This one goes out to all those IMAC 3D guys and anyone else with any knowledge of these kits.

I've read the profile on the FC website. I've seen pictures of finished birds and I am impressed to the point to where I would like to get one.

My question is, if this kit is so good, so light, and so strong, how come this thing doesn't seem very popular? Is it just the price? Does anyone compete with one of these birds? Are there any drawbacks to this kit? Anyone have problems with the whole "floating" main spar?

I have a chance to pick up a 33% RTF with a DA100. It weighs only 23 lbs and has DR 8411's all the way around. What would be a fair price. The plane has been flown but is only 4 months old.

Thanks for all your help.


Jon Athans
[email protected]

I have a friend who bought the same setup but with a 3W100B2 and with only (5) JR-8411 for $3500.

Am am putting together two 40% Extas right now. I can vouch for the weight, absolutely light. I have some mixed thoughts on the plane since it costs so much. Maybe the mixed thoughts will go away once it accels through the vertical the first time.

We have one with 56 flights on it. We like it well enough that we should test fly our 2nd one next week. Price is the reason you don't see more of them. Jason S. says it flies just like the 40%, it just rotates a little faster in snaps. With the exception of the TroyBuilt 260 , I like it better than anything I've flown, better than most 40% airplanes.

The spar has not caused any problems. Despite having heard that they are difficult to repair, It's not really that hard, and no I'm not explaining how I know that.

As to the weight, have you seen it on a scale. Our first is the red, white, orange, and yellow version. It is 24.4 with 1650 Nimh batteries. The solid color versions are about 1 lb. lighter plus whatever finish you put on it.

Tracy Hill

Tracy, Why are you getting a second FC when you like the TBM 260 better?


Mark, My 35% TBM 260 weighs < 23 lb. and never a problem -- blenders, full throttle hovering inverted flat spins, 10's of walls every flight, and nothing's even loosened up.

But you better not even THINK about landing it hard. It only takes the abuse if you keep it out of the way of solid objects.

I know a couple people with the 40% FC Extra, and a couple with the 33% FC Extra. I spent a week with Jason Shluman watching him fly the 33%, and really ring that plane out. I know the builder who built it, and he didn't change anything on it. Seeing Jason put it through its paces, as hard as he flies planes, makes me a believer (at least in the 33%) that the plane is light AND strong.

I hope to fly it sometime before this season is over, for my own sake. I'm interested in the plane based on its performance, and flying it could strengthen that view.

All I would need then is Jason's radio and programming to fly it as good as him

BarryB

The reason for a second fc extra is that the troybuilt 260 we have has 330 flights on it. We have a second 260 that will be starting the covering process this week. We like both airplanes very well so as the reason for 2 of each is 1 does some things better than the other and vice versa. Also have the 42% 260 on order. And will most likely get a 40% FC extra also.

Steve and Tracy Hill

If someone has put together a 40% FC 330s, would you mind contacting me offline? I have some construction questions. Specifically about mounting the servo trays, throttle servo etc. inside the fuselage. My construction manual is very hard to make sense of and the pictures are too dark to see.

[email protected]

Steve & Tracy,
You certainly do it right. I only have 100 flights on my TBM and I've had mine for a few months longer than you. I hope you're planning on attending the HCAM big bird again this October. I really enjoyed watching you guys wring it out last year!

I'm drooling over the 42%er myself, but my finances just won't allow it. However, I am considering selling my 33% Edge and acquiring another 35% TBM or the FC 33%. Where does the FC plane excel in your opinion?

U may want to take his thumbs along with programming and radio if u want to fly as good as him, hehe.

-Kelly

Ah yes....how embarrasing that would be if i fogot his thumbs. I can see it now.

"Hey guys, watch this....<crash>.....nevermind :-(

Barryb,

The differences in th TB 260 and FC 330l are pretty small. The FC has a construction advantage. If CNC molds are right, so are the airplanes. You may have to adjust the incidence, but the wings, stab, and fuse are all close to perfect. The TB is like anything made from balsa, ie, less than perfect. So the FC tracks a little better. A local Flier has made a clone of the TB, He's a perfectionist and his is very true and tracks as well as the FC. That's why I think it's a matter of construction and not inherent in the design. The FC has one little flaw. Sometimes the tail wiggles in yaw a little. There is a fix that involves adding something on the trailing edge of the rudder, I'm not sure exactly what it is, but intend to look at the FC at the TOC to see what needs to be done.

The TB advantage is in 3D. It's based mainly on being lighter. Ours is 22.5 compared to the FC at 24.25. With the TB you have more time to correct a mistake. For instance, if you are drifting a little sideways on a hovering rudder touch the FC falls to the side noticeably harder and you have less time to save it. The extra weight of the FC means you hover at a higher throttle setting. So the tail surfaces are more effective in a hover for the same throw setting. This just means you need more throw on the TB. The FC just flies a little heavier.

I think it comes down to the FC is probably best at precision flying because of the true airframe. The TB is best at 3D because of the weight. Keep in mind the differences are pretty small. I prefer the TB overall. Keep in mind that I had over 100 flights on the TB before flying the FC. If it had been the other way around, I might like the FC better.

Guys are using fuel tubing split down the center and sticking it on the TE of the rudder.You can also take coroplast {its vinyl cardboard} and cut a section of it to put on the TE. Just cut it so you have a piece that is a 90 degree.Make sure the section of the 90 in the airflow is only 1/16 of an inch wide. The coroplast is harder to do but you can get a color to match your plane.I think it looks a lot better than fuel tubing. The reason the FC hunts on the rudder is because the TE is so sharp.All you need is something to break up the airflow slightly. The airframe is very light for sure.I doubt you will notice much diffrence in the vertical speed.All the FC plane's I've flown seem to have a very constant speed all the time. Jason D.