Are particular ARF manufacturers guilty of making bad engine recommendations or is this phenomenon limited to Warbird ARFs that require more weight up front? The reason I ask is it seems some hobbyists complain about going with the recommended engine only to have to add a ton of dead weight to balance the plane. I would like to hear some anecdotes on personal experiences where you went with the recommended engine and the outcome. Also, I think it would be interesting to hear where you've gone far from the recommended (larger, heavy or smaller, lighter then manuf. suggestion) and had it turn out just right. I just want to get an idea of the possibilities and which ARF manuf have no idea what they are recommending.

Haywood:

Some ARF manufacturers recommend low powered engines as a way to avoid product liability claims. The airplanes will fly in a scale manner with the recommended engines, but anyone looking for more performance will use a bigger engine, which not only voids the warrenty, but gives the manufacturer/distributor/dealer a strong defense in any subsequent liability lawsuit.

Knowing this, the better manufacturers will design the airplane to balance with the heaviest recommended engine. Therefore, a light engine will require nose weight.

World models and EZ take this philosophy to an extreme.

Jim