Finally moving to a 2.4 radio
11-02-2010, 09:48 PM
#76
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Norwood,
OH
Posts: 22,101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Finally moving to a 2.4 radio
ORIGINAL: downunderdog
So, are you implying here that AM or FM is less likely to glitch or have a frequency conflict than 2.4G, and that planes haven't been lost due to those issues with AM or FM systems? The fact that guys who have put $10K+ into RC jets ARE using 2.4Gig kind of suggests that it's the better, more reliable, system, doesn't it? I mean, if FM is more reliable, why would they be using 2.4Gig in a plane that is that expensive?
ORIGINAL: ThunderbirdJunkie
Oh, but you can
Tell that to the plane guys that have lost $10-15,000 jets flying on DSM that took a radio hit.
ORIGINAL: cummins driver
Frequency conflicts is the big one obviously, so you cant just exclude that.
Frequency conflicts is the big one obviously, so you cant just exclude that.
That and the glitching is what i hated with my AM systems.
Every radio is susceptible to interference. PERIOD. No exception. It doesn't matter if it's the radio on the friggin space shuttle, dude. There are still guys that run 72PCM in $10k+ jets and won't run anything else.
Never said it was. Just said that 2.4DSM is not better.
- 2.4 has shorter antennas
- 2.4 is free from frequency conflicts
and I don't think that you disagree that 2.4 glitches less (or do you? you haven't really said)
What about FM is BETTER than 2.4 Gig? If it's nothing, then the above 2 or 3 (agreed upon) improvements that come with 2.4 Gig DO make it better. All you've done so far is concede that 2.4 gig is better in some respects than FM, but then say that it's not better overall. What tips the scales back towards FM? The fact that you already have the gear?
Why are you getting so angry?
11-02-2010, 10:02 PM
#77
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Finally moving to a 2.4 radio
ORIGINAL: ThunderbirdJunkie
Why are you even bothering bringing this up?
Every radio is susceptible to interference. PERIOD. No exception. It doesn't matter if it's the radio on the friggin space shuttle, dude. There are still guys that run 72PCM in $10k+ jets and won't run anything else.
ORIGINAL: downunderdog
So, are you implying here that AM or FM is less likely to glitch or have a frequency conflict than 2.4G, and that planes haven't been lost due to those issues with AM or FM systems? The fact that guys who have put $10K+ into RC jets ARE using 2.4Gig kind of suggests that it's the better, more reliable, system, doesn't it? I mean, if FM is more reliable, why would they be using 2.4Gig in a plane that is that expensive?
ORIGINAL: ThunderbirdJunkie
Oh, but you can
Tell that to the plane guys that have lost $10-15,000 jets flying on DSM that took a radio hit.
ORIGINAL: cummins driver
Frequency conflicts is the big one obviously, so you cant just exclude that.
Frequency conflicts is the big one obviously, so you cant just exclude that.
That and the glitching is what i hated with my AM systems.
Every radio is susceptible to interference. PERIOD. No exception. It doesn't matter if it's the radio on the friggin space shuttle, dude. There are still guys that run 72PCM in $10k+ jets and won't run anything else.
Never said it was. Just said that 2.4DSM is not better.
- 2.4 has shorter antennas
- 2.4 is free from frequency conflicts
and I don't think that you disagree that 2.4 glitches less (or do you? you haven't really said)
What about FM is BETTER than 2.4 Gig? If it's nothing, then the above 2 or 3 (agreed upon) improvements that come with 2.4 Gig DO make it better. All you've done so far is concede that 2.4 gig is better in some respects than FM, but then say that it's not better overall. What tips the scales back towards FM? The fact that you already have the gear?
Why are you getting so angry?
What has your research indicated with respect to reliability and ease of service of 2.4 G systems and how it is worse on 2.4G than FM? I haven't seen any complaints about 2.4G reliability issues, and how is it less "easy to service"?
11-02-2010, 10:10 PM
#78
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (31)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Danville,
KY
Posts: 4,388
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Finally moving to a 2.4 radio
Oh, but you can
Tell that to the plane guys that have lost $10-15,000 jets flying on DSM that took a radio hit.
