RCU Forums

RCU Forums (http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/)
-   RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros (http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/rc-radios-transmitters-receivers-servos-gyros-157/)
-   -   Quandary... (http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/rc-radios-transmitters-receivers-servos-gyros-157/11323699-quandary.html)

LSP972 12-08-2012 07:11 AM

Quandary...
 
Getting back into the hobby after a several year lay-off. It would seem that 2.4 has "taken over"... it was in its infancy when I left.

I'm struggling now with whether or not to "go" to 2.4 or just stay with 72mHz. It sure is hard to abandon all the 72mHz stuff I have, and I don't go to fly-ins or other places where freq control is an issue. Apparently, there is nobody left on 72 mHz at my club, so...

The decision to switch or not is another topic... my question here is... should I indeed decide to switch, will converting my beloved 9Z to 2.4 suffice, or should I just spring for a new 12 channel Futaba 2.4 radio?

.

rmh 12-08-2012 07:29 AM

RE: Quandary...
 
Are you looking for an excuse to spend a buck?
or do you really want to keep using the 9Z-
There ARE plenty of new features in the latest equipment -in various brands -some of these are really fun to use.
If you just want the security of 2.4 - get a modiule and rx which has the channels you need -and stick em in your 9Z-
works fine - did it for friend's 9Zs years ago .

LSP972 12-08-2012 07:38 AM

RE: Quandary...
 
Not looking for an "excuse" for anything.

Perhaps I should re-phrase the question.

Would a new 2.4 12Z, or whatever they call it these days, be 'more better' enough than a 2.4 modded 9ZWCII to justify simply dumping the old stuff and getting all new stuff?

By 'more better', I mean control response/resolution.

.

TFF 12-08-2012 07:47 AM

RE: Quandary...
 
Cost and performance wise. Get a dedicated 2.4. If you 72 stuff is in good order keep flying it. A lot of people have abandoned 72 so it is almost free airspace for it. If you have a bunch of congested frequencies 2.4 is hard to beat. Me i still fly 72. I am going to get a 2.4 for scale contests, although I was one of 5 out of 70 contestants still on 72, the last I was at.

BuschBarber 12-08-2012 07:59 AM

RE: Quandary...
 

Quote:

ORIGINAL: LSP972

Getting back into the hobby after a several year lay-off. It would seem that 2.4 has ''taken over''... it was in its infancy when I left.

I'm struggling now with whether or not to ''go'' to 2.4 or just stay with 72mHz. It sure is hard to abandon all the 72mHz stuff I have, and I don't go to fly-ins or other places where freq control is an issue. Apparently, there is nobody left on 72 mHz at my club, so...

The decision to switch or not is another topic... my question here is... should I indeed decide to switch, will converting my beloved 9Z to 2.4 suffice, or should I just spring for a new 12 channel Futaba 2.4 radio?

.
I moved from a 9CAP to a JR XP9303. The Spektrum 2.4 module came out shortly after. I have been using this combination for the past 5 years without any issues. I can fly 72Mhz or 2.4

I am not suggesting you switch to JR or Spektrum. My point is that if your 9Z does everything you want it to do and it can be easily converted to 2.4, then there is nothing wrong with that approach.

What I missed by not purchasing a JR X9303 was some Latency and the Model Match feature.

If I had converted my 9CAP to 2.4 I would have only had 8 channels.

karolh 12-08-2012 08:45 AM

RE: Quandary...
 
I am sport flier and was quite happy with my 72 mh modular type Futaba Tx so I just got a 2.4 module and I'm happy having the best of both frequency worlds.

Karol

Dave McDonald 12-09-2012 04:09 PM

RE: Quandary...
 
Years ago I was in a similar situation. I was flying a 9Z on the 50 mhz HAM band and wanted to switch over to 2.4. I didn't want to give up the programming power of the 9Z, and didn't want to give up the glass smooth gimbals.

OPTION 1: Get a Futaba FASST 8 channel module for the 9Z. The catch is that you are now limited to 8 channels.

OPTION 2: Get another brand 2.4 module for the 9Z such as Hitec, FrSky, or Spektrum.

OPTION 3: Buy a new 2.4 radio and sell the 9Z to offset the cost.

I ended up going with Option 3 and bought a Futaba 12FG 2.4 in order to have the same level of programming power, and to get the same quality gimbals as the 9Z. If I had to do it over again, the only difference would be that I wouldn't have waited so long to make the switch.

LSP972 12-09-2012 05:17 PM

RE: Quandary...
 

Quote:

If I had to do it over again, the only difference would be that I wouldn't have waited so long to make the switch.
Okay... why? What is it about 2.4 that you find so much better than 72mHz? I'm real curious about this, because I have had experienced modelers of my acquaintance tell it to me both ways... some of them say they can tell the different 'feel' (i.e., alleged better control resolution of 2.4), and others say they cannot tell the difference. And all of these guys are experienced plank and helo pilots; REAL model helicopters, not the e-power toys that anyone with a pulse can fly. And before any e-power guys get their knickers in a twist, yes, I am well aware that there are indeed serious electric helicopters. But you know what I'm talking about. I was talking with a guy who has one of those contra-rotor toys and is under the mistaken impression that he is a real model helicopter pilot. The discussion didn't get very far... I lost him at 'collective pitch', and it went downhill from there.

Anyway... pardon the rambling. My question stands; what has 2.4 done for you? Remember... frequency conflicts are not an issue for me.

.

ira d 12-09-2012 05:30 PM

RE: Quandary...
 
the Transmitter will use less battery drain on 2.4 and you will be less likely to pick up interference and of course dont have to worry about being shot down. I still
use me 72mhz radios but I also have some 2.4 stuff as well.

BuschBarber 12-09-2012 05:55 PM

RE: Quandary...
 

Quote:

ORIGINAL: LSP972


Quote:

If I had to do it over again, the only difference would be that I wouldn't have waited so long to make the switch.
Okay... why? What is it about 2.4 that you find so much better than 72mHz? I'm real curious about this, because I have had experienced modelers of my acquaintance tell it to me both ways... some of them say they can tell the different 'feel' (i.e., alleged better control resolution of 2.4), and others say they cannot tell the difference. And all of these guys are experienced plank and helo pilots; REAL model helicopters, not the e-power toys that anyone with a pulse can fly. And before any e-power guys get their knickers in a twist, yes, I am well aware that there are indeed serious electric helicopters. But you know what I'm talking about. I was talking with a guy who has one of those contra-rotor toys and is under the mistaken impression that he is a real model helicopter pilot. The discussion didn't get very far... I lost him at 'collective pitch', and it went downhill from there.

Anyway... pardon the rambling. My question stands; what has 2.4 done for you? Remember... frequency conflicts are not an issue for me.

.

Frequency conflicts can come from owners of ground vehicles that purchase the high end air radios that many are selling cheap only you don't know they are nearby until you get shot down. Almost every new aircraft could potentially have something inside that could cause RF noise and needed debugging. Aside from that, 2.4 is virtual freedom from RF noise interference. I enjoy going out to fly not worrying about when I turn on my Tx and not worrying that someone will show up on my channel or has a radio out of tune.

The newer radios have better resolution, less latency, shorter antennas, better programming, which includes no delays in response between mixed channels, commonly found when you mixed two channels that were far apart such as Ch2 and Ch8. This delay was very prevalent with my 9CAP when using Ailevator mix which combined Ch2 and Ch8 for dual elevator.

Dave McDonald 12-09-2012 05:57 PM

RE: Quandary...
 
Switching to 2.4 is sort of like justifying buying a new car. Do you really need a new car? Probably not. But once you buy a new car, you're never sorry that you did.

Switching from 72 to 2.4 is the same way. Once you make the switch, you will never be sorry you did.

flyinwalenda 12-09-2012 06:50 PM

RE: Quandary...
 
If you like the 9Z why stop using it ? Just get a 2.4 module of your choice for it. Or you could install a 2.4 hack module inside and a switch so you can easily toggle between 2.4 and 72 instead of popping out the modules.
I converted my Futaba's with a module and a hack module as I slowly converted over to 2.4. I still have some on 72.

TFF 12-09-2012 06:54 PM

RE: Quandary...
 
2.4 is one of those time marches on things. It is like super PCM. The transmit rate is fast which makes latency go away. It also transmits in packages. Instead of a steady stream or transmissions it sends info bundles. It is also supposed to be smart enough to skip or avoid interference. The receiver is now playing a big part of accepting good signals. The computer inside is deciding how good the info is before it moves a surface. 2.4 is a free for all band, so the FCC wants you on it. They can sell other bands if they can free them up. The problem down the road is it may become congested and the radio has to be smart enough to get the work done. I hate to think every consumer electronic device may end up on 2.4. 2.4 does have a big advantage with gas ignition systems; they are not bothered by the ignition noise for the most part. 2.4 is like led lights. Better in a bunch of respects, but it always seems it looses some of the soul in the translation. 72 probably wont be legal in 20 years, but it will be sad when our dedicated channels are gone. Too bad the did not add some of the technology to 72, we could have had our own channels that were bullet proof.

LSP972 12-10-2012 03:27 AM

RE: Quandary...
 
All interesting responses... thanks.

My 9Z is overdue for a lithium battery replacement; I'll ponder all of this while its visiting Radio South.

.

proline8000 12-10-2012 04:48 AM

RE: Quandary...
 
If you like your 9Z and you are using PCM and if your club still allows 72 Mhz than there is no reasion to change. At my local club most of the members are still using 72 and as more update to 2.4 the 72 bands are clear all day long. People think that 2.4 is more reliable than 72 and they are wrong it is just different, totaly different.

BuschBarber 12-10-2012 05:54 AM

RE: Quandary...
 

Quote:

ORIGINAL: proline8000

If you like your 9Z and you are using PCM and if your club still allows 72 Mhz than there is no reasion to change. At my local club most of the members are still using 72 and as more update to 2.4 the 72 bands are clear all day long. People think that 2.4 is more reliable than 72 and they are wrong it is just different, totaly different.
We have already had two crashes this year because some have forgotten to pay attention to the need for a frequency pin and shot another down. Some have forgotten to extend their antenna because they do not have to do that with 2.4. I realize these are procedural issues, but it is happening.

