Thunder Tiger Arf's
02-27-2002 | 06:50 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Junior Member
My Feedback: (22)
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Thorofare,
NJ
Thunder Tiger Arf's
Any comments on Thunder Tiger ARF's in general and the 140 G202 in particular?
Hanger 9's are junk and Sig is not much better. The firewall will pull out with just a prop strike.
NEWKIII
Hanger 9's are junk and Sig is not much better. The firewall will pull out with just a prop strike.
NEWKIII
02-28-2002 | 12:01 AM
#4
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ketchikan, AK,
TT Arf's...I've had lots!
Hey guys...I've got no experience with the bigger planes from Ace/TT, but I do have a Seamaster ARF. This is (by far) the best quality ARF I've seen. Excellent covering job (ultracote), beefy hardware, and good build quality. I also have 2 TT Profiles, a G-202 and Extra 300...these are pretty much the same plane.
The quality here is, ummm, less. The covering is that sticky backed film. Do they fly well? You bet. I crashed one very badly, disintegrating the wing...that night I CA'd it back together from pieces in a sack, covered it with Towercote and flew it the next weekend. Another TT arf I've had a couple of is the TT Champion 45S, on floats, which is pictured below. Nice flying airplane. I have crashed 2 of them and the fuselage breaks right behind the canopy. Wing is tough, but the tail assy is very long and should be beefier. I still have one and it is an excellent flyer. My fave knockaround TT ARF is the Lazy 51. I have flown it this winter on skis... what a blast. The quality of this ARF is much like that of the Seamaster. Ultracote covered, ply sides, all wood construction. Nice.
On my ARF quality scale, I give the Seamaster and Lazy 51 an "A".
The TT Profiles get a "B-, C+" mostly because once the covering is punctured, you pretty much have to strip it and recover the whole plane...it doesn't repair well.
The Champion flies very well, but has the crap-o stick on covering, and has a flimsy tail assembly. The wing is very good. In fact, I am currently in the middle of kit bashing a twin C45S...that will give me somewhere to put the two gp-42's that are taking up shelf space.
I think they are all good value for the $$$, considering you can buy a 45S ARF with Pro-46 and 4 servos installed for around $170.
(not from me! I do not sell anything!)
Email me if you have more ?'s.
Tracy
The quality here is, ummm, less. The covering is that sticky backed film. Do they fly well? You bet. I crashed one very badly, disintegrating the wing...that night I CA'd it back together from pieces in a sack, covered it with Towercote and flew it the next weekend. Another TT arf I've had a couple of is the TT Champion 45S, on floats, which is pictured below. Nice flying airplane. I have crashed 2 of them and the fuselage breaks right behind the canopy. Wing is tough, but the tail assy is very long and should be beefier. I still have one and it is an excellent flyer. My fave knockaround TT ARF is the Lazy 51. I have flown it this winter on skis... what a blast. The quality of this ARF is much like that of the Seamaster. Ultracote covered, ply sides, all wood construction. Nice.
On my ARF quality scale, I give the Seamaster and Lazy 51 an "A".
The TT Profiles get a "B-, C+" mostly because once the covering is punctured, you pretty much have to strip it and recover the whole plane...it doesn't repair well.
The Champion flies very well, but has the crap-o stick on covering, and has a flimsy tail assembly. The wing is very good. In fact, I am currently in the middle of kit bashing a twin C45S...that will give me somewhere to put the two gp-42's that are taking up shelf space.
I think they are all good value for the $$$, considering you can buy a 45S ARF with Pro-46 and 4 servos installed for around $170.
(not from me! I do not sell anything!)
Email me if you have more ?'s.
Tracy
02-28-2002 | 02:59 AM
#5
Senior Member
My Feedback: (6)
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 692
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Redding, CA
Thunder Tiger Arf's
I have a Lazy Tiger 51 and it really is a great flying plane! Awesome in the wind. Quality is top notch! I did a review of it at rcamericaonline.com.
