graham_mac

I am in the market for a larger Tiger Moth and have been leaning towards the Pacific Aeromodel version over the Great Planes model.

But doing google searches I keep finding this one http://www.nitroplanes.com/timo12076arf.html at various affiliate type model web sites. The interesting thing is that it carries the same registration number R-5130 as one of the Pacific Aeromodel/Green Models Tiger Moths.

There is no sign of the pull pull rudder/elevator, but then the aircraft in the photos shows no control runs period. Nor is any rigging shown as if the was a model just slotted together quick for the photos. Otherwise it does look like a PacAero one... but the span quoted is not quite right.

I am wondering if it really is possible that this is a Pacific Aeromodel ARF at a vastly reduced price... or maybe just a low quality rip off. Anyone have any insight.

BobbyGee

My Feedback: (3)

I'm unfamiliar with the kits involved but, just as an observation, don't be swayed by the registration number.

Just by way of reference, it seems that every CAP 21 I've ever seen carries reg. no. F-WZCH, regardless of kit manufacturer. Some are real nice kits, some are bowsers.

Keep doing your homework before you draw conclusions!

BobbyG

flyer495th

Just one note; the Nitro plane does not use any flying wires on the wings. The pacific Aeromodel uses the flying wires and they are adjustable to keep the wing true.

jrf

My Feedback: (551)

The landing gear and wing struts are different as well. I'd have to say it is a rip off. Also, Nitro Planes (Raiden Tech) is known for selling cheap copies of better quality models.

Jim

graham_mac

All fair comments.... thanks. Yes I noted the lack of flying wires but as there are also no control runs visible either I wondered if this was not a completed model as photographed.

Thanks for that insight jrf, that is the background knowledge I was looking for... the clincher
I know Green Models make a special version for Hobby Lobby of the .30 version... so I thought it might not be inconcievable that they were doing a special for Raiden Tech. But at this price it has to be unlikely I guess.

I'll keep on saving my pennies..

damagedgoodes

graham mac,
Can't comment on the maker of the other model in the pic but i own a Pacific Aeromodels 120 size tiger. All i can say is in this instance you get what you pay for. The quality of mine was nothing short of excellent. Thats not to say yours will be (everyone has a dud that gets through) but i haven't heard anything bad about them. Of all the ARF's I have it is by far the best in terms of covering, wood used in construction and trueness of all structures. I fly mine with an OS Surpass III 120 (the normally aspirated fuel pumped version) and it fly's like a gentle trainer at 1/3 throttle but open her up and she'll do rolls, loops, spins and hammerheads with ease. It is my favorite in the hanger and worth every cent ($700 AUS for the kit). It's a bit larger than the GP and has a lot of scale potential. If you get one the mods i made were to replace the pull/pull cables with dubro as the supplied clevises are metric (great quality) but if you loose one somehow at least you can use another dubro one and i used 80 pound fishing trace for the flying wires as i snapped two with the supplied cables doing aerobatics. Goodluck and Jim (JRF) is also a great source of help, he helped me out when i got mine (thanks Jim).

Doug 50

I have one as well.It flies very well on an elderly OS120.Highly recommended!
The flying characteristics are very much like the full-size,i.e.use lots of rudder!
The field where I fly is 5300'above sea level and the 120 pulls it just fine.

Doug.

graham_mac

Thanks guys I really appreciate your comments here, I agree that you get what you pay for in this hobby and a too good to be true deal probably is not true.

I must admit the smaller PacAero version is tempting purely for convenience, and I do have an old OS40FS sitting idle.