2.4 is safer to use and free from most RF noise. It is not just different, it is better. We have no rules against flying 72Mhz at our fields and I have nothing against anyone flying on 72, but I have converted all my aircraft to 2.4 and I am satisfied that it was the right thing to do. I travel around the NE going to different events all summer and I never have any issues. I never have to wait for a frequency pin to fly, just an open flight station.

LSP972 12-11-2012 04:15 AM

RE: Quandary...
 
Well... last night, my sometimes mentally arthritic #1 grandson let slip that I'm getting a 12ZHP 2.4 for Xmas.

Quickly perusing through the on-line manual, I was delighted to discover:

1. The menus/programming seems quite similar to the 9Z. IOW, I understand "conditions" and am not frightened by them...:D

2. One can purchase a 72mHz module from The Empire and use his old stuff in the "junk planes".

3. A tremendous increase in options, such as a four-servo wing, etc.

So it looks like my decision was made for me. I'm rather excited. And someone has been paying attention... they know I prefer the ratchetless left stick on the Futaba heli version radios.

.

vonveska 12-11-2012 01:33 PM

RE: Quandary...
 
I was using JR 9X on 36 Mhz for years without a problem and now I bought a new 2.4 module - just because I sometimes go flying in the park.
I can't see any difference between 36 MHz and 2.4 GHz - both work OK and flawlessly, but the interference on 36 (or any MHz band) may be a problem. Also the short antenna on 2.4 is more convenient (both on Tx and Rx).

Dave McDonald 12-11-2012 02:25 PM

RE: Quandary...
 

Quote:

ORIGINAL: LSP972

Well... last night, my sometimes mentally arthritic #1 grandson let slip that I'm getting a 12ZHP 2.4 for Xmas.

Quickly perusing through the on-line manual, I was delighted to discover:

1. The menus/programming seems quite similar to the 9Z. IOW, I understand ''conditions'' and am not frightened by them...:D

2. One can purchase a 72mHz module from The Empire and use his old stuff in the ''junk planes''.

3. A tremendous increase in options, such as a four-servo wing, etc.

So it looks like my decision was made for me. I'm rather excited. And someone has been paying attention... they know I prefer the ratchetless left stick on the Futaba heli version radios.

.
Congratulations on your unexpected switch to 2.4.

Once you get used to the 12Z, your old 9Z will be gathering dust, and then put up for sale.

LSP972 12-11-2012 07:30 PM

RE: Quandary...
 
I've got two 9Zs. If the 72mHz module deal works to my satisfaction, then both of them will going on the block.

What does an excellent-condition, complete (module, issue case, manual) 9ZHP WC II go for these days... Maybe $300?

.

Dave McDonald 12-11-2012 08:55 PM

RE: Quandary...
 
Most of my planes were on 50 mhz, and the rest were on 72 mhz. I ended up buying both a 50 mhz and 72 mhz module for the 12FG, and they both worked perfectly as I made the transition to 2.4. So you won't have any problems using the 72 mhz module in a 12Z.

Although the 9Z is still a great radio even compared to some of today's brand new radios, you are probably going to be disappointed in the selling price of a used 9Z. You might be able to get $300, but don't be surprised if you end up getting about $200. Since the 12FG, 12Z, 14MZ, and the 18MZ came out, the 9Z has become somewhat of an antique compared to the current high-end radios.

rmh 12-12-2012 05:43 AM

RE: Quandary...
 
Around here - you simply have to give away non 2.4 radios
The change in what new fliers want, simply has changed that much-
Offer an old 72/53, to a new guy and the answer is "what for?"
Can't blame em-
I sold ALL my non 2.4 stuff as soon as I flew the first DX6 stuff-
that was in 2007-
A good module to update the old tx and new batteries for it - cost as much as a new low cost 2.4 TX -Over $100.00

BuschBarber 12-12-2012 06:02 AM

RE: Quandary...
 
Some people are attracted to modular radios because they can use other manufacturer's RF modules. In that respect, they have value. How much is a guess. Check RCU marketplace and eBay.

LSP972 12-12-2012 07:11 AM

RE: Quandary...
 
I hear all of that. I'm not expecting a miracle...:D

I don't think a "new" R/C pilot would be the slightest bit interested in a 9Z- he wouldn't know what to do with it anyway, unless he was determined to learn the interface.

Perhaps I can find someone who knows the radio and has decided to stay with the old, so to speak... pretty much like I would have been had my bride not wanted to be helpful.

Both these radios are in great shape. The newer one is set up for buddy boxing with a 7CAP as the slave; so I might just keep them. I'll decide after I've spent some time with the 12Z.

Thanks again for all the information, guys.

.

AndyKunz 12-12-2012 08:02 AM

RE: Quandary...
 

Quote:

ORIGINAL: rmh

Around here - you simply have to give away non 2.4 radios
Well if any of them are giving away Proline or JR single sticks, you have my address!

Andy


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:51 PM.