That is entirely dependent on the strength of the transmitter, it has nothing to do with AM or FM or DSM or anything. With a powerful enough transmitter you can talk to people on the moon with AM. If you can prove, without a doubt, that (for example) a Futaba 3PMX has more radio range than a Futaba 3PM FM ThunderbirdJunkie will concede this sect of the argument...but he can drive his cars further than he can see them on his FM setup, so what does it matter?
Has anybody actually owned a FlySky radio long enough to speak for their reliability, durability and longevity? No? Then let's leave them out of the equation.
Redcats have awesome reviews too
ABSOLUTELY they do. Tangibly, you can feel it in the materials and trigger/wheel feel of a higher end radio. Even ThunderbirdJunkie's near-seven-year-old 3PM feels better than the FlySky radio he's held and used (BRIEFLY...what an ergonomic nightmare). Intangibly, you can see it in ThunderbirdJunkie's Futaba 2PCKA and JR XR2 that are both a decade+ old; both of those radios feel better than the FlySky, too. All of them have adjustable spring tension on the trigger and wheel, as well. How much channel mixing can you do on a FlySky?
Never said it was. Just said that 2.4DSM is not better.
11-02-2010, 10:19 PM
#79
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Norwood,
OH
Posts: 22,101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Finally moving to a 2.4 radio
ORIGINAL: cummins driver
Where at?
Redcats have awesome reviews too
ABSOLUTELY they do. Tangibly, you can feel it in the materials and trigger/wheel feel of a higher end radio. Even ThunderbirdJunkie's near-seven-year-old 3PM feels better than the FlySky radio he's held and used (BRIEFLY...what an ergonomic nightmare). Intangibly, you can see it in ThunderbirdJunkie's Futaba 2PCKA and JR XR2 that are both a decade+ old; both of those radios feel better than the FlySky, too. All of them have adjustable spring tension on the trigger and wheel, as well. How much channel mixing can you do on a FlySky?
Never said it was. Just said that 2.4DSM is not better.
Cheaper to manufacture and inventory because only one part number to keep track of.
11-02-2010, 10:28 PM
#80
RE: Finally moving to a 2.4 radio
ergonomics comfort are upto the individual. I've not had any discomfort from holding either of my flyskys personally.
Kinda like the car I drive some people drive it and find it fine, where I find it to be extremely uncomfortable (I only drive it cause I don't got the cash to sink into a new clunker, and it runs)
I've also had ergonomic keyboards, and mice that cost a good chunk of change. I replaced the keyboard with a old 1980's IBM keyboard, and the mouse after it gave me carpel tunnel with a cheap $5 mouse that has reduced the pain.
So in my book how someone feels about its ergonomics is a non-factor.
Also losing a $15k jet that is flying faster than hell vs a truck on the ground there is a huge difference. Almost like comparing a harrier jet to a chevy malibu performance wise. Lets face it an onroad RC will not be subject to anywhere near the speed the jet is or any other factor. Honestly there are so many factors in jets, truthfully they might just blame the radio. You never know if a wire comes loose, human error, or anything so IMO that is not a good example. Its kinda like people who lose in a video game blame the controller and then start beating the crap out of them.
Kinda like the car I drive some people drive it and find it fine, where I find it to be extremely uncomfortable (I only drive it cause I don't got the cash to sink into a new clunker, and it runs)
I've also had ergonomic keyboards, and mice that cost a good chunk of change. I replaced the keyboard with a old 1980's IBM keyboard, and the mouse after it gave me carpel tunnel with a cheap $5 mouse that has reduced the pain.
So in my book how someone feels about its ergonomics is a non-factor.
Also losing a $15k jet that is flying faster than hell vs a truck on the ground there is a huge difference. Almost like comparing a harrier jet to a chevy malibu performance wise. Lets face it an onroad RC will not be subject to anywhere near the speed the jet is or any other factor. Honestly there are so many factors in jets, truthfully they might just blame the radio. You never know if a wire comes loose, human error, or anything so IMO that is not a good example. Its kinda like people who lose in a video game blame the controller and then start beating the crap out of them.
