Register

If this is your first visit, please click the Sign Up now button to begin the process of creating your account so you can begin posting on our forums! The Sign Up process will only take up about a minute of two of your time.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 140

  1. #101

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    19
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4


    ORIGINAL: Dick T.


    ORIGINAL: RamItOn

    Where's onewasp in all of this? I really was hoping to have my masculinity/technical competence/RC piloting questioned.

    -Tony
    Onewasp's head is so far up Xjet's rear he can't hear you.

    Good one!

  2. #102
    rmh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    , UT
    Posts
    12,605
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4

    Having built 72 and 27 mhz radios -and used em and done field testing on some I di have problems with both 27 and 72.
    I had frequency conflicts, multipath problems ,AGC problems (that was a real bear on a particulat old JR design) and just plain old tuning problems
    On my Spektrum stuf - I knew going in that the small antennea would be an issue -and it was
    some simply can't understand that thet the rx have to able to "see out" the voltag thing - a small matter of holding correct voltage and a very very easy fix .
    after that
    It's all a piece of cake.
    Libby is still watching you

  3. #103

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Bradenton, FL
    Posts
    2,057
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4

    This is starting to get very interesting!!!
    Too much horsepower- Just right !!!

  4. #104

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Bradenton, FL
    Posts
    2,057
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4

    Hey RamItOn, I'm in the same boat as you. 9 planes- 9 RXs= $900.- One new TX around $200. = Over a $1,000.00. In my club, out of the 6 guys I fly with, I'm the only one that flies 72 MHZ. I don't worry about getting "hit" at all. I've talked to all my buddies & they can't remember taking a hit. I can just about name my price for RXs & servos. They are all wanting to "unload that old stuff" Us hold outs can spend less than a $50. bill to get a new plane in the air with electronics. If you have a 2.4, at least double that !! I'd rather spend the extra cash & buy another plane!!! Different strokes for different folks !!!
    Too much horsepower- Just right !!!

  5. #105

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    San Tan Valley, AZ
    Posts
    5,100
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4

    The really,really interesting thing is you can buy a 2.4 system from Hobby city for $30 and have a more robust system than any of the old 72ghz systems.

    dirty old men need love too.

  6. #106

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Bradenton, FL
    Posts
    2,057
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4

    Hobbycity huh. $30. huh. I don't believe. A system would include TX, RX, $30. huh!!
    Too much horsepower- Just right !!!

  7. #107

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    San Tan Valley, AZ
    Posts
    5,100
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4

    There are at least 2 of those systems at the field I fly. They work fine.
    You get no batteries or servos for $30. Just the TX and Rx.
    Extra receivers are $15

    Here is the link:

    http://www.hobbycity.com/hobbycity/s...&ParentCat=190
    dirty old men need love too.

  8. #108

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Bradenton, FL
    Posts
    2,057
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4

    I stand corrected Dirtybird.!!! Had no idea !!! Although, those are a one plane TX. I'd have to have a TX for each of my planes.I think I'll stick with my Futaba stuff however. Thanks & I now am a believer. $30. bucks huh.
    Too much horsepower- Just right !!!

  9. #109
    iflyj3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Paris, KY
    Posts
    1,399
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4


    ORIGINAL: outdoorhunting

    I stand corrected Dirtybird.!!! Had no idea !!! Although, those are a one plane TX. I'd have to have a TX for each of my planes.I think I'll stick with my Futaba stuff however. Thanks & I now am a believer. $30. bucks huh.
    Back in the 60's the transmitters did not even have reversing switches like these do. You can fly multiple planes with this transmitter by adjusting the plane to the transmitter and not vice versa as you are used to doing now.
    Dan Thompson http://sites.google.com/site/ckffinc
    MicroPro8000 http://sites.google.com/site/mp8kinfo

  10. #110

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Pine Bluff, AR,
    Posts
    1,504
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4


    ORIGINAL: dirtybird
    Shielding is much more effective for 2.4ghz as it it is for 72mhz. It does not eliminate the ignition noise problem but it makes it much more manageable. As to it being silly I guess is in the eye of the beholder.
    If you have a cold and you stuff tissue up your nose to contain the snot you still have the cold. I'm merely saying that if you have a faulty/leaky engine ignition you should fix the problem not the symptom.

  11. #111
    nonstoprc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central, TX
    Posts
    2,404

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4


    ORIGINAL: Robotech


    ORIGINAL: dirtybird
    Shielding is much more effective for 2.4ghz as it it is for 72mhz. It does not eliminate the ignition noise problem but it makes it much more manageable. As to it being silly I guess is in the eye of the beholder.
    If you have a cold and you stuff tissue up your nose to contain the snot you still have the cold. I'm merely saying that if you have a faulty/leaky engine ignition you should fix the problem not the symptom.
    I would not call it a problem any more if it does not show up with 2.4ghz equipment :-)
    Where facts are few, experts are many.
    Perfection is God\'\'\'\'s business.

