uonlylivetwice

My Feedback: (2)

Here is something I have thought about for awhile. My first plane was a Sig Kadet Senior, recommended by a LHS. Since then, I built two more Sig kits, and it seemed almost foreign getting that first plane that was not a Sig. Now, my 'RC world' has expanded to include companies at the LHS and on Tower Hobbies, but I am not sure that just because a company is popular makes it the 'best'. I see lots of manufacturer names here I have definitely never heard of, nor seen their planes on the LHS shelf. How would you all rate the best companies for plane kits, based on kit quality, instructions, ease of build, flight characteristics, etc?

jmulder

My Feedback: (6)

Well I will say that Sig is one of the very best quality kits you will find. Sig is also user friendly in that their kits are very straight forward and have great instructions.

MAJSteve

My Feedback: (-1)

I've built 3 Sig kits recently - the Hog Bipe, the Kavalier, and the Komander. Note that these kits date from 20+ years ago to present.

Without fail, the instructions are clear, the wood acceptable, the hardware good, and the cowls are THICK ABS not the thin stuff we're getting used to.

I've also built a couple of Goldberg kits - the Ultimate was fine, the Cub was relatively hard to build and the wire bending was innacurate.

I've also done Sterling - the Schwitzer glider, a couple of Stearmans, and the Fokker bipe. Lots of work, but rewarding when you're finished. Pretty costly now considering what's out there.

I also have been building a TF FW-190D9. The only plane that's taken me longer to build than I'd consider reasonable. POOR parts fit, poor engineering on the flaps and landing gear concept.

I've also built a Nosen P-51 - a REAL monster but easy to build. The Citabria - costs more in covering than the kit cost!

I've tried a SureFlight P-51. Don't bother trying to get a good finish, sand gently and use latex. LOTS of work getting the wing saddle sanded to specs.

The Wing MFG short kits are fun - not too much work building the fuse and sheeting the wings, look good and fly good if you keep the weight down and keep to a .40 size motor and minimal crontrol throws on your first flights. Even put retracts in one.

To tell you the truth, I LIKE building, but after looking at the cost and quality of ARFs (I come from the era when the wing spars were dowels SOMETIMES hot melted to the ribs) I'm seriously considering having some in my stable so I know I have something to fly every weekend.

At least the wife flys too, so I can always "suggest" she try a different plane and she'll buy the kit for me <G>

Jafrh

My Feedback: (1)

I agree, Sig is one of the best. Top Flight "Gold Edition" are also top quality as is Great Planes. Tower Hobbies also puts out good kits. The above companies are fine up to 90 size 2 & 4 strokers. When you get into larger w.s. planes there's a whole new list of companies.

bgi

My Feedback: (7)

I'll second the Sig kudos seen here. I'm wrapping up a Sig SE and a 4-star 60. Great kits! Laser cutting and parts fit is superb.

Great Planes kits? I'm also wrapping up a 60 sized Cub. Some errors in instructions and some wood thickness changes made for some extra work. But I'd buy another GP kit.

Herr engineering makes great small kits.

Laser kits go together easily.

phaebes

My Feedback: (1)

Another vote for Sig and GP. The bonus is thst the Sig designs fly great as well. :thumbup:

DGrant

My Feedback: (4)

Yep,,,Sig is one of the best...there are others that are right up there as well too, and I think all were already mentioned...TopFlight, GreatPlanes, Goldberg(I only hope they don't change to much), don't forget Midwest, HouseofBalsa, even BalsaUSA is alright. I've listed here in order of my preference, which seems to follow the general census so far.

To me, the manuals are a big part of any kit, and the order of assembly, and general techniques each manufacturer has in store.

Speaking of techniques, you'll notice each manufacturer has slightly different techniques to teach, through the instructions. After building from different companies, you'll learn several new techniques, that you can carry through with other kits as well. This is how I learned quite a bit, and why the writing of the manuals is "oh, so, important!"

Well, got to go work on the Midwest Extra,,,,finishing covering today. Good luck, and good thread here.

