ADANAC18

My Feedback: (16)

I am looking to get one of these planes. Is one better than the other?

Any advice will be appreciated and helpful.

JimCasey

My Feedback: (1)

In the upper right hand part of the screen there is a "search" button. Mariner vs Seamaster has been thoroughly discussed.

The Seamasters I flew handled a lot like a Kaos. Capable of precision maneuvers, no vicious tendencies. Flat-bottom hull skips when you touch down.

The Mariner I flew handled like an Ugly Stik. Fully aerobatic, but gentler. Comfortable-like an old pair of shoes. Slight v-bottom hull lands a little more gently than the SM. However, there have been reports of inconsistent material and assembly of the Mariner. The one I flew was rigged true. Other reports differ.

Personally I would take a GOOD Mariner over a Seamaster, but that's personal taste.

jrf

My Feedback: (551)

I would recommend Hobby People's Sea Monster as a compromise between the two. It is similar to a Sea Master, but has a fiberglass V bottom and a stronger tail. The Sea Monster is far more durable than the Mariner and handles better on the water and in the air.

My Mariner was one of the bad ones, so maybe I'm prejudiced.

Jim

britbrat

I own a Seamaster & have also flown Mariners. The Seamaster is my choice -- I've never experienced (or heard of) a bad one. The Mariner is another story altogether -- some OK (but not great) & some really bad ones. The Mariners that I've flown weren't great, but they were flyable.

ADANAC18

My Feedback: (16)

Thank you for the information. I will be getting a Seamaster.

clolson

My Feedback: (7)

I've been very pleased with my Mariner. I think it flies great ... a bit like my old sweet stik. It's not a scale design, but looks a bit more like a real airplane than the seamaster (in my opinion.) :-) I wouldn't hesitate to get another if my current one ever met an untimely demise. I'm planning to give the engine just a bit more up incedence for the upcoming flying season ... I think that will help it get off the water a bit quicker, and will reduce the tendency to nose down when adding power. And as it is now, it trims out with a lot of up elevator for full throttle, but get's really slow/mushy at idle and on approach ... the big fat wing has very stable/forgiving slow speed characteristics (like a stik) so this isn't a big problem... If there are any unhappy mariner owners out there looking to unload theirs for cheap, let me know. :-)

Curt.

magyarbacsi

Hi Curt. My Seamaster is just the opposite. I have to washers under the two bottom engine mounts that gives the OS 46 just a tad of up. Cant hardly see it less you look. It lifts off in a very short distance and seldom need full power. Depending in the weather condition. In the air, full power will tend to make the plane climb. I set my idle just fast enough to assist with a smooth landing. I few times when it bounced up, I gave it some throttle and just kept on going. I never could make the Mariner fly well enough to make me want another.

magyarbacsi

Curt, that last post was in referance to my Seamaster. My Mariner, which I no longer have, had quite a bit of up on the motor and still had to give it full up to lift off.

clolson

My Feedback: (7)

Yeah, my Mariner likes to run along the water at high speed up on step, and sometimes needs a little coaxing to get airborn. Hadn't considered it much of a big deal though. The mariner has a deep authoritative water rudder ... I almost wonder if that contributes to pushing the tail up a bit when you are up on step (making it harder to lift off?) But a little elevator wiggling and it will pop off and head skyward.

My biggest problem with float flying so far is that my flying location (parent's lake) is such that I have to go out a ways in a boat to get enough room to fly. It's easy to drift around in a boat and your orientation is continually changing which requires a very flexible neck, and out in the open water, it's hard to find fixed reference points to set up consistant approaches. I find it easy to let the airplane get much further away than I ever would with land based flying ... and the Mariner with a .45 2-stroke engine has a bit of get-up-and-go ... so it doesn't wait around for me to straighten out the boat.

I don't claim to be any super-experienced R/C pilot, but with the exception of being just as bit squirrely in pitch with power changes, I think the Mariner is a very predictable, stable, fun flying airplane, it has awsome looks, and feels/looks very solid in the sky.

I'd like to try a seamaster sometime too, but I have a couple of other projects earlier in the queue.

A few more weeks and the ice will be off the lakes around here ... :-)

Curt.

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

Curt, try shortening both aileron pushrods two full turns of the clevises (for starters).

I have found many a seaplane that benefits from adding just a touch of droop in the trailing edge. Another nice thing about this is that if it doesn't help, it's easily reverted to its original configuration.