  12. #112

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    San Tan Valley, AZ
    Posts
    5,100
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4

    ORIGINAL: outdoorhunting

    I stand corrected Dirtybird.!!! Had no idea !!! Although, those are a one plane TX. I'd have to have a TX for each of my planes.I think I'll stick with my Futaba stuff however. Thanks & I now am a believer. $30. bucks huh.
    According to xjets review it has an easily removable RF unit. I think I will get one and see if I can replace the RF section of an old Futaba am radio I have.

    Update:
    When trying to buy a Hobby King radio I discovered the shipping from Hong Kong is $20.
    ASSN makes an RF chassis you can patch into almost any radio for $59. Their receivers are $20(Four channel) and $26 for a six channel. I think I will go that way.
    dirty old men need love too.

  13. #113

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    taxim, TURKEY
    Posts
    3
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4

    range

  14. #114

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    San Tan Valley, AZ
    Posts
    5,100
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4


    ORIGINAL: grifon

    range
    If you are saying that 2.4 does not have the range of 72 I think that has been proven wrong.
    The other day A $2000 airplane went in at our field because another flier switched on on the 72 frequency it was on.
    I really think it is stupid not to take advantage of the technology we have to prevent such issues
    dirty old men need love too.

  15. #115

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Visalia, CA
    Posts
    1,327

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4


    ORIGINAL: dirtybird


    ORIGINAL: grifon

    range
    If you are saying that 2.4 does not have the range of 72 I think that has been proven wrong.
    The other day A $2000 airplane went in at our field because another flier switched on on the 72 frequency it was on.
    I really think it is stupid not to take advantage of the technology we have to prevent such issues
    Actually the offending pilot is the "stupid" one.

    Our club has over 30 active pilots flying both 2.4 and 72. In fifteen years there have been only 3 72mhz shoot downs all caused by new, impatient members doing a stupid thing. It personally cost them enough to learn the hard way.

    2.4 is certainly the future of RC, however it isn't necessary in all locations to make the mad dash, related expense and bragging rights, to change immediately. To those who can afford or need to make a rapid changeover....good for you. Those not needing to, or are doing so at a leisurely pace aren't stupid.
    Dick Tristao
    ModelGrafix
    Visalia, Ca.
    559 625-3590 Home/Office
    559 280-6559 Cellular

  16. #116
    rmh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    , UT
    Posts
    12,605
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4

    Everyone has a rationalization .
    But - even old timers can accidentally shoot someone down on 72- seen it dun it
    actually on 53.xx
    IF the risk of being shot down means little -and if the faster response and Model Match etc.,are of no real value
    then the advantages of 2.4 are insignificant.
    The additional features of the Spektrum are what really sold me -plus the Bind n Fly feature opened a whole new experience of flying indoor stuff that really performs well.
    As for cost there are now Chinese radios systems which cost les than a fill up of gas on a Chev truck and they work - so prices are really not a big deal if a simple system will work for you.
    Libby is still watching you

  17. #117

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Visalia, CA
    Posts
    1,327

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4

    I don't disagree with the 72 shoot down risk but it varys by location. High in some areas, zero in others.

    Faster response is certainly desirable but 90% of todays RC'ers can't tell the difference and fewer know what it means. The Spektrum Model Match feature is great, more so for the lazy dude who can't keep track of what he has. Today's transmitters have beautiful graphic displays yet some guys can't figure out which model they have in front of them.

    Personally I use Futaba 9Z, 14MZ and 12FG, all on 72 and 2.4 FASST depending on the airframe be it park electrics, helis and 33% scale. Yes, it requires me to be vigilant concerning frequency swaps, pin control and flying site etiquette.

    Again 2.4 is RC's future and I do enjoy it's advanced features but it sure is making a lot of folks lazy when it comes to maintaining their equipment or exercising good safety manners at the field.
    Dick Tristao
    ModelGrafix
    Visalia, Ca.
    559 625-3590 Home/Office
    559 280-6559 Cellular

  18. #118
    nonstoprc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central, TX
    Posts
    2,404

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4

    Faster response time is significant for Futaba 10C. I am sure every user of 10C can see it comparing to the 9C. I believe 10C's response time is the fastest, according to earlier this year's benchmark (done by a heli pilot).

    To appreciate the faster response time, one really ought be able to see the drift of the airplane as early as possible, and make a movement on the stick(s). With 10C, he will see the response of the airplane (almost) in real-time.
    Where facts are few, experts are many.
    Perfection is God\'\'\'\'s business.

  19. #119
    rmh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    , UT
    Posts
    12,605
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4

    Model Match is only for lazy people?.
    Well having spent a fair bit of time in accident reconstruction- -(industrial accidents)
    I can assure you ,in a court of law , safety features are never considered as being only for the "lazy worker".
    Maybe the feature or absence of the feature, will never pop in in a lawsuit -maybe it will
    In any event - I consider it a very good idea .
    This is off the point of the eoriginal thread - somewhat.
    However.
    The safety of the 2.4 approach to flying RC is simply indisputable.
    Libby is still watching you

  20. #120

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    19
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4

    I don't think Hanson (or his dog) really want to be confused by facts (72 MHz works fine for most of us) and manners (frequency boards seem to be beyond some of us). I've tried for several days, only to have my arguments (founded in fact) ignored. According to them, if you don't convert RIGHT NOW, then you are not using all tools available to you and are not as smart as those who do convert.

