Well, I just had a super boring day indoors with cold weather and all. I made it a reading day and decided to check out some of the forum reports on planes that really interested me.
I got into the Rare Bear forum and read all 48 pages. Whew! What a drag to see so many problems with a plane that literally hundreds of modelers were drooling over in anticipation of club racing and general sport flying.
Later in the day I tackled the Seawind forum. I have to tell you I've never been so depressed in my modeling life as to hear the horror stories encountered by these two plane groups. I want a Seawind as bad as any plane I've dreamed about in years. Just all the broken parts and cracked this and that, the cracked gelcoat, the loose formers, etc. What bothered me just as much were the comments from some about how we should not complain about these matters since the average modeler couldn't build these birds for this amount of money. GEEZ, are people not allowed in this day and age to expect a product that works, dosen't need rebuilt, rehashed, moded, new hardware? Would people feel just as good about going down to the BestBuy and getting a new digital camera and finding out it dosen't really work without different batteries and you had to reassemble it, but oh well, the price was better then I could have built one myself? I would be the first to admit, I'd be years building a fiberglass fusalage like the Seawind. Is that really the point? For me the point is things are not being supplied as represented. The fact that the retracts don't work in the water and are only usable on land is a total fib on the part of Great Planes. Kinda a matter of, "well we never clearly told anyone this thing is not REALLY an amphibian, but we're content to let you believe this."
I have had very good luck over the years with arfs for the most part but I feel were starting to see a trend here with more and more manufacturers rushing to see who can beat out who with the new "SuperNitroMasher 500" and too hell with quality control. Anyone else gettin tired of being the test market? Obviously, the suppliers who cater to their customers needs will win out over time. Most every problem that was reported in those two forums could have been prevented had the manufacturer institued proper quality control measures. Classic case of "we don't have time to do it right, but we got time to do it again". Just my thoughts, disagree if you want, but they were free. LOL

I feel your pain NIpilot, I have owned, built and flown ARF"s from every manufactur'er around, starting with the DuBro ARF that was manufactured in the sixty's. Some good, some better, and alot worse. I must say that the best overall ARF, I've ever assembled, was the "KANGKE," Laser 2000. I realize that by makeing that statement I'm opening myself up, because what I say is very subjective. Nothing, and I mean nothing.........could I find wrong with the design, or the components of the kit. I was so impressed with the quality of the kit that I just ordered another KANGKE kit from Chief. WACO BIPE.

I do not necessarily agree. My most recent ARF's have been 3 QQ Yaks, GP Hawk, and a few other major brands. They have all been of superb quality. For the most part I believe all the high-end ARFs are of incredible qualty considerng the conditions and pay the builders work under.
Now motors, servos and electronics are another issue. For a couple of years now the trend has been to get new products out before they have been adequately tested and let the buying public be damned. I will no longer purchase new release servos from any company until they have been out for several months and I can determine what problems they have.

It just so happens that im building the RareBear for a freind from the club....The thing with ARF's is that they put in all the stuff to build it..but that is THERE idea of how the plane should go together...if you could look at this bear...It is so bashed that I lost bout 30 pds of ply "none of the guts were used"...ok...little far feched,,,but still...you just have to use your head and do what it takes to make the model fly the way you want it...if we depend on the manufacture to make a "perfect" model...welllllllllllll.,,,we'll be waiting a longgggggggg time...but,,,all in all,,,,ARF's are what I like...quick and easy...I built for years....and i love the "new way to fly..."

My comments were directed toward one particular ARF, by one particular Manufactur'er. The KANGKE, Lazer 2000. When an industry grows as fast as the RC industry has been changing lately, it souldn't come as any suprise when some of the products are released on the market before they have been fully tested and developed. I'll admit..........I'm a guini Pig, because most of the ARF's I buy (and engiines), alsso, I buy just so I'll be the first at the field with it. I'm a sucker for any new product. Always have been, always will be. I have much more money than I have sense.