02-28-2002 | 06:37 PM
#7
My Feedback: (67)
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,066
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Evansville ,
IN
Thunder Tiger Arf's
I was not impressed with the quality of the smaller giles they produce. The cowling was deformed out of shape and the plane just looked cheap to me. It's not the kind of plane I would be proud to bring to the field! Just my thoughts
02-28-2002 | 07:18 PM
#8
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,860
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Weirton,
WV
Thunder Tiger Arf's
I think TT has 2 types of ARF's......very nice, and not so nice.....I have one of each. The Lazy Tiger 51 is very well built, I can't wait to fly mine soon. I also have the Tiger Sport 40L...nice flying plane, but it is definitely a lesser quality. I can't see that plane lasting too long.
Mike
Mike
02-28-2002 | 07:30 PM
#9
My Feedback: (45)
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Wilsonville,
OR
Quality between models
Hi NEWKIII,
The only plane I've had is the TT Fun Tiger Extra Profile, and it was really not very good quality(their flying characteristics aren't anything to write home about either). The covering material was particularly bad. I do not know if they use the same materials and construction techniques for their other offerings, but I think this is a trend for most ARF manufacturer's. You really need to look at, or get feedback, on the exact model you're interested in because quality and methods seem to vary to a great degree between models from the same manufacturer.
Your statement that H9's are bad, is definitely not a good generalization. Their newer models (Cap 33% and Taylorcraft as a couple of examples I've seen) are excellent, but I have heard bad things about some of their other planes.
The only plane I've had is the TT Fun Tiger Extra Profile, and it was really not very good quality(their flying characteristics aren't anything to write home about either). The covering material was particularly bad. I do not know if they use the same materials and construction techniques for their other offerings, but I think this is a trend for most ARF manufacturer's. You really need to look at, or get feedback, on the exact model you're interested in because quality and methods seem to vary to a great degree between models from the same manufacturer.
Your statement that H9's are bad, is definitely not a good generalization. Their newer models (Cap 33% and Taylorcraft as a couple of examples I've seen) are excellent, but I have heard bad things about some of their other planes.
02-28-2002 | 07:58 PM
#10
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,860
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Weirton,
WV
Thunder Tiger Arf's
Bill, that's an excellent point. My two TT ARF's are like night and day......If they weren't both badged "Thunder Tiger" on the box, I would have never guessed they were produced by the same manufacturer.
Mike
Mike
02-28-2002 | 08:06 PM
#11
My Feedback: (45)
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Wilsonville,
OR
Same manufacturer?
Hi Mike,
>>I would have never guessed they were produced by the same manufacturer
This is also a good point. It is possible that they didn't come from the same actual manufacturer. I'm not sure about TT, but many of the ARF producer's don't use the same source for production for their different models, hence the great difference in their quality. It's very likely that two ARFs from the same company are not built at the same manufacturing facility.
>>I would have never guessed they were produced by the same manufacturer
This is also a good point. It is possible that they didn't come from the same actual manufacturer. I'm not sure about TT, but many of the ARF producer's don't use the same source for production for their different models, hence the great difference in their quality. It's very likely that two ARFs from the same company are not built at the same manufacturing facility.
02-28-2002 | 08:32 PM
#12
Senior Member
My Feedback: (6)
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Bedford Heights,
OH
Thunder Tiger Arf's
Originally posted by capthis
I was not impressed with the quality of the smaller giles they produce. The cowling was deformed out of shape and the plane just looked cheap to me. It's not the kind of plane I would be proud to bring to the field! Just my thoughts
I was not impressed with the quality of the smaller giles they produce. The cowling was deformed out of shape and the plane just looked cheap to me. It's not the kind of plane I would be proud to bring to the field! Just my thoughts
01-28-2003 | 02:30 AM
#14
Member
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: akron, OH
Thunder Tiger Arf's
I have the Ace Staudacher 60. I put a Saito 120 , Simple Smoker.
A great flyin airplane . I cant seem to get a replacement canopy
though. My local hobby shop says replacment parts are hard to get. My 2 cents
A great flyin airplane . I cant seem to get a replacement canopy
though. My local hobby shop says replacment parts are hard to get. My 2 cents
01-28-2003 | 05:09 PM
#16
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ketchikan, AK,
Thunder Tiger Arf's
Flyin...
