Hi all,

I would like to thank you for your support and patronage. With out you, the customer, we would not be here.

I would like to emphasize that it is very important to use the recommended engine size as stated in the manual for your particular airplane. Whether you are using a 2-cycle or a 4-cycle engine, please stay with in its class. I can not stress enough on this matter. I have seen and read what engine size the customer are putting in to their VQ model planes with out any structural reinforcement. (ie. fiberglassing the center wing section.) As with any plane whether an ARF or a kit plane, if you over-power the plane with out any structural reinforcement, the plane will have a very high risk of structural failure. Our planes were designed and tested at the recommended engine size, any thing larger is at the risk of the owner. These planes are suppose to be flown in a semi-scale manner and were not intended to be rocketships in the air.


Sincerely,

Mike
www.vqmodelaircraft.com

You might want to take a look at the thread on your product.

The natives are restless Mike.

We are not thrilled with your quality control.

Now please don't tell us about over sized engines, deal with the problem, and talk to it

What do you think?

This is your forum to discuss out concerns

Your turn Mike

Steve

Steve,

We have no control in what size engine the customer puts in their planes. I know as a modeler myself, I have a tendency to over-power things to, but in doing so, one must remember to compensate for that modification or any modification. As I have stated "Our planes were designed and tested for the recommended engine size, any thing larger is at the risk of the owner. " We always welcome any comments you may have about our products and are always on a learning process to improve our products.

Sincerely,

Mike
www.vqmodelaircraft.com

I understand your point. You seem to be focused on the size of the engine. I am talking about the quality of your ARFs.

Can we move on?

Can we duscuss your quality control?

I bought one of your Mig-3, and to be honest while it is a pretty plane, I am not thrilled by the quality of the wood, and I am not thrilled about the construction.

Now I can beef up the glue joints, but I would like you to address my point.

Perhaps, I was not direct enough.

Look for threads that discuss VQ products. You seem to have a problem with quality control.

Can you discuss that please.

Is that direct enough?

Steve

Steve,

In reply to your quality question. The wood we use for the model airplane is not balsa as you already know. It is not inferior to balsa nor is it superior to balsa. We are in the process of refitting machinery and stamp press for the change over to balsa for all of our planes, which hopefully would satisfy most of the modelers out there. Balsa which is not native to southeast asia, must be imported in. I hope that answers your concern Steve.


Sincerely,
Mike

www.vqmodelaircraft.com

So what is it?

What is the mystery wood that you are using?

And I did not know it was not balsa, I thought it was an inferior form of balsa

But I do thank you for beginning to address my concerns

Steve

Steve,

The wood is a cotton tree which is natively grown in southeast asia and have similar characteristics to balsa.

I personally liked the wood parts of my Zero, the problem with my plane was the plastic parts cracking just from engine vibration alone. wing saddles, the florebord inside the canopy that supports the pilot has cracked letting the pilot flop around.
I am guilty of overpowering my Zero im using a .91 forestroke. But the tail of the plane was so heavy that even with the heavy .91 in it i still had to add 2 ounces of lead to the nose to ballance it. my plane weighs the same 7 to 7.5 lbs as some others that used smaller engins they had to use even more lead in the nose to ballance it. I like this plane it looks good. just want the plastic parts tot to stay together longer.

Supertiger,

Thank you for your support and patronage. I understand your concern and we are working deligently to find better plastics supplier in southeast asia. I am not making excuses for us, but to start a manufacturing company from ground zero in 2.5 yrs is very difficult and people are not willing to talk or share info on their materials suppliers. So it basically searching for a needle in a haystack especially when we are 1/2 way around the world from our manufacturing plant. We have improved and will be always improving on our products.

In your last post to another client of yours, you talked about the difficulty of starting a company from scratch in 2 /2 yrs, and trying to run a southeastern company remotely.

Mike,

Take a look at the other thread on VQ models. If it doesn't alarm you, then you are sure to fail. You have issues.

Now they are still addressable. The jury is still out. I will tell you that I have pushed back the building of your Mig-3 until two other ARFs are completed. They are a Sig Four Star, and a Hangar 9 Ultra Stick. Why? Because They are better than yours. Not more expensive, better. What makes them better? Quality!!!

I was a manager for 20 years for a fortune 100 company, frankly I don't care how hard it is to manage a company 1/2 way around the world. You want feedback, here it is. You have four choices.