    I'm with you, Dick. Never a 72 MHz shoot-down at our club, and now that everyone is migrating to 2.4 GHz, no waiting. Why would I leave a radio set (9C) that I have had virtually no problems with to dump wads of bucks into a new system (see outdoorhunting's comment on the cost of upgrading)? Such an upgrade could be done incrementally, but there exists the problem then of dragging around another Tx module, and having to remember which model is on which band.

    I can't wait until the next new technology is released 8 years from now (assuming hobbies are still legal then). Hanson and onewasp will be back on this board, shilling this new technology and explaining how 2.4 GHz is a relic technology. My PC is over 10 years old, yet it works fine for the tasks I use it for. Am I a lesser human being for not rushing out and taking advantage of Quad Core technology?

    Finally, regarding Hanson's argument about safety: how many of your industrial accidents could have been prevented by workers paying attention? Matching the correct model on my Tx with the airframe in front of me has never been a problem. Somehow, I think most people don't have a problem with it.

  21. #121
    Zeeb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Highland Utah UT
    Posts
    3,785
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4


    ORIGINAL: RamItOn


    Finally, regarding Hanson's argument about safety: how many of your industrial accidents could have been prevented by workers paying attention? Matching the correct model on my Tx with the airframe in front of me has never been a problem. Somehow, I think most people don't have a problem with it.
    Not very familiar with Tort law are you?????

    Since I used to fly with a Futaba 9C, I think I can comment on several aspects of your "thinking" process...

    First of all, the dual elevator servo lag on the 9C is notoriously well known and is the primary reason I went to a 9Z WCII instead. I thought that was a really nice radio with excellent control response, that is until I flew a model one day with the 9Z and the next with a DX-7 setup. There is absolutely no comparison in the speed of the control response and it gives you a much more connected feel with the model and there are no servo lag problems on mated channels due to the Servo Synch function on the Spektrum/JR 2.4GHz radios.

    As for ModelMatch being only for "lazy" people?

    Well at one time in my modeling life, I felt that way too until I started a model with the wrong one loaded in the tx. The one that was loaded had very similar control setups and the only real difference was that the throttle servos were on opposite sides of the fuselage so the travels were reversed. Checked the control deflections which were true and correct, fired up the model and it went to full throttle. Had it not been restrained as is my custom, that APC prop would have made mincemeat out of me.

    As careful as I am I still screwed up and while there are those who say ModelMatch is not needed as they've "NEVER" fired up a model with the wrong one loaded in the tx, I maintain those folks are either mis-representing the truth or only have one model.

    Was it expensive? Yes. Was it worth it to convert all my stuff to 2.4GHz? Most definitely.
    Zeeb

  22. #122

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Visalia, CA
    Posts
    1,327

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4


    ORIGINAL: Zeeb

    As for ModelMatch being only for "lazy" people?
    I said, "more so for the lazy dude who can't keep track of what he has."

    If the shoe fits, wear it. If not then it doesn't pertain.

    It seems reading comprehension is going the way of the Dodo.
    Dick Tristao
    ModelGrafix
    Visalia, Ca.
    559 625-3590 Home/Office
    559 280-6559 Cellular

  23. #123

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    19
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4

    That's fantastic, Zeeb, that you are a tort lawyer and have expertise in that area. The Futaba 9C has been on the market for over 10 years. Please name a lawsuit against Futaba regarding the failure of the dual elevator servo problem that you mentioned, oh J.D. of the Skies. I've had a couple of custom models that used dual elevator servos. Not a problem experienced.

    I never called those who rely on ModelMatch "lazy," but if by making such a claim, you will regail me with the ruminations of your finely honed legal mind, I just might. I'm simply saying that they need to pay attention. If you had bothered to read any of the other comments in this board, you will have noticed that I mentioned that I had about 15 models that I use (probably not nearly as many as you, Zeeb), not one. I just can't get over how zealous you guys are about 2.4. The ardency for 2.4 GHz (and the requirement for all to buy in, lest not being perceived as savvy as those who have) really is shocking. Write your congressman and have them propose legislation to make 2.4 GHz the standard, and outlaw our FCC-specific 72 MHz band. That would be awesome and save countless lives! Let's march on Washington! Hold demonstrations! ARE YOU WITH ME?!

  24. #124

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    San Tan Valley, AZ
    Posts
    5,100
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4

    RamITOn, nobody says you have to change to 2.4ghz
    All we are saying is you are obstinate, stubborn, and foolish.
    dirty old men need love too.

  25. #125

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , CA
    Posts
    84
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Reason for not upgrading to 2.4


    ORIGINAL: dirtybird

    RamITOn, nobody says you have to change to 2.4ghz
    All we are saying is you are obstinate, stubborn, and foolish.

    You left out cheap.

    jc


Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:48 PM.

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.