When we enter comparing the radio link robustness from different brands I miss an important point: On first January 2015 here in Europe applied new regulations to the 2.4GHz band (ETSI EN 300 328 V1.8.1) which for maintaining previous RF output power it was necessary to include LBT (Listen Before Transmit) and a reduction of duty cycle limit to 10% for a better use of the band as more and more equipment use 2.4GHz.

It is normal that USA pilots do not know about it as there has been no changes to FCC rules there but in Europe we have "old" and imported equipments which do not comply and modern updated ones that do. When making comparisons we have to be totally sure that all R/C systems are equal regarding rules compliments.

I know personally a situation when a major firm launched a top end R/C car system at the end of 2014, and it was a massacre for the pilots using it on an 1/8 All Road European Championship held in Italy on February 2015 as the top pilots using this new system raced against pilots with old ones and under costumes acquired since the spread use of 2.4Gh,z when organizations do not take R/C systems from pilots. It happened that if while they were racing several pilots with old systems switched on their transmitters on the boxes for making adjustments to their cars, the new compliance systems due to the LBT condition were unable to find enough free channels to keep a robust link and went into Fail Safe producing the worst image on the new radio and important sales loses. And it being that it was just only that "faulty" R/C system which really complied to new legal requirements!.

It must be considered here that there is the possibility we are also comparing equipments manufactured under different 2.4Ghz rules as well as considere the safety implications due to rule changes that may be positive for certain uses but negative and even dangerous for others.

Best Regards,