1. Hire someone there who you trust, and tell them you want quality. Quality rules. If you can't find someone you trust can deliver you quality then:

2. Move there yourself to manage it. If you don't want to do this:

3. Get into another line of work. Work for a company where you can insure the quality of your product.

4. Accept responsibily for your product. You have a minor problem compared to some other ARF manufacturers. Take a look at the threads on VMAR ARFs and see if you would want to be in their shoes.

I also thought the following line you said to me: The wood we use for the model airplane is not balsa as you already know. was condescending and inappropriate. I don't know the difference between balsa and cotton wood, why would I?

I was giving you feedback, usually companies pay a great deal for the feddback that you are getting here for free. Apprciate it.

I sent you a priviate message, but you didn't respond to it, ergo, this posting.

Don't bring out new ARFs, address the issues that you find here and fix them, don't make excuses, just fix the problems. They are fixable. That is the good news.

Once you lose your reputation, the lose is forever. You still have yours, be grateful, and use this forum as a place where you are going to get constructive criticism. Whether you choose to take it, that it up to you.

My hope is that you will, your products quality will improve, and we will sing your praises.

Be a Warrior, acceot the criticism as a way for us to tell you what we want different about you product, then act on it.

Now for advice like that, I think I deserve one of your new P-38's that is if the quality is good

Steve

[QUOTE]Originally posted by VQModelAircraft
I would like to thank you for your support and patronage. With out you, the customer, we would not be here.
.........We always welcome any comments you may have about our products and are always on a learning process to improve our products.

[QUOTE]

Steve114,

We don't take anything for granted especially you our customers.

I have a YS FZ63 4-stroke engine in my VQ Zero, which is well within the 4-cycle class specified in the instruction manual. The plane flies great and looks great. However, most of the plastic parts have cracked due to vibration from the engine. Those plastic parts have got to go, including the canopy. The covering seems to be very brittle. I already have some cracks and holes in the covering even though I have yet to dump the plane in tall weed. I had to reinforce the retract mounts, and they are still holding up, even after several rough landings on a grass field. I would love to get another VQ Zero, provided that the fragile plastic parts are replaced with fiberglass parts, the canopy is made out of lexan, and the fuselage is slightly longer. Currently, the fuselage is between 5 to 7 inches too short for its long 62" wingspan.

--
Richard Le

I couldn't get a straight answer from VQ, and I don't see you getting one either.

It is a shame because they truly have some unique ARFs but I have come the belief that VQ stands for Variable Quality.

I don't expect any miracles from this company. They are better than VMAR but behind World Models, Hangar 9, Great Planes, and a number of others.

I am personally looking forward to the new Kondor Models Products, it seems they do care about the customer, and will give us concrete answers instead of the platitudes that I have received thus far.

I saw pictures of the Zero, and it really looks nice, but I no longer trust VQ, case closed in my book


Steve

Guys,

We have made many improvements to our products and will continue to do so. To ensure that you purchase the most updated planes, purchase them directly from Morris Hobbies or have your local hobby shop get them directly from Morris Hobbies. There are still many old but new kits in the box out there that have the issues you are discussing. For those that think we do not listen and care about our customers, we do. We have taken many suggestion and comments from the customers and have applied them. You can email me at [email protected] and I will be more then happy to answer your questions or take your comments.

So what are we supposed to do?

Everyone seems to agree that the plastic is inferior, the wood on my Mig-3 leaves much to be desired, so what do I do?

Just fly it until it falls from the skies?

You make some interesting and unique products but until I read some real good comments about improvements by guys flying them, I will avoid your product.

The way I figure it, you are 5 or 6 in the line of quality manufactirers, that might be good for some guys, but my money is going to the top quality manufacturers.

As far as you listening to us, prove it.

I even went as far as reading the review (called the excellent review on Morris Hobbies) of your A-26, which the Warbird guys were now recommending based on YOUR word that many of the problems they found (including split wood, and shoddy workmanship) were addressed by you.

You might have convinced them, but the way you danced around my most specific questions didn't leave me with a warm and fuzzy feeling.

Steve

I got a straight answer from VQ, and I was fairly happy to hear that VQ has improved the quality of the plastic parts. To be honest, I didn't get my Zero from Morris Hobbies. Thus, the plane might be two to three years old. I already got some replacement plastic parts from Morris Hobbies. I cannot wait to get my hands on another gray/white Zero with improved plastic parts.