11-03-2010, 08:51 AM
#81
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Atlanta/Houston, GA
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Finally moving to a 2.4 radio
ORIGINAL: ThunderbirdJunkie
That is entirely dependent on the strength of the transmitter, it has nothing to do with AM or FM or DSM or anything. With a powerful enough transmitter you can talk to people on the moon with AM. If you can prove, without a doubt, that (for example) a Futaba 3PMX has more radio range than a Futaba 3PM FM ThunderbirdJunkie will concede this sect of the argument...but he can drive his cars further than he can see them on his FM setup, so what does it matter?
That is entirely dependent on the strength of the transmitter, it has nothing to do with AM or FM or DSM or anything. With a powerful enough transmitter you can talk to people on the moon with AM. If you can prove, without a doubt, that (for example) a Futaba 3PMX has more radio range than a Futaba 3PM FM ThunderbirdJunkie will concede this sect of the argument...but he can drive his cars further than he can see them on his FM setup, so what does it matter?
The only REALreason they're so hip on these flysky POS radios is that they're CHEAP, just like the CHEAP AMand FMradios they used to sell.
11-03-2010, 05:15 PM
#82
Member
My Feedback: (8)
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New Windsor,
NY
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Finally moving to a 2.4 radio
I made the switch to 2.4 based solely on the fact of no more frequency conflicts. There was nothing that aggravated me more than to be in a race and have someone turn on their radio in the pits and watch my fairly expensive toy go where ever it wanted to, usually resulting in a spectacular crash and colorful words being strung together. No crystals, no antennas, built in fail safe and more cars on the track at the same time with no conflicts.
To each his own, IMHO.
To each his own, IMHO.
11-11-2010, 10:32 PM
#83
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (31)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Danville,
KY
Posts: 4,388
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Finally moving to a 2.4 radio
Well, since today was my birthday, I got to open my remote, and had a chance to try it out
Installed it in my brushless MGT. Linked it up, which was basically instant, and then went out and tried it out. I took it waaay down the road with zero glitching. Last time i ran it with the AM traxxas system i was using, it was glitching while I was right on top of it. Worked perfect the whole time tonight and I really do like the feel of the remote, and where the trim knobs are, plus the fact that they are covered so you dont accidentally hit them.
Ill link the other receiver with my savage soon and ill be good to go.
Installed it in my brushless MGT. Linked it up, which was basically instant, and then went out and tried it out. I took it waaay down the road with zero glitching. Last time i ran it with the AM traxxas system i was using, it was glitching while I was right on top of it. Worked perfect the whole time tonight and I really do like the feel of the remote, and where the trim knobs are, plus the fact that they are covered so you dont accidentally hit them.
Ill link the other receiver with my savage soon and ill be good to go.
11-11-2010, 11:18 PM
#84
RE: Finally moving to a 2.4 radio
ORIGINAL: cummins driver
Well, since today was my birthday, I got to open my remote, and had a chance to try it out
Installed it in my brushless MGT. Linked it up, which was basically instant, and then went out and tried it out. I took it waaay down the road with zero glitching. Last time i ran it with the AM traxxas system i was using, it was glitching while I was right on top of it. Worked perfect the whole time tonight and I really do like the feel of the remote, and where the trim knobs are, plus the fact that they are covered so you dont accidentally hit them.
Ill link the other receiver with my savage soon and ill be good to go.
Well, since today was my birthday, I got to open my remote, and had a chance to try it out
Installed it in my brushless MGT. Linked it up, which was basically instant, and then went out and tried it out. I took it waaay down the road with zero glitching. Last time i ran it with the AM traxxas system i was using, it was glitching while I was right on top of it. Worked perfect the whole time tonight and I really do like the feel of the remote, and where the trim knobs are, plus the fact that they are covered so you dont accidentally hit them.
Ill link the other receiver with my savage soon and ill be good to go.
On my old TQ-2 I would occasionally hit the trim by accident, and be forced to center it again.
