Toucan

My Feedback: (1)

Hi,
About six months back a friend of mine bought an Great Planes PT 40 ARF from Tower Hobbies. He some how managed to get it to India with a great difficulty. I was so surprised to see a lousy quality ARF by great planes.

I am so surprised as how can this company sell a Third Grade Model by there own name.

Sharad

apalsson

My Feedback: (1)

Fairly sweeping statements here.
You haven't articulated what was wrong with the kit.
Typically, GP make good quality kits

Volfy

My Feedback: (23)

Judging a person by the looks of his little toe, are you?

PT40 sits at the very low end of GP's offerings. At that level, simplicity and easy of assembly are much more important than form and aesthetics. I've seen it in person, and it's no worse than the Superstars and the Alpha Trainers.

Before you make a blanket statement on GP's quality, at least wait until you've seen a few other GP ARFs. I have no doubt planes like the Patty Wagstaff and Pitts Specials will change your mind about GP's quality.

cloudancer03

My Feedback: (22)

I disagree..I have been modelling for more than 25 years and great planes kits and for that matter midwest make some of the very best planes..I recently tried an arf .long story but I needed something fast and got an easy sport arf..its quality was fine ..parts were good.I only had to give it a few clicks of aileron trim and it flew great. I would have agreed with you had you said you bought a toe...tower kaos or something like that.. early arf's were horrible ..and I hear fellow pilots talk about arf fragility and I guess you have to be careful and in some instances beef up the frame ..

rfw1953

My Feedback: (2)

I'm going to pipe in here. I haven't been flying nearly as long as some, but long enough to know a good ARF from a bad one. I have been very pleased with the quality Great Planes puts out, but even more so with their service. If you have a legitimate problem with a poorly made airplane, G.P. will make it right. They stand behind their products and service. This is a big claim, but I have had personal experience with them and find them to be more than reasonable. Some people gripe about the company, but you have to follow their directions for replacement consideration, which usually involves sending the airplane back to them. They will inspect it to verify the problem and will replace it if warranted. I have never had a problem with them and use many of their products. Give them a call and consider sending the airplane back. I realize you are in India so this does make it a bit more challenging, but then again, you can't expect them to correct a problem simply on your word. There are enough people out there trying to take advantage of good companies.

Hope you can get your problem solved. Communicate, and work with them and I bet you will become a happy customer in the end.

Toucan

My Feedback: (1)

Guys,
I have made over 5 kits of Great Planes, have seen many PT 40 Kits , but could not believe after looking at this one. Usually you get ARFs from Great Planes Monokote covered, this one had a very bad quality Shrink film.

PT 40 is a great Traniner having lot of strength and stability, but this one has very less strength as compared with a kit version, it looks different too. Wing when assembled does not even fit properly to the fuselage, Dowels are so short if some one is flying the rubber bands would just slip out of them in flight.

I would never suggest any one to buy one personally.

Sharad

racer8297

My Feedback: (13)

Well, here is my two cents:

Bought a GP Big Stick 40. Box said it was covered in "Genuine Monokote". It looked great after assembly but after taking it to the field, the covering on the main wing started to sag. When I got home, I used the heat gun to shrink the covering only to find that the covering softened and sagged even more. Upon closer inspection I noticed that the covering had a sticky back to it. It was NOT iron on covering. I flew the plane like that about 10 times. Then the covering started to seperate near the ailerons. I took of the original covering and bought True Red Mononkote as called for on Tower's website. The color was close but not an exact match to the sticky back "Genuine Monokote" on the plane. I recovered the wing anyway. Looks much better now and even flys better because I removed to stupid plastic winglets on the end of the wings.

Without going into it, my EZ Sport from Great Planes also had the same problem but I do not remember if it said "Genuine Monokote" or not.

Regards all,
Jim

Yak18

My Feedback: (11)

If you don't like the product...send it back for a full refund...

That's what makes Great Planes great.

Yak

Volfy

My Feedback: (23)

Umm... this guy lives in India and got the plane from Tower. I think it's safe to assume the return postage will cost more than the ARF.

Toucan

My Feedback: (1)

Dear Volfy,
Thanks for the understanding. We in India with a great difficulty get our aeromodelling equipment, specially kits as they are big in size. Its not that easy to just buy it over the net and next day its on your door steps.

Sharad

lavneet

I learnt to fly on a GP PT40 about 6 years back and it still is one of my most prized models. It was a great quality kit.

Unfotunately it was on my recommendation that he got this ARF coz I will be his instructor. I was surprised to see the quality of the ARF. I found it hard to believe that it was a great planes PT 40(not till i saw the box was I convinced). The covering is some cheap material which has designs printed on it.(it is even inferior to econokote). The overall appearance and shape of the ARF is also different. The model felt rather flimsy. There is another guy I am instructing on a Hobbico Avistar ARF and there are no quality issues there. I expected the GP to be a little bit better than that.

I guess the OEM in the orient let GP down on this one. I also see that GP has discontinued selling this model on the tower hobbies site. It is not hard to understand why.

http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...?&I=LXJ629&P=7

I second everyone who says GP has great service. Even Towerhobbies is excellent in this department. It was for this that I recommended the GP/Tower combo to him. It was very tough for him to get tis model to India(It sat in his sisters house in USA for 6 months till someone finally carried it). It will be next to impossible to have it sent back(considering it is built and RTF)
Cheers

Rocketman612

My Feedback: (85)

I have also built a couple of GP ARF's and am pleased with the planes and construction. I always go over the plane before assembly and the ones I have had good balsa and covering. I always add tristock to the firewall if it's not there or change out some hardware but, I don't think that's unusual. Now if you want to see a piece of **** buy a Tiger Stick[:'(] Pete

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

More to the point.

