Does anyone have any comments about these ARF kits?[&:]

i had the Fun50, and LOVED it.
the only problem is , they are kinda pricey.
the flying characteristics where the best i experienced.
now i'm flying a UCD 46 just because it's significantly cheaper .
i still got the Kangke here in pieces and will probably attempt to fix it, just because it was such a great plane.

They have a CAP with a bigger, wide wing that I have been hearing good things about.

Overall, Kangke ARFs have a very good reputation for quality. They're not the cheapest ARFs around, but they seem to offer good value and they're certainly not overpriced for the most part.

If Kangke makes an ARF that you like, don't worry about the quality. By all accounts, you will get your money's worth. They also offer some of their ARFs bundled with SK 2-stroke engines for a pretty attractive price:

http://www.kangkeusa.com/specialbuy.htm

You should post about your experiences here in the ARF forums. Given their reputation for quality and value, it's too bad Kangke ARFs aren't discussed more often. Good luck and good shopping!

I have 2 Kangke arf's and they are both very high quality. I don't think they are too pricey considering the quality of them.

I had the Laser 2000 with a G-62 on it.........what great combo!!!

Haven't had one in 6 or 7 years but the old 60 size ("Staudacher 300") was a fine flying /quality plane. I resold mine after I flew the heck out it for a year or two and was very satisfied with its resale value. Their new 40/50cc Extra sparked my interest for awhile. Anybody have any insight/comments/reports on that airframe?

Bass1:
What engine did you have in your Staudacher? Do you have any build suggestions/hints/tips? I have one that I have had stashed under my building table for a long time, and am considering getting it together.

I have a Kangke SK50 that I built with an anhedral wing, per Ed Moorman's prototype. It is a great flyer and really gets some odd looks on the flightline!

Thanks, and regards to all!

I have their yellow monocoupe and its a solid flyer. The quality is very good and they come with billet alluminum control horns.

SK- 50. Loved it for three years and flew it HARD (four seasons of the year!). Lost it trying to do a limbo pass entered at head level upright and half-rolls at that level to inverted and back out. Made the inverted but caught a wing tip at full throttle and it was ugly. Old enough to know better. That particular plane had three different engines and was a great test bed and trial horse for experimenting. Did beautiful axial rolls with just a touch of differential programmed in.

Liked it so much I may get another.

I don't care much for the SK engines. I tossed the stock carb and added a Perry carb to my .50 and since then has performed wonderfully.

Bob, The majority of the time I had an OS 61 FX in mine. ( I did break in a Saito 100 on it also) The only problem I had was not having a computer radio back then and the airplane wanted to tuck to the belly in knife edge. Since I couldn't "mix it out", I shimmed the trailing edge of the wing a little and it helped. I learned to use a little up elevator during knife edge and point rolls. Would be a non issue with a computer radio. The landing gear is a bit soft and hard landings will result in a trip to the bench vise The airplane eventually taught me how to "grease em' on"

Bass1,

Thank you for the prompt feedback. I have a couple of old .90 FSRs (man, those old O.S. engines were bricks, compared to the newer FXs), and a 1.08. Our altitude here in Wyoming dictates larger engines than normal, so I will probable use one of those three.

Regards!