Our company puts a two page suggestion flyer entitled "Getting the most from your ARF" in the box of every ARF we sell. Perhaps you might find some of its suggestions helpful. Some will be obvious and well known, some may be new to you.... if anyone would like a copy, please send me an email so that I can attach it in an return email.

Regards,
Mike McGraw, President
GCBM R/C Models Inc.

Importer and distributor of the Glowplugboy, Fusion 3D 90, Cap Xtreme, Melody, Harmony, and Extra 300 ARF line.

[link=http://www.gcbmrc.com]www.gcbmrc.com [/link]

I just got back into RC after a long layoff.... like 15-20 years and was quite happy to see all the airplanes being offered as ARFs. I've been building from plans, drew my own plans, built from scratch, designed my own, built for sale, whatever you want to call it, since the '60s..... and first thing I did was pick up a beautiful little ARF. And it was excellent.

Then I bought a Phoenix Sukhoi ARF. And it had some bad stuff in it. But because of my experience, I caught all but the hidden lead weight trick. I fixed everything I felt was wrong and the "build" didn't take but maybe an hour longer than it would have without the fixes. And the sucker flies really good. Very nice. Excellent value for my money. Probably is a fair value for most short timers, new to flying models, average flyer of today.

Then I bought a World Models .46 Ultimate and that beauty is VERY VERY well designed and built. It's only got one thing I though was a problem but the mfg construction looks excellent. That one thing is something that would be very obvious to an experienced biplane builder. But then I found out about the Raidentech Ultimate that is about $30 cheaper. Everything about the Raidentech points to it being either an early version built for WM and rejected by them, or maybe it's WM's seconds, or maybe it's just a cheaper run off the line that also mfg's for WM. Whatever it is, it turns out to not have included a couple of decent items. For example, it doesn't come with the VERY useful wing incidence template/supports. And just a day or so ago, while discussing how much of a value the Raidentech Ultimate was, I noticed that the design of the center, top wing struts was significantly different than the WM struts. And nothing about the Raidentech design was an improvement. Matter of fact, everything about them was a big negative. What did turn on a light for me was that most people with decent experience would have probably looked hard at that Raidentech while sticking it together and if they didn't fix the problem while sticking it together, would have been watching for problems from it on the first flights.

And I've helped guys at the field with their new ARFs. One of them got a $200+ beauty that came without instructions of any sort. Cost savings? or poor quality control? Neither is really acceptable in today's world.

So the Raidentech/World Models Ultimate makes a point about todays ARFs.

My opinion is that every ARF I've stuck together so far has had a flaw that really would not have been there had the mfgs actually been experienced builder/flyers. And one of them had multiple flaws. Most of the flaws weren't close to being fatal flaws, but a couple probably would cause considerable grief to people who would probably think it was their flying that was at fault.

I'd say that the issue brought up by this thread is one I've noticed and have been somewhat amazed at. It's amazing that the design and construction is so top notch and that there are dead stupid mistakes, and those are screw ups in areas that're outside the design/construction part of the process. They're things that only show up when you fly the suckers! Don't they test fly what they mfg?

Don't know about your experience with Raidentech ARF's but here's a horror story.
I wanted a throw in the car electric Cub, saw one on Raidentech's site for $55 + shipping.
Couldn't be that bad right? WRONG!
Everything was wrong from the start. The manual has a split elevator shown but the fuse has two tube for pushrods.
One for elevator, the other for rudder. It shows wooden pushrods, none supplied or useable with the fuse.
Box shows a Yellow Cub, mine is a Blue Decathalon "sort-of" covering.
Wheels axles were three sizes too big, struts won't fit, the clevises don't have a chance at fitting. It has
been a joke. What a waste of money. I could elaborate all the other misfitting, wrong junk, lousy manual
but I'll spare everyone the whine

Never fails somebody has to open up a thread to let ARF bashers vent their steam. Some people might call this a troll.

There are plenty of good examples of bad ARFs to pick on - especially near the bottom end of the price scale and from lesser brands. If you are gauging the entire ARF industry by them, then you are truly looking at it with a jaundiced eye.

Try sampling from the more respectable brands and a bit higher on the price scale, then see if you still think ARFs are a waste of money. I can talk about 35% composite ARFs, but really, one doesn't need to look any farther than the $200 Sig Kadet Senior ARF. I have one, and I have also build several Kadet kits in the past. The ARF version is precision built and very well finished. Any builder would be proud to come anywhere close to its construction quality - at any where close to $200 in overall cost. And that's not counting the labor required.

Wake up and smell the sweet absence of CA fumes. ARFs have arrived.

I too had a Kangke Laser 2000 with a G-62 on it.....it was one of the sweetest flying planes I've owned. After 3 years of flying/fun, the only reason I sold it was to make room for a new plane and to help a friend get into gassers............

I bought a Kangke Laser 2000 a few years ago. ZDZ 60 engine.

The engine sucked--but when I finally dumb-thumbed the plane into the dirt about 2 months ago--I went right out and bought a new one within a week. I liked it that much.

The Kangke quality is pretty high IMO. For a Giant Scale ARF under $450--it's top notch!!

I bought the MW 40 size Ultimate too. I thought the little wing templates were a really nice addition to the box. How in the world would you ever get the incidence right without that little jewel? The quality is very good--which is typical of World Models.

My worst experience so far has been the Seagull 40 size Decathlon with 68" wingspan. It's a pretty nice ARF--outta the box. Tail pushrods are installed. Covering and framing is very good. Design is very good.

My problem with this model was quality control. Silly me I expected the incidence to be correct on a factory built model thats most likely built in a jig. WRONG!! I made a rookey mistake and didn't check the incidence untill AFTER I flew it and discovered that the horizontal stab was pretty far off.

I don't know how I would have fixed it. With a H. Stab that has 4* positive incidence--what are ya gonna do? I couldn't hack the stab out--that would have menat a total rework of the rear end of the plane--even if I had caught it before I glued the stab on. What are ya gonna do with it?

I could have reworked the wing saddle--but that would have also meant stripping the covering off and sanding the saddle down to make it match the tail. Neither option was acceptable to me.

I should have known better than to just slap it together without dry-fitting it first and checking the incidence.[:@] But, you'd think it would be built close enough to at least fly decent.

Thats my only real complaint about ARFs. I've bought cheap ARFs and I've bought expensive ARFs. I find that the best quality comes from the ones that are priced right about in the middle or slightly higher end for sport fliers. I wasn't really too impressed with the quality of the very expensive ARFs. Decent--but not worth the extra $150 for a 40 or 60 sized model.

I'll never pay $750 or $800 for a 50cc sized model. I really can't see the quality being THAT much more than a $400 or $500 model. $250-300 is a LOT of money. For that much of a price difference--that 85" model thats designed for a 50cc engine----it better weigh 13 pounds RTF with an average 50cc engine and it should have 1450sq.in. of wing. To my knowledge--none of them fit that criteria.

I don't buy the stupid cheap ones anymore either. They just aren't cheap enough for the quality you end up with.

Overall--I think that with the huge volume of ARFs on the market--your bound to find a turd now and then. I think that about 90% of them are pretty decent.

The absolute best ARF I have ever purchased was Knagke Laser 2000. Covering perfect with hardly any shrinking needed. Component fit.....excellent. Glue joints......obverkil W/glase tape on high stress parts such as firewall, and landing gear. Still waiting on weather for test flight. While I'm waiting I just bought a Kangke Waco ARF, because I was so impressed with the Laser. I paid 310.00 for mine from RCS.