Why should a manufacturer market a product that has known defects. It would be better for the customer if they purchased a product that they knew to be of high quality. It's the responsibility of the manufacturer to periodically inspect their product at various assembly points. Why should the customer have to pay for shipping and insurance to return a product to the manufacturer? Didn't the consumer already pay the full price for the product? Why should the consumer have to wait an indeterminate period of time to use the product they paid for in good faith?

Why does at least one manufacturer market a product that has several structural defects that can effect the safe outcome of a flight, only own up to the problem on a case by case basis, and then only privately?

I'm not going to point any specific fingers here, but at least one major manufacturer/retail outlet will not EVER get any more of my dollars for ANY of their products due to practices noted previously involving my purchases.. This is the only action I can reasonably take to prevent further aggravation. If others would do the same, I'm certain that corrective action by the manufacturers would soon follow. If not, then business closure in the not to distant future would become a prime possibility. Other companies with integrity and solid ethics would hopefully pick up the slack.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

You folks are missing my point. The person with the gold makes the rules. In my opinion, when I purchase an ARF (lets use $400.00 for a dollar reference) I want the product I am buying to be as free from defects as possible. No matter what the nature of the defect.

This is not in any way to imply that legal forces should be brought into the product side of the hobby. There is too much room for differences in technique. Just build it straight, with good covering, no bends or breaks, with hard points where they are needed, and allow for sound and secure attachment techniques. If the Chinese or whoever can't build it right, take the job to someone who can. We could use a few more jobs in the U.S.

As a paying consumer, I deserve the best product and service that any supplier or manufacturer can provide me if they want to retain my business. Why should I settle for less? This should be the attitude that everyone has. Without this attitude, everything falls to levels of mediocrity that denies excellence.

I pay money hard earned for the pursuit of my hobby. I see no logical reason to have to pay extra for repairs and/or shipping to brand new equipment caused by shoddy workmanship and a manufacturers lack of concern for their consumer.

Toucan

My Feedback: (1)

Dear Post replier,s,
First of all , my statement would be !QUOT!SEEING IS WHAT BELIEVING!QUOT!. I have seen many kits and ARF's and know the difference between them as well. Great Planes being such a big and an American company should keep a check on quality of the products they manufacture or sell, whether they are of high cost or low cost. I use many American and European made products and feel that they all ways take care that right from there packing to their products are all in good shape and should be of an high quality...

Regards

sharad

cometravi

Most of us aeromodellers in India are very very well off but still love a good deal!!!
I have seen that plane and the quality is pretty sad to say the least. It may be a one off case. And its not just about cheap ARF's. I know a lot of people all around the world who order PT 40's just because they are wonderful planes to fly. In fact we have 4 PT 40's in out small club alone. Its a good entry level plane and good value for money so why not. Most people here learnt on PT40's and so its the most popular trainer around here.

lavneet

It maybe GP's rock bottom entry level ARF but it is priced at about 110$ and at par or a little higher than some of the hobico trainers that are far far superior(great monokote covering for one, solid landing gear, better wood quality and an overall solid feel). After being in the hobby for so many years, you can "feel" the difference between a good and a bad product. This just did not feel right to most members at our club. Even the Thunder Tiger trainers flying at our club are better and a lot cheaper than the GP PT40 ARF.
Phoenix models is selling a giles 202 46 on tower for $93. I have a phoenix/seagull ARF and they ae pretty darn good!!!

Ragz

why is the moderator allowing people like volfy to insult here? This sucks big time!!! Not acceptable in a hobby ONLY forum...

glowplug

My Feedback: (1)

Silversurfer, I understand exactly what point you're trying to make...and you are ABSOLUTELY correct.....but here is the reason that I think this is happening......

Back in college I had a business ethics course and we touched on business practices similar to this situation. Before I get into this, let me say this: I'm not saying that the PT-40 is a bad plane (I trained on one too) or GP makes crappy ARFS, (I currently have 2 of them and they're both nice) OK, with that established, here's my take on it:

Manufacturers strive to produce a product to have no known defects.....but many times, defects show up in the products after they have been on the market for some time. The manufacturer SHOULD correct the problem, BUT, what manufacturers often do is a cost analysis....what they are figuring out is, how much correcting the problem will cost vs. cost of claims against the manufacturer because of defective products........guess what, if they determine the potential costs of claims is less, they won't fix the problem. In the model airplane industry, it could be cheaper to deal with the 1% of customers that demand a refund or replacement than to re-tool production of the planes.
It's very sad, but this type of analysis is done in the auto industry, since correcting a problem requires costly recalls......auto manufacturers will calculate the odds of a part failing and causing death or injury, and how much those claims will add up to vs. the cost of recalling the cars.

RC Pilot56

My Feedback: (4)

To all those that have had there post edited by me, it was done to clean up the insults caused by some remarks that were made and to get this posting back on track. Lets stick to RC related items or subjects when making a comparison. Please enjoy this Forum the way it was meant to be used.
My Regards to all,