Try these guys...I have ordered TT parts from them several times and have had good luck.
http://www.quicktechhobby.com/
TM
Try these guys...I have ordered TT parts from them several times and have had good luck.
http://www.quicktechhobby.com/
TM
01-28-2003 | 09:34 PM
#17
Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Bangkok, THAILAND
Thunder Tiger Arf's
just my 2 cents worth on TT......
My first plane ..ARF..ever was a TT cub....80in span.....
I learnt to fly with it.....the quality was excellent....and it flew great.....I have since had other arf's that weren't in the same class....H9...being one of them.....I would'nt have any trouble with buying from TT again.....I still have my cub...amonst others.....!!
be lucky all.....!!
My first plane ..ARF..ever was a TT cub....80in span.....
I learnt to fly with it.....the quality was excellent....and it flew great.....I have since had other arf's that weren't in the same class....H9...being one of them.....I would'nt have any trouble with buying from TT again.....I still have my cub...amonst others.....!!
be lucky all.....!!
01-28-2003 | 09:59 PM
#18
My Feedback: (111)
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Manalapan, NJ
Fun Tiger Extra 300
You get what you pay for. I am currently redoing an Extra 300 profile (never seen air) that I bought from someone on eBay.
Every seam had lifted. Not all the ribs and sheeting were glued on, and the cutouts for the access panels were done on the wrong side (or it was covered upside down, take your pick).
The ailerons, horizontal and vertical stabs, rudder and elevator are all "built from sticks", and in many cases where the sticks are glued in on angles the ends of the stick were left "square" instead of angled to meet the piece it was connecting to. No wonder TT tells you not to fly this plane fast, it will fall apart! I added some gussets where I thought these surfaces needed reinforcement, but this is not an option if you leave the covering on. By the way, don't use acetone to clean the covering, it dissolves the covering and makes it brittle (You know how I know). Sure isn't Monokote!
All that being said, I paid $23 for the one I have, so I don't have any "real" complaints with what I bought, but I am pretty sure that this plane, as it was delivered, would only last (1) flying season. Maybe for this type of plane, and at $80 street price, that is not a bad deal.
Every seam had lifted. Not all the ribs and sheeting were glued on, and the cutouts for the access panels were done on the wrong side (or it was covered upside down, take your pick).
The ailerons, horizontal and vertical stabs, rudder and elevator are all "built from sticks", and in many cases where the sticks are glued in on angles the ends of the stick were left "square" instead of angled to meet the piece it was connecting to. No wonder TT tells you not to fly this plane fast, it will fall apart! I added some gussets where I thought these surfaces needed reinforcement, but this is not an option if you leave the covering on. By the way, don't use acetone to clean the covering, it dissolves the covering and makes it brittle (You know how I know). Sure isn't Monokote!
All that being said, I paid $23 for the one I have, so I don't have any "real" complaints with what I bought, but I am pretty sure that this plane, as it was delivered, would only last (1) flying season. Maybe for this type of plane, and at $80 street price, that is not a bad deal.
01-29-2003 | 05:40 PM
#20
My Feedback: (13)
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,177
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
From: Center of the Flyover States,
Thunder Tiger Arf's
Regarding the Giles 202:
My flying buddy purchased one and waited about 4 months before they were actually imported. He set it up with a RCS 1.4 gasser and the thing weighed in at just over 12 pounds. He used a servo reverser gismo on his elevators (two servos) with the unit fastened to the canopy floor. ON about the third flight the doublestick tape that held the canopy assembly on separated off and took the servo reverser........no elevator........total airframe loss..... BUt the good news is that the plane flew very well and landed quite nicely....no tip stall tendancies, etc.
My friend got another kit from TT at a reduced price and will try again after checking everything over very closely.
My flying buddy purchased one and waited about 4 months before they were actually imported. He set it up with a RCS 1.4 gasser and the thing weighed in at just over 12 pounds. He used a servo reverser gismo on his elevators (two servos) with the unit fastened to the canopy floor. ON about the third flight the doublestick tape that held the canopy assembly on separated off and took the servo reverser........no elevator........total airframe loss..... BUt the good news is that the plane flew very well and landed quite nicely....no tip stall tendancies, etc.
My friend got another kit from TT at a reduced price and will try again after checking everything over very closely.