Thanks again...
Graham

x3heimmr

I have bought one of these Tiger Moth ARFs from Nitroplanes. It appears to be a copy of the Pacific Aeromodel. I even took it to my local club meeting for advice. Only changes suggested were to replace the foam wheels and use a better tailwheel assembly. This plane is set up for pull pull rudder, dual servos on elevator. I am thinking of a Saito 180 for power. I plan to replace any hardware that looks weak. Plane was well packed and had no damage. There are only a few areas where the covering needs to be tightened with a heat gun. I could not have asked for a better deal. Total bill was $192 shipping included. Now as long as it doesn't disintegrate on the first flight, I'll be happy........

graham_mac

Hi x3heimmr... well that doesn't sound so bad. Changing out fittings from any kit or RTF is a normal thing for me anyway so that would be no hardship, it's just a part of building properly I would say. Also I am sure I have read that the Pacific Aero version has hard foam wheels too.

I am very interested to read that it is set up for the pull pull rudder and elevator again like the Pac Aero. Can you tell me please if the wings are one piece or two (four panels in all) and if they slot on to metal joiners with active rigging wires to hold them on like the Pac Aero?

I looked at a Great Planes Stearman in a local shop and the covering was awful... more wrinkly that my grannies stockings... so a little work with a heat gun is to be expected. If it hangs together it sounds interesting yet. Thanks for the feedback sir.

Graham

x3heimmr

grahm-mac,
The wings are 3 pieces for the top and two pieces for the bottom. Each major component was packed in its own bag. The dacals are not applied. All decals came on sheets in another bag. 3 pieces for the top wing because of the center section. They are aligned with an aluminum tube and a couple od steel pins. the fit is very tight. The cabanes are atreamlined aluminum. Flying wires should be functional, but depending on how well they work, they may be replaced with something else. I'll try the ones in the kit first. The directions are very brief - only six pages. But, With this kit, I don't see the need for a big book unless this is your first build ever.

I am thinking od a Saito 180 for this plane. Anyone out there have any suggestions??

Thanks

x3heimmr

I forgot to mention in the post above that the pull pull rudder setup is different from the Pac-Aero model. This one doesn't look as good. I may go with a solid control rod or a rod/tube combo. Haven't decided yet. I also read in another thread where someone bought a replacement wing from one of these Chinese companies. The original plane was good, but the replacement wing was not good. These things are put together by hand. I'm sure there are good Chinese employees and bad Chinese employees. Just hope you don't get a bad one. I read another post somewhrere that one of the CMP distributors started. He is asking for comments and suggestions on how to improve their reputation, make the products better, etc. It looks loke the fellow is genuinly trying to doo good business. Just my 2 cents........

ElectRick

My Feedback: (2)

I have the Great Planes PT-17.

The only wrinkles I found on mine were a few small ones on the top wings and one half the bottom wing near the edges. I don't understand why a few easily shrunk wrinkles in the plastic covering is such a great big deal to so many. Do your plastic covered kit planes not eventually need a little tightening up after a couple seasons too?

Considering these ARFs almost exclusively come from the Pacific Rim on container ships to the west coast, and are then distributed by truck or rail all across the country, is it any wonder why they might wrinkle a bit during all the extreme heat and humidity cycles they must endure on the trip?

It's a penny's worth of electricity and five minutes with a heat gun to fix, guys--for crying out loud.

I am much more concerned with an ARF's (not the GP PT-17) potential lack of quality construction, poor wood, bad engineering, crummy flight performance, or missing/poor hardware and accessories. Those conditions all are much more significant, requiring significant time and/or money to be spent to correct.

I would never disqualify a purchase of any ARF based solely on wrinkly covering.

JMHO.

Rick

graham_mac

>>>I looked at a Great Planes Stearman in a local shop and the covering was awful... more wrinkly that my grannies stockings... so a little work with a heat gun is to be expected.<<<

Above is what I wrote and from that I think it is clear that I do not see having to tighten the covering as a significant problem at all. In the context of the more detailed questions I was asking the wrinkle comment was in defense of ARF's... re-shrinking is to be expected and therefore no big deal.

quote: "I would never disqualify a purchase of any ARF based solely on wrinkly covering."

Nor would I.

