Hobbico or Goldberg
11-03-2003, 03:40 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Fairfax Station,
VA
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hobbico or Goldberg
I crashed my LT-40 Kadet trainer this weekend, and lost the wing. It will take time to rebuild the wing and, as a result, I will loose what is left of the flying season. Therefore I would like to get an ARF trainer to finish out the season.
Which is better, the Goldberg Eagle II or the Hobbico Superstar 40? I have never built and ARF and am not familiar with the quality of either kit. Would appreciate any input.
Victor
Which is better, the Goldberg Eagle II or the Hobbico Superstar 40? I have never built and ARF and am not familiar with the quality of either kit. Would appreciate any input.
Victor
11-03-2003, 03:57 PM
#2
RE: Hobbico or Goldberg
I use both the Tower .40, which is the twin brother to the Superstar, to teach on and the Eagle 2 as a camera plane. The Hobbico is a much stronger plane but heavier. The Eagle has the best overall flying qualities of any plane out there. Both go together well, except I did have to re-enforce the firewall, built a glass engine mount, and added plywood formers to the wing saddle of the Eagle. If you never built an ARF, I would go with the Hobbico, the instructions are much more clear, much less parts to modify, and this plane can really take a beating. My Tower 40 is 12 years old and still takes a tremendous amount of abuse from students. My Eagle ARF is not even a year and already I had to re-glue the firewall and fix a split in the fuse.
Scott
Scott
11-03-2003, 04:04 PM
#3
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Fairfax Station,
VA
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Hobbico or Goldberg
While I have never built an ARF, I did build my Kadet from a kit. Am presently helping my son build a SE from a Kit and I have a goldberg tiger kit awaiting me as well.
That being said, as I understand, you believe the the Hobbico is sturdier and will go together easier vs. the Eagle whcih is a bit more fiddly but flies better.
That being said, as I understand, you believe the the Hobbico is sturdier and will go together easier vs. the Eagle whcih is a bit more fiddly but flies better.
11-03-2003, 09:33 PM
#4
Senior Member
My Feedback: (13)
RE: Hobbico or Goldberg
Why not the Sig LT-40 ARF?
I have dealt with over a dozen different trainers, and IMO the LT-40 is hands-down the best of the "cookie-cutter" ARF trainers out there. There are three problems with it:
1. The supplied wheels weigh a ton. This doesn't mtter to some; it did to me.
2. The broad chord wing, which is a bit larger all-around (64" vs 60" ) than most of the other's and provides better performance (again, IMO), is also a minor source of irritation, as it is a bit TOO wide for #64 rubber bands. They fit, but its tight. #67s are better, and hard to find.
3. The supplied plastic pushrods are pretty lame. Easily and quickly replaced.
Unlike many ARFs, the hardware that comes with the Sig LT-40 is mostly excellent and quite usable. Most of it is DuBro stuff. The pushrods are the only real gripe in that area. Still, they're better than the balsa stick, brittle metal, and cheap heat-shrink one finds in most ARFs.
Having said all of that, the CG Eagle would be my second choice. Also, the Goldberg ARFs are a definite league above the Hobbicos, IMO. I say that after having built several of each brand. I'm doing a CG Ultimate right now; super-duper quality.
.
I have dealt with over a dozen different trainers, and IMO the LT-40 is hands-down the best of the "cookie-cutter" ARF trainers out there. There are three problems with it:
1. The supplied wheels weigh a ton. This doesn't mtter to some; it did to me.
2. The broad chord wing, which is a bit larger all-around (64" vs 60" ) than most of the other's and provides better performance (again, IMO), is also a minor source of irritation, as it is a bit TOO wide for #64 rubber bands. They fit, but its tight. #67s are better, and hard to find.
3. The supplied plastic pushrods are pretty lame. Easily and quickly replaced.
Unlike many ARFs, the hardware that comes with the Sig LT-40 is mostly excellent and quite usable. Most of it is DuBro stuff. The pushrods are the only real gripe in that area. Still, they're better than the balsa stick, brittle metal, and cheap heat-shrink one finds in most ARFs.
Having said all of that, the CG Eagle would be my second choice. Also, the Goldberg ARFs are a definite league above the Hobbicos, IMO. I say that after having built several of each brand. I'm doing a CG Ultimate right now; super-duper quality.
.
11-04-2003, 08:15 AM
#5
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Fairfax Station,
VA
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Hobbico or Goldberg
I don't want the LT-40 ARF because I plan to repair the LT-40 kit version that I toook out the wing on sunday. I am just looking for a low cost, yet decent kit to get me through the rest of the season without having duplicate aircraft
11-04-2003, 05:04 PM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Hobbico or Goldberg
Why get another trainer? Have you considered the Avistar? It's just a small step up from a trainer, but flies much better and capable of basic aerobatics. The only difference from the Superstar is the wing, which is semi-symetrical. You'll enjoy flying it much longer than the flat-bottom wing trainers.
