You gotta admit, they look good on the 'net and in the magazines, and the ~$150 price tag makes them look even better, but are these ARFs any good? I've looked around for some reviews or praise, but with no avail.

NAY, BIG NAY

Might I inquire why you say that?

What BRYAN01601 said.
Why ?. Because I have/had one.
One is one to many with these
There are all kinds of much better ARFS out there
Take a look at WM.

Hideho,

I have just completed a review in the VMAR RV-4 and my overall opinion is that their very heavy. Different type of balsa perhaps. Hardwear like the screws that hold the hatches and the clevis's are virtually unuseable. Great looking though, and I do like the polycoat covering with the graphics printed intp it. The plane flys heavy too, lands pretty hot. Still, it's a pretty acurate semi-scale rendition of the full scale RV-4.
Bottom line is, would I buy one?
Nope, not untill VMAR can build in "lightness" to thier product line.

Just my opinion, use it if you like.

I've been struggling with the VMar Texan II. Looks good, but...
(1) Covering wrinkles badly in cool temp. Will shrink back under high heat, but be careful, very careful, around the seams. They will pull apart really quickly if you get too close with the heat.
(2) The removable firewall invites exhaust gases into the fuselage through the gap between it and the fuselage.
(3) VMar may have tried to do too much for you. The wing mounting dowel does not line up with the hole in the bulkhead and re-aligning it gets to be a major headache.
(4) Strut covers are made of soapy plastic that splits if you look at it wrong. I wrapped mine with trim film to keep them together.
(5) Mounting the engine inverted as suggested results in the fuel tank centerline being above the carb. Not an easy job to adjust.
(6) The FG cowl is very thin and prone to cracking, even with an additional layer of cloth epoxied to the inside.
(7) Haven't flown it yet, so the final assessment is yet to come.

I know what you are saying.. The price and the looks really tend to suck you in. As I stated above 1 is one to many though

On the other hand, I've been delighted with my Vmar Extra. A friend bought one on my advice, and was delighted with it too.

Mine's got over 275 flights on it now, and my friend bought bigger planes and sold his - the second owner is now delighted with it.

Specifically, it was very complete, the assembly was easy, the looks are adequate for an inexpensive plane, it's pretty sturdy, and the flight characteristics are suited to the able student or the accomplished aerobatics flyer. Mine does fine four-point rolls and rolling circles, nice stall turns and humpty bumps, etc. with it.

I don't regret buying my Extra, and I recommend it.

Best wishes,
Dave Olson

About 8 months ago, I got the RV-4 from Vmar , and it flew terrible, it had bad warping in almost every surface, particularly in the elevator, "kinda important". I put an OS 61 FX in it thinking it would be great. It is too heavy of an airplane, but is tough and pretty to look at. ON the other hand my buddy just flew the tomahawk, and its a great airplane. Im sure they have some good and bad airplanes.

I bought my TexanII because of the write up in Oct.issue of Airlplane News,looked great in the magazine.I posted jan 1 after I finished this plane,and said it was junk,and it is.This inexpensive 150.00 plane turns into 500.00 after engine etc.The main landing gear were both bent the wrong ways,not from shipping,the wheel collar set screws both snapped when I tightned them,the covering is wrinkeled and I couldnt iron it out for nothing,I screwed in the engine mount,the back of wall split,there are many other imperfections to the plane that I just decided that I wouldnt trust it for flight.This my first and last Vmar,very unhappy with it.I gave it a hanging(on my ceiling).Money doesnt grow on trees,I am not tight for money,but I would like value when I by something. Phooey on Vmar
Carl

Well, I can tell you even as a rookie flier my H-9 Alpha looks like a mercedes on the inside compared to their ApacheII . I soloed with the ALpha on my ninth flight! and the Apache I could not get trimmed ( I used their hardware since it was already installed, against my first instincts) On the planes third flight, I asked for help to get it to level flight , at the hands of one of our instructors, it came in deadstick and flaired kerrplunk nosed in from about 30inches..no big deal. just hit the long grass shy of the run way..right? WRONG! The plane totally snapped in two ! NO ONE WATCHING COULD BELIEVE IT. When I looked it over I realized the plane has very little in the way of substance ie. real ply and quality anything including the stuff they call epoxy to keep it together. I also noticed that when I took that Polycoat stuff off the whole plane that the sheeting had splits all over the plane! Well there is a market out there, for those of us in a hurry to have flying time but from now on I'm going back to building, thats the other fun part of this Hobby!

Can't say how they fly.Mine arrived yesterday and is sitting on the table. I'll say this...It's one eye catcher for dang sure.Fantastic lookin' plane. I posted in groups and even talked back and forth with the rep from RichmondRC.com.I think the negative side is what you'll find in most ng's.

I only heard two negatives that came up more than once...They are a bit heavy and don't crash it...The covering looks great as is,not with patches here and there.Graphics galore.

All and all..I'm very pleased with what I see and you can't find a plane that looks like that for 169 anywhere.I bought the Edge540T in green.There's not an instruction book on the market that looks like this one either. I'd say go for it but again this plane is still on the table so don't know what will happen at the field. May just sit it there and look at it...Cheers..Walt

I just purchased a VMAR V-Stick 40. Ths kit was packaged very well and looks great. It came with everything you need except engine and radio gear. I did not like the landing gear that came with it so I used the gear I had on my old Global 40T trainer. This looks better and is much stronger. I also opted to not use the clevis that came with it. I use the easy eyelets with the servo's and find them much easier to us and adjust. I have also epoxied the fire wall and added some epoxsy to the body in area's where it looked flemzie. For the Money this plane is well built and easy to put together. I have bought some other ARF kits and they to had some things that had to be addressed before you could fly. VMAR is a good kit for the money and I well buy another in the future.

Nay - from experience.

I'll admit they do look good.
VMar uses some interesting techniques but, coupled with substandard materials and spotty craftsmanship, the end result is ARRRGGH!

Some of their ARFs have had pretty good reviews while many have been disappointments to their owners.

Don't just 'look' around for reviews, do a 'search'.

What are you thinking of buying?

Great kits if you want to dig the hinges out and rehinge them to get the U shape out of the ailerons and then laminate the ailerons to get the twist out of them. Just because one elavator half goes up while the other one goes down is no biggie. Corkscrew effect is fun to flywith. Of course the clevises etc they furnish you with are useless if not hazardous. The screw threads will grind out a servo arm in no time. Great kits until you dig a wing tip and the wing shatters like glass.
Then you take your pride and joy to the field set it in the sun and watch the warps set in again.
If there is such a thing as "green" balsa it must be used in these planes. Actually I have been told a lot of it is not balsa but Cottonwood. Couldn't say for sure, I am not familure with cottonwood.
Why would anyone want to go through all this when there are so many better built ARFs out there at the same or better prices ?.