No one ever said that all ARF's were created equal. How are we judging them anyway? There is no industry standard by which to grade them by. As I said earlier, too many people are too busy griping about the ARF they purchased. You get what you pay for. Any ARF that has a price too good to be true, than it probably is too good. That is precisely why we have forums like here on RCU. If more people would do their "homework" and research the plane they are looking for, then maybe they can make a better educated decision before the purchase is completed.

The ARF industry has really changed the way we do business. Whereas it used to take months to complete a project, we can now complete them in weeks or even days. By choosing to purchase an ARF, we have to learn to accept the compromises that accompany it. Yes, some ARF companies are exceptional in the product quality they offer. The downside is that you are generally going to pay more for that particular product. Others are not quite up to par and therefore cost considerably less. But just because a product cost more doesn't necessarily mean it is better. I recently read a thread about a high priced ARF from a company and there were many complaints concerning the completeness of the plane.

All I am trying to say is that we should be thankfull for the ARF's we have today. These companies go to great lengths to try to make our building time as quick as possible. I have seen a few people rush through their ARF and didn't take the time to thoroughly inspect all critical areas. After a few flights I have seen these planes come apart. Is it the companies fault? I don't think so. I think the builder/flyer should take the time to thoroughly check out the plane before, during, and after assembly. It is foolish to think that an ARF should be "perfect" out of the box. There always be a compromise somewhere.