Graham

ElectRick

My Feedback: (2)

On second read, maybe I misinterpreted your comments regarding the wrinkled covering.

However, my comment stands true for many whom I've seen rag on and on in shock and dismay over finding wrinkled covering on an ARF in the box, as if it were a sure sign of inferior quality. It's a virtual non-issue to me, as it apparently is for you--and ought to be for everyone. Only if the wrinkles won't shrink out would it be a legitimate quality issue to me.

It simply amazes me that some actually expect a tight wrinkle-free covering job on a mass-produced airframe that has traveled extremely long distances under fairly extreme conditions. That's a totally unrealistic expectation, IMHO.

I would actually be shocked to find a typical ARF WITHOUT wrinkles when I opened the box.

Rick

graham_mac

Agreed Rick, and I also agree that posts here, like emails, are so very easily misinterpreted that I maybe should have not got my feathers quite so ruffled

I'm looking forward to your further reports x3heimmr... if this airframe is sound then at this price it seems like it could be a good starting point especially as I like the yellow fuselage/silver wing style colour scheme and so would consider stripping the wings and re-covering in a silver heat shrink fabric.

iamrandy

I, too, have bought the Nitroplanes Toger Moth 120. I am ecstatic. This is a large plane. Well covered and apparently well built. If you have a few ARFs under your belt, there shouldn't be that much of a need for instructions. The only thing I have observed lacking is how to balance the aircraft...i.e. where is the Center of Gravity? But that's what my friends on RC Universe are for. I would not doscourage anyone from this plane.

Red B.

I know this is the ARF/RTF forum, but have you considered building a Moth from a kit?
If so I would recommend the Flair Tiger Moth. Although it will take some time to complete, the build isn't difficult and the result is usually fantastic. The kit is of good quality and very complete (rigging wire, wheels cowling, sprung landing gear etcetera.)

/Red B.

Dolan

Hello, Just wanted to comment on the 120 size Tiger Moths. I've been a modeler for sometime now and recently had a back injury. The Doc has taken me out of work so I now have all this time on hand. So, with that I decided to crawl! back into the sport for lack of better things to do. As I read through your comments on which TM is the best ..........well there a lot of good out there and allot of bad out there. I think a Good modeler can take the worst and make it into what he likes and keep it in the air. I bought the Nitroplanes Tiger moth 120 because of the price and took the extra money that I could have spent on the Pac-Aero model and enhanced the NP Tiger moth. This equals to one hell of a good flying machine. She sports a Saito 1.25, APC 16/6 prop, Sullivan wheels, PULL-PULL control for rudder and elevator, JR electronics. I have to admit that the instructions are yet to be desired with the Nitroplanes TM, But any good Modeler should get through that with no problem. So, which is best?? I think that depends on who is putting it together. I've seen really good kits put together that ended up in the trash heap by wanna be Modelers and really cheap kits that fly better than those so said top quality kits. So my friends there you have it. You just never know. I think the best inventory should come from you as to weather or not the building experience is good for you. I like the more challenging Kits that allow me to think and figure out things for myself and be creative. Therefore I would not be disappointed if the kit is somewhat rough. Just more of a challenge and more of an experiance.
Dolan ~wingman~ Gallier

jrf

My Feedback: (551)

The Pac Aero Tiger Moth is on sale now for $250. I guess the NitroPlanes version must be hurting their sales, but their loss is our gain.

Jim

Clipclop

I have the Aeromodels Tiger Moth and love it. I do suggest that all wires be replaced with a quality, braided fishing leader that can be purchased at a good fishing tackle store or on line with an outdoor outfitter like Pro Bass or Cabela. Let the plane fly itself. Don't worry if it doesn't repond immediately to your inputs. So much wing with ailerons only on the bottom wing make it fly to scale. Mix some rudder with aileron. The only problem with the plane, if it can be considered a problem, it doesn't like to land if there is a hint of a head wind. It just keeps flying and flying and flying!