I too have a Kangke Laser 2000 and as soon as I opened the box I was totally impressed with the quality. Mine has Moki 210 in it and that too is quality all the way. I also have a H9 46% Ultimate which is also brilliant quality, plus Gt Planes and World Models arfs too. But there are ARFs out there which are crap and the Thunder Tiger planes fall into that category I have had three two are dead and buried and the latest is waiting putting right before it crashes! It isn't just the money wasted it is the real chance somebody will be hurt or killed by one of these and then watch the outcry, insurance going through the roof etc etc. It is not fair to knock a kit or maker if one guy doesnt know how to build his arf or puts a 2 times too big engine in, but if there is poor quality we should make it widely known not just sit there and take it, because that way nothing will change.

Bob:
You stole that Laser for $310. Wish I'd gotten at least 1 of mine for that.[]

They are nice planes. Not the best 3D ship in the world--but extremely smooth for IMAC and sequence flying. Thats all I want out of it anyway. I've got other planes for 3D.

I've seen the Kangke Monocoupe fly with an RCS 180. Excellent quality and scale performance.

I agree I was lucky to find it for 310.00. I made a comment about the price and they sold out in three weeks. I have a friend that has the Kangke Rearwin Speedster, and I've seen it 3D with the best of them. It's over powered of course but that's nowmal for these days. I'm like you.......I don't care much for 3D. I prefer the Imac and scale manuvers done in a scale like manner. I leave the 3D flying for those that are still trying to learn how to fly an airplane in a scale like manner. There..........I guess that will shake em up.

I like doing 3D--but I discovered early on that this Laser 2000 isn't really all that good at it. It'll knife-edge and hover/torque--but it's not very good for harriers, walls and waterfalls. I didn't even bother with 3D after I flew the first one about 10 times. It's just a really smooth sequence flyer--and thats all I want from it. I might fly it in IMAC this year--if I can get it put together and fly it a bit before spring. I was flying my World Models 80" Patty--and there's nothing wrong with that plane for IMAC or 3D. I just might try the Laser a few times this year.

My favorite 3D plane is a little CMP 40 3D Giles w/TH .75 engine inverted.

I have the Powerline 46 size Edge 540 on a bench right now--but it's on hold untill I finish a 4*120 kit. I'm excited to fly the little Edge--it looks like a 3D monster with my TH .75 engine and a cline regulator with tank on CG.[sm=spinnyeyes.gif]

I Own the Kangke WACO and it is the best arf that I have owned. YES, including the hardware. I have built about a dozen arfs.

Glad to hear that news. I have many airplanes that will 3D includeing one that's just about ready for testing. Aeroworks 36% Katana. You can see my fleet on this site by checking "MY Gallery at the bottom of this post.

RC Flyer, good luck with IMAC

Very nice BOB... You can see my WACO at my Gallery too... If you have checked the WACO thread you have seen mine. Good luck with yours.

I love my ARFs , I think there is a new word in modeling that needs to be added .
we have
1)Builders , use to be me when I had the time ,
2) we have ARFs , they love the ease and time savings of the ARFs and really just like flying so they make suger tweeks to make the planes safe and fun
3)Me- new group -lets call ourselves the finishers . We like ARfs but are anal about the detail and the stupid "why did they do that stuff" to the planes .So we take basicilly good arfs , usually add strength, new hardware and better retracts if needed .But then we go one step further , we either paint , or structally change planes by adding flaps , or better tail airfoils , or more scale detail like interiors , sliding canopys , rivits ect ect ect .
As far as overall quality , we the RCU consumer have shown the demand for ARFs so we had a huge rush of "want to me companys" come into our hobby . As a result its 100% a buyer beware . Example , I have real CMP warbirds and just bid on a copy and won for $68 bucks with shipping it will run me $118 . Now on the surface I am getting a 70" Hellcat , fiberglass fuse , stand way-off scale WW2 plane . But I know -1 the ebay seller is questionable , the plane will probably need hardware and reinforcemnet out the cazoo and a new paint job . Buts for me its better then building from scrach . All i hope is that is gets to my house complete and in one piece

Don't you guys snivel too much about the quality of arf's... I've seen some pretty junky kits in my day. Where do you think the term die crunched came from. Enjoy the flying and leave the building to us old fa_ ts.[8D]

My comments regarding the Rare Bear and the Seawind I think can be regarded as "fact" unless you can somehow make an arguement that all those individuals on the forum sites got together and formed a conspiracy to bash these two arfs I mentioned.
My intention was and still is to point out that Thunder Tiger and Great Planes both should be ashamed to rush to market with products that are not in keeping with customers expectations. Now being in the retail environment myself, I know first hand that people can have high expectations. Wanting a plane that the tail dosen't fall off is not wanting too much! Wanting an amphibious seaplane with retracts that work in both worlds may be a hard thing to provide from a technical standpoint. Its not to much to expect that Great Planes would make obvious in there advertising that this product does NOT provide this experience. At any price. I have had several Great Planes products and was very satisifed. If I'd bought this thing and found out some $700 later it was not amphiboius in the trustest sense of the word. I would be very dissappointed. Thats just me.
And by the way, I also have a Kange Laser 2000 and its one kick butt airplane. First rate all the way! If all manufacturers had the sense of fairness in their dealings with there customers that Kange has, we would have nothing ever to gripe about.

Here's a thought. Build yer own. Either from plans or a kit. If you do buy an ARF check it out at the store first. I like Pheonix ARF's . They are cheap and IMHO good value for money. OK they are not the best ARF's on the market but they don't claim to be. But they do represent value for money. I can't see the point paying top $$$ for a plane that somebody else built.

That's a good idea. Build yer own. If you want to. The trouble with building from full kits is, very few people can build as well as most quality built ARF'S are today. In my 45 years of RC I don't think I've ever seen a "KIT," that didn't have to have part of the wood replaced, or make modifications for structual strength. As someone else said above, "remember the day's of "DIE CRUNCHING?" I do indeed remember those days. I can also remember when it was sheer joy to build from a kit that had band sawed part's that you didn't have to sand, and trim to make them fit. Before that, the best we could hope for was that the dies used to punch out the kit's, had just been replaced so the parts would seperate better. Bet I'm not the only one that recalls those good old day's. Come to think of it.............TO He-- with the good old days. I'll take these days, where the better built ARF'S, are the best value we've ever had for our modeling dollar. ARF'S are here to stay.

Here I am in another discussion I said I would never be a part of--(some of us never learn or else cannot pass up the bait)

My first ARF was a plastic Lanier Dart ($50) with a Magunm 61-- then I got a Royal ARF trainer($95)--when I joined the wings, one wing half was about 3/8 inch in front of the other--over the years there have been a number of GP ARF-- Pitts and Wagstaff-Dave Patrick-World Models of various flavors and also some high dollar Aeroworks ARFs/Composite ARFs etc..... I think they are all of good quality, but some are not worth the money and I will leave it at that. When comparing the GP Pitts at $400 to the Aeroworks Ultimate at $600 (then you had to buy the hardware) I could not see the difference in quality for the difference in price. nuff said!

Then I bought a Kangke Waco here on RCU for $350 shipped to my door and I will say that it is by far the best to date as far as quality/design/parts fit/value for the money even at full retail, and just about everything else.

SUMMARY: I used to build kits because I had to and some were a joy! But I cannot build as well as ARFs (most of them, anyway) are constructed in this generation. Are there problems? You bettcha! Can you take a box of sticks and do better? Some people can-I can't! Therefore I don't complain.

PS-- this statement is not meant to start a war, but most of the ARF bashers that I have met, are master builders. They do excellent work and enjoy a talent that not many can duplicate. Since starting in this hobby in 1989, I remember when the only great looking and flying planes were the few constructed by these guys. I have built many kits -- and while they flew good, they did not look the best. I sometimes wonder if these remarks come from the fact that they no longer have all the attention at the field.