Richard L , Are saying that the Zero is not at scale proportions?. when you said that the fuse need to be longer to match the length of the wings. If the tail where a few more inches longer then the plane might balance better with smaller engines and might land better for people like me.
How good does that German Me109 fly and land?

The real A6M5 Zero has a wingspan of 36 feet 2 inches and a length of 29 feet 9 inches. Let's convert these to inches and do some simple algebra:

36 feet 2 inches = 434 inches
29 feet 9 inches = 357 inches

434/62.2 = 357/x

where x in the equation above is how long the VQ Zero should be.

x = (62.2 * 357) / 434 = 51.2 inches

So, if the Zero was true to scale, then it should have been around 51 inches in length. Mine is around 44.2 inches from the rear tip of the fuselage to the tip of the spinner. VQ labels the Zero as "Semi-Scale", so I can't really complain. However, it would fly much nicer and be more stable if the fuselage was longer (longer tail moment).

If the tail was longer, then you would need to add more weight to the nose to balance the plane since the tail would be more heavier. Perhaps this is why the plane has a short fuselage.

The Kyosho ME-109 flies and lands great. It's a floater on landing. You can just chop the throttle when it approaches the edge of the runway, and it will just gently glide in without tip stalling. It weighs only 6.5 pounds with a Saito 72 4-stroke up front. My Zero is 7 pounds 1.8 ounces and needs two or three clicks on the throttle to do a good landing.

Just like watching TV or listening to the radio, if you don't like what's on, CHANGE THE STATION! Enough of your *****ing and
moaning. It serves you right for not doing your research before
buying. Isn't that what a "good" fortune 100 manager would do?
Quit derailing the company issues, learn from your mistakes and
move on. That's my advice to you, and I don't need a free P-38
in exchange!

I see I've got it back wards the tail would be even heavier than it is now. that would mean i might use a 1.8gas engine to balance it without using lead. LOL
even with the bad plastic i still like the VQ models. their the only people making unique aircraft at a price i can afford. maby after they become more successful and profitable they will use better materials the Moris Hobbie web page has a new P38 coming soon Ill be thinking about it in the future.
I don't want to come off to critical about their mistakes in manufacturing, because since Morris Hobbies started selling their planes I've noticed other manufacturers are now offering low priced ARF with retracts for under 200.00$,like the World Models P51 Mustang ARF. competition is always good for the consumer.

hay whstindeath, If you look at the Zero over at the Morris Hobbies Web page you will see why i purchased my plane"That big chested blond airplane holder-upper distracted me and my good senses" that called good advertizeing.

I have given up on VQ

And you are correct I should have done my homework first. My bad.

TThe P-38 line was dripping sarcasm, and if you knew me you would know that. I didn't expect one from VQ, and to be honest I don't want one from them.

I currently have 9 unbuilt ARFS sitting in house waiting to be built, and the P-38 I want is going to be built by Kondor Model Products. Go to their web page and you can take a look at that beauty.

Perhaps I have too much free time on my hands. In my postings to VQ in this thread, I was actually trying to make some constructive criticism of VQ, and their quality control. And I got back from themwas the texas two step as a response. It did push my buttons, I can't stand evasive answers.

Why do I have 9 unfinished ARFs? because I am awaiting a heart transplant, and the only thing I have is too much low quality time right now. My friends have taken to building some of them for me.

I can no longer fly until I get the new heart, because I lack the strength, focus and concentration, and sometimes my frustrations do get the better of me and I do vent on the forum. Sorry, if it offended you.

If you want to see some of my writings on that subject, go to www.hsj.org (that is org not com) and look under the name 'Steve114'. The Article will tell you where I am at. You might even enjoy it.

Bottom line, I just can't stand not getting a straight answer.

Steve

I understand. I wish you the best.

VQ needs to keep on puttingn out those quirky rare ARFs like the Mig and Macchi. When's the last time somebody showed up at your field with a Macchi? How bout a Yak-9, can anyone else think of any other obscure WWII warbirds we can ask VQ to make?

I wish VQ would make a 60-size Messerschmitt Bf109, Focke-Wulf Fw190, or a Mitsubishi A6M2 Zero flown by Japanese ace Saburo Sakai similiar to the one pictured below:



Now that's a nice looking Zero.