GalenB

My Feedback: (18)

I think Bruce Tharpe at Bruce Tharpe Engineering (BTE) produces the best kits. His kits are all precision machine cut, no die crunching or laser charring. All pieces are bagged and there is nothing to "punch out" and no scrap... Bruce's manuals/instructions are just about the best available anywhere. About the only problem with BTE kits is the limited selection -- he only makes three kits! Bruce makes the Venture 60, the Flying King, and the Delta Vortex. If one of Bruce's designs are of the type of model that you are looking for then you will be getting the best kit of that type availalble anywhere.

snsmith

My Feedback: (5)

I've built kits from most of the major manufacturers and have started more scratch building lately. However, in terms of quality, the best kit I've ever built was the Midwest G-202 that I'm finally finishing up. Everything was cleanly packed, wood bagged and sealed, the best die cutting I've ever seen, rolled plans and excellent, detailed photo instructions. The only gripe was plastic parts (not unusual) and the plans were printed on both sides of a single sheet (a bit unusual).

For completeness, the worst was a Lanier Laser 200...don't get me started.

BPKlein

My Feedback: (1)

I will agree with Sig and Midwest being excellent kits. Midwest has the best instruction books I have ever seen.

Great Planes on the other hand is another story. I just started a GP Giles .60. Should I say, I just started scratch building a GP Giles .60 from the kit. The wood in this kit is horrible. More like oak instead of balsa, and the fit of the pieces.....every piece would have to be modified to fit each other. So I am making all of the parts myself from wood of my choice. I probably won't do another GP kit. Just my .02.

uonlylivetwice

My Feedback: (2)

Thanks for all the input. I just asked my local hooby shop to get me a GP 40 sized P51 kit. So now my question is, was Klein's experience one bad kit? maybe a trend in GP kits? Could it possibly have anything to do with which plane kit you order from a manufacturer? Sounds like most guys have had good experience with GP kits. Had to ask, since I have one on the way!!!

Thanks!

TRP

My Feedback: (1)

I know that SIG does NOT stand behind it's ARF kits when the stab comes apart in mid flight AND the 40 size cub kit is more die crushed than it is die 'cut'.

I am a Great planes, Wing Mfg (full kits) and Adrian Page man myself.

but that's just me...

TRP

bgi

My Feedback: (7)

Good point on SIG's problems. I've heard plenty of complaints about their ARFs.

My GP 60 Cub was die-crunched fairly badly and following the instructions to the letter caused me to cut a main spar 1.5" too short.

Try a SIG laser-cut kit and you'll be happy.

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

uonlylivetwice,
I've heard bad things about the particular kit that Klein has, although quality wasn't one of the problems. Maybe he just got a bad one. But the GP 40 size P-51 is a winner in my book!

DGrant

My Feedback: (4)

I've had nothing but excellent service, and great luck with GreatPlanes kits. Not to say I've had a perfect kit every time, but they've stood my every product I've ever bought. Including a kit that I bought, and built. Had I kept the remains for them to inspect, I believe they would have sent me a new one. As it was, they offered me a kit for 40% off, just for my troubles. I did send them pics of wreckage though.
If you do have problems with any given kit though, save all the trash from it. It could be worth something.

I had another kit that came with a cracked canopy. One E-mail to the "hobby services" is all it took, and I had a new canopy in about 5 days. Good service, very people/hobby oriented.

fiery

My Feedback: (2)

After years of ARF'ing, I've got back into kits, and have started a Balsa USA Bristol M.1C. Good value for the price.

Lots of nice wood, pretty good die cutting, good plan and pretty good instructions. I'd heard a few horror stories about the kit, but on looking at it there's nothing too hard. Just enough challenge to make it interesting. I like to exercise the grey matter.

AxBxCxD .... type kits bore me

(maybe I'm a masochist ... then again... all long term R/C flyers are, you have to be!)

Any one else out there want to rate their Balsa USA kit?

Nuker

TF Gold Edition Contender was straightforward. Wood quality was excellent.

Have had no issues with SIG kits either (Hog Bipe, 4 Star 40, Fazer).

What is beneficial is that you can download some manuals now so check them out; don't always listen to the advertisements as your sole source of how much work is involved. e.g. My GP Pete N Poke is a great kit but the "minimal carving" ads are I saw are perhaps a tad misleading. Doesn't detract from the quality of the kit however, just the ads I am referring to here.

Just take advantage of the internet and get whatever info is available to help make your decision. Try and get a manual ahead of time if how it builds is one of your considerations.

I'd buy from any of these 3 kit manufacturers again.

Nuker

uonlylivetwice

My Feedback: (2)

One thing is certain. An investment in a new GP P51 and an OS46fx is much better than an investment in the stock market right now!!!!!!!!!