fusion that is happy because at least he got a plane for free.

Z
Old 12-19-2007, 08:11 PM
  #68  
remcl1
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
remcl1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lakeland, FL
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

I really don't have a fusion thing.

To me it is a non issue. I asked a simple question and gave a plain and simple opinion that "that was not right". Mike blasted me PM's accusing me of slamming him called me classless, unprofessional and few things I can not repeat. He said that my question should have gone off line: making the purpose of this forum moot. When confronted with his own words he went back and edited them out. This really disappointed and bothered me because I always considered Mike to be one of the good guys that we could trust. With the way he tried to strong arm me with PMs, change posts, and say he did not say something when it was right there in the same thread, just takes the wind right out me. I stuck around a little hoping for a glimmer of hope or at least a token apology for the most unprofessional PM's.

Let me make one thing clear. My opinion of OMP at the moment has nothing what so ever to do with the fusion.

I bought my first 3D profile kit from Mike in person at the Wheaton ILL "Da big one" show in 2001. This is not the same Mike that I met that day.
Old 12-19-2007, 09:18 PM
  #69  
CopperheadAV
Senior Member
 
CopperheadAV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Zhong Shan,Guang Dong, CHINA
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

OK,

“And there lies the problem†Well that says a lot. You’re pissed off because you bought an AFR and it was china coat though we didn’t advertise it as UltraKote. Then you PM'ed mike, offended him, and then didn’t get the response you wanted and posted the PM on the forum. That’s cheesy!! If you don’t like what Mike said to you, handle it like a man and PM him back or PM me. Let me explain the etiquette to you: PM- Mean’s Private message. Not post it on the forum cuz you didn’t like what it said. You want to bust off at the mouth to hurt our sales and not resolve a problem, you may have at it sir! Thats fine!! Let’s man up. If you have a problem and and cant get it resolved call me. (717) 671-1658 and I will fix it. If you don’t man up OR shut up!!
Old 12-20-2007, 05:04 AM
  #70  
Zman39
My Feedback: (6)
 
Zman39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Central, FL
Posts: 582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

Hey Tim,

Did you read ANY of the this thread before coming into it????? I NEVER pm'd Mike!!!! I never busted off at him!! He chose to pm me with his poison pen hiding behind his typewriter. And my response to his ugly nasty pm; Wow, nice Mike". He accussed me of not being a man because I didnt take up the covering issue "offline". I did, back in August with him and John, offered him the emails proving it, never asked for him and went ranting on about something else. I never went public back then, left it at the pm or email stage. Then in this forum, again didnt "attack" Mike, I gave my 2 cents on its covering in a public forum. Then Mike says that is why they are discounting the fusions now because :"they didnt come with the coating they should have" and think of it as a recovering discount. Whether it was suppose to come with it or not, I have multiple emails from John and Mike clearly stating that they got screwed by China on covering. His words, not mine. Now go back and read my post. I nicely asked if the loyal OMP customers that bought fusions when coming out could receive the same discount. The question was never answered, just side stepped around. Not even a pm to me saying no. A yes or no would have been an answer. Next thing I know, whammo, one nasty pm after another and not just to me. And to be clear, I pm'd him back giving him ample time to retract some of the nasty things said to me in pm, all I got was more nasty pm's. So yep, I made it public, people might want to know who they are dealing with. I was hoping and gave it plenty of time to not. PM's may be for private but they are also not to disrespect and be ugly to someone. An answer to my only question in this thread, pm or public, would probably have stopped it there.

So Tim, who is in the wrong here. Please ask Mike to send you my pm's, you will clearly find they are only replies to his and mine don't contain the disrespect his does.

Z
Old 12-20-2007, 07:37 AM
  #71  
AFSalmon
My Feedback: (3)
 
AFSalmon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beavercreek, OH,
Posts: 4,319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

Mr McClarty, on your post above I think if you reread what I said, and what you even quoted me at posting you can clearly see that I say "not a building technique". I think your agenda here is clear. Mr. Zellar, I have asked you repeatedly to call or contact me offline so we can discuss your issues yet you refuse. Instead you insist on posting "private messages" and pursuing your personal agenda of bashing me and OMP on this forum. I think your agenda is clear as well and you've demonstrated clearly the quality person you are.

For those who are honestly trying to gain "useful" information from this thread I apologize for the unsolicited drama. I do not intend to entertain Mr Mclarty or Mr Zellar in a personal battle on this forum. Perhaps they will see the light and learn to use the phone.
Old 12-20-2007, 07:58 AM
  #72  
Zman39
My Feedback: (6)
 
Zman39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Central, FL
Posts: 582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

ORIGINAL: AFSalmon

Mr McClarty, on your post above I think if you reread what I said, and what you even quoted me at posting you can clearly see that I say "not a building technique". I think your agenda here is clear. Mr. Zellar, I have asked you repeatedly to call or contact me offline so we can discuss your issues yet you refuse. Instead you insist on posting "private messages" and pursuing your personal agenda of bashing me and OMP on this forum. I think your agenda is clear as well and you've demonstrated clearly the quality person you are.

For those who are honestly trying to gain "useful" information from this thread I apologize for the unsolicited drama. I do not intend to entertain Mr Mclarty or Mr Zellar in a personal battle on this forum. Perhaps they will see the light and learn to use the phone.

Mike,

What world are you living in. YOU ARE THE ONE PM'ing in a rude manner and started the pm's, not me and yet you clearly state above it is me. Please post here where I sent you a nasty pm, not going to find it. You may find one defending myself against nasty accusations you made toward me, that is my right. YOU STARTED the ugly stuff sir, not me. This is a public forum, I am allowed to ask questions or give an opinion about a product, whether yours or someone else's. If asking you if us that bought the fusion when it came out could get a recovering fee is bashing you as you refer to, then I would hate to think what you would call the pm you sent to me if it was reversed and I had used the words you used. As far as calling you? How many times would you like me to do this Mike. I did this back in August, did it by email and again the only response was "we got screwed on covering as well". I never got mean or bashing and said okey dokey and LEFT IT IN PRIVATE. I DID do what you are claiming I have not done and have proof and offered it. Never asked for that either. So what is calling you again going to accomplish? I asked a civil question once the discounts were announced and I guess this is bashing you Mike. If you want this thread to stay "useful", then knock off the personal BS. If you choose to take it personal, whether here or in a pm, then plan for me to respond back. Oh and read this post once again, you wont see any hidden jabs like you and Tim like taking behind your keyboards. So I ask, who here is violating the RCU rules of posting personal attacks? I guess you would have got suspended or something some time ago if you were not a sponsor of this forum.

Best Regards,

Mike Z
Old 12-20-2007, 09:33 AM
  #73  
remcl1
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
 
remcl1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lakeland, FL
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak


ORIGINAL: AFSalmon

Mr McClarty, on your post above I think if you reread what I said, and what you even quoted me at posting you can clearly see that I say "not a building technique". I think your agenda here is clear. Mr. Zellar, I have asked you repeatedly to call or contact me offline so we can discuss your issues yet you refuse. Instead you insist on posting "private messages" and pursuing your personal agenda of bashing me and OMP on this forum. I think your agenda is clear as well and you've demonstrated clearly the quality person you are.

For those who are honestly trying to gain "useful" information from this thread I apologize for the unsolicited drama. I do not intend to entertain Mr Mclarty or Mr Zellar in a personal battle on this forum. Perhaps they will see the light and learn to use the phone.

Mr. Pilkenton, I have no agenda other than defending myself to your baseless offenses, although your agenda is clear. I have told you many times that comments like mine are in line with RCU rules and are not to be taken off-line. That would be against the purpose of this forum. Where did I ever bash you personally. I have several PM where you personally attack me. I never and wont go down that road. I asked you a business question and said that offering a discount to new customers and not existing ones was wrong. A wrong business decision: not a wrong personal decision. You had no right to attack me personally and that is against RCU rules. The way you use PM is not the way RCU intends them to be use.

Mr. Pilkenton, I went and reread the above quote as you asked. I do not see anywhere in there where you say "not a building technique". You do say it in the next quote when you are asked about why you sell an ARF and an engine combo where you have to beef up the nose with glue. your response was that you did not offer that as a building technique. I quoted both side by side to illustrate where you clearly did offer it as an optional building technique to Dave. I did this to illustrate that you have a problem with the truth when you are confronted with your own words. I would not feel like I needed to do this if you did not keep personally attacking me. Again you personally attack me in your last post.

Let me give you an example of another situation that is not so close to you. I have been a customer of Dish network for 10years. I wanted to upgrade to HD and a DVR. I was mailed a pamphlet outlining a free up grade to DVR and HD. I called them and said I would like this free upgrade. They said that was only available to new customers and I would have to pay $400.00 for the equipment. I did not think it was right to charge me $400.00 when I have been a paying customer for 10 years and give to a new customer for free. They explained to me that It was a promotion to draw in new customers and they could not afford to upgrade all the existing customers without a monthly rate increase. I can understand that answer. I still think it is wrong to treat one segment different from another just for commercial gain, but that is their business. After I asked the question they did not personally attack me they gave me their honest answer and it was over.

I hope the above illustration allows you see where my question and opinion was not a slam on OMP or an attack on you personally. It was a legitimate question that should have received some sort of legitimate answer rather than personal attacks.

This is not entertainment, as you put it. It is extremely frustrating when you continue to drag my name in the mud for your personal gain.



Old 12-21-2007, 11:13 AM
  #74  
RCKen
RCU Forum Manager/Admin
My Feedback: (9)
 
RCKen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lawton, OK
Posts: 27,757
Likes: 0
Received 27 Likes on 24 Posts
Default RE: 67" Fusion vs. 65" Yak

Unfortunately for this thread it has strayed WAY off topic. I have cleaned the thread up and since the original question has been resolved I'm going to lock the thread down.

Ken

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.