I would go with nitro if you can. That is if you have the flying space for them and not worring about noise restrictions. The electrics to me sound like a flying blender. There is a couple of them that show up at our field and I'm wondering, "is that a plane or a nose hair trimmer?" Yikes! And you'll gain a lot more experience with a nitro motor. And if you ever get into 4 strokes you will love them. They sound and smell awesome.

You definitely need to look up the definition of subjective... while you are at it check "perception" and "arbitrary"

Yet again you have taken a subjective opinion (your own) and attempted to arbitrarily apply it to others. You attempt substantiate your claim with the perception (again your own) that "Well, most people would consider paying more $$$ to get less in return to be a disadvantage"

Speaking of economics maybe you could provide some statistics to bolster your assumptions. In lieu of that your comment is nothing more then opinion (as is everyone else’s)


In simple terms (for PKHs benefit) value is based primarly on ones perception. Case in point people paying a million $ for a baseball just because it was used to break a record.

In response to "where did anyone read .40 sized glow engine vs. electric parkflyer motor." Skaggydog was asking about trainers for his son. 40 size trainers are considered to be fairly standard so I used that as a starting point.

Crashem - I think you're right about doing research yourself. But he clearly posted this thread for our opinions. If the original question is which one is easier, I would offer the following:

Easier on the wallet - Nitro. For the level of performance best for a beginner at least a 25 class trainer would be best IMHO. Any smaller and it isn't stable in any but the lightest wind and difficult to see at a distance for orientation. Given the same flight times/same amount of power and same level of control, electrics will be significantly more expensive to start. But naturally, electrics could ultimately be cheaper if you count in the running costs, provided you don't plant one then you have to invest in another battery that can be quite expensive.

Easier to get in the air - Electric. While electrics come VERY RTF for parkflyers, they are not so for larger planes. The larger planes would be equally difficult to build as Nitro RTFs. The good thing is that electrics don't have a run-in as obvious as that of a nitro plane, which may not run correctly or idle consistently at first. No tuning is necessary and you can just put it together and it's good to fly. Of course, some people ask you to run in the commutators of brushed motors but I think that is really optional for beginners. Nitro engines can be difficult at first so definitely easier to get in the air goes to Electric. Also, you can fly electrics almost anywhere where Nitro planes are too loud.

Easier to learn on - Equal. Given the same size plane with the same power/weight ratio, wing loading and flight time, they are the same. Once again, the price differential would be the only limiting factor. The only thing that nitro would have is that you can fill up and go again. Electrics you need to charge. Even if you have two packs, charging takes time. On the electrics, you have the benefit of not having deadsticks since you sould know well in advance that the pack is running low.

Easier to move on - Naturally this depends on your next plane. If you eventually go nitro... then an electric trainer will just sit and rust.

So it seems like the only real benefit of Nitro is the cost.

Now from my own experience. I have taught people on 40 size nitro trainers and that has to be the most fun I've had. They are easy to handle, very stable and extremely forgiving. They are true floaters. I don't know of an equivalent electric at this time. I have also taught people on crappy 3-channel foamy cubs that were heavy and underpowered as well as the multiplex ez-star. I would say this... nothing is as good a trainer as the 40 size trainer with light wing loading and tricycle gear. If you can find a good electric that meets those criteria at a price you can afford, then you I salute you, Mr. Gates. If however, you aren't ready to spend that money... decide if you want to go Nitro 40 size or with a lesser plane that maybe won't teach you everything you need to know but will give you the basics there are plenty.

If you go nitro - options abound.

If you go electric - my suggestion would be the Multiplex EZStar RTF made of elapor. It is very very stable and will get you up in the air as soon as the battery charges. This plane is offered through Hobby-Lobby and is great for very beginners. I think it's 200 bucks.

I'm sure I left out a lot but that is just my 2 cents.

One more thing... these suggestions are based on the fact that you plan to join a club and have someone actually instruct you or at least buddy box you. If you want to learn it yourself... cheap foamy planes are the best (economical) way to go!

[quote]ORIGINAL: Crashem

Well Crashem his statement is not subjective at all!!! How one defines "return" may differ but no one would argue that "paying more $$$ to get less in return" is not disadvantageous :-) Even the person that paid for the ball in question would've liked to pay less for it! Naturally, there is the question of whether or not an R/C airplane is a luxury good and those people would rather the prices be maintained at a premium. To argue that this person see's his first R/C plane as a good like "rolex" or "louis vuitton" is a little preposterous. If truly he didn't care about the money... why not buy one of each and try it out for himself? He can have his butler make it, his driver run in the engine and his handyman charge the batteries. At least that still makes sense in economic terms :-)

Okay... I'm the one being preposterous now!

I have not flown the EZStar but I seen many at our field! They are definately easy, so easy that a beginner I am tutoring who cannot fly a nitro trainer properly can easily handle the EZStar! The seem great.

As for my the initial capital outlay for EP is a little stiff but if you keep them within the 350-400 motor size its AFFORDABLE! Those motor with 2 cell lipoly is easy to work with. Try GWS planes if you want something that is dependable. My GWS Formosa on stock set up with 2 cell lipo was what I learnt to do rolling circles on. I am now into the EP craze and its really good fun. Not better than nitro but good fun.

For me I say learn with a nitro plane and not EP if you can. But if you really want EP go with something like the EZStar, that is a great 1st plane!

I think he was questioning the parkflyer side of the comparison (I know I was)... looking at a .40 glow plane vs. 540+ electric motor plane would be a more fair comparison for "glow vs. electric".

The only electrics that I've seen or heard of flying very well have brushless/LiPo setups. Most of the brushed setups with NiMH or NiCd cells that I've seen, flown, or read about all seem to be underpowered. It is hard to get a good thrust to weight ratio with the brushed setups and the inexpensive NiMH or NiCd cells. Most of the reviews I've read of brushed electric kits end up with the author trying the stock brushed motor, not liking it, and then sticking a brushless setup in it, and saying it flew great afterwards...

Believe me, if someone finds a great flying electric with just a brushed setup & NiMH/NiCd batts, I'd like to hear about it! That is the cheapest and easiest way to go if it will work well!

Well thi smay have been said above (I haven`t had time to read all the posts) but if not, the cost of electrics is deceptive.

I looked at the two for a seaplane I`m building, and the total cost for two motors, ESC`s, and batteries was over US$1200, almost 700 of that for the batteries alone. It`s a twin, and heavy.

The manufactuers say that the life of LiPo`s is currently 100-200 cycles, so go up the middle and say 150 if everything goes well, and that`s over 4 bucks per cycle or flight. I always think that the manufacturers are a little optimistic, so if the worst case scenario is 100 cycles, that`s 7 bucks a flight and that`s excessive to me.

Sure electric motors have a loooong life, but they`re just as susceptible to damage in a crash, and if the cost over and above fuel and glo plugs goes toward glo engine maintenance, then it`s no contest to my way of thinking.

I can tally the cost of my WM Clipped Wing Cub EP (Red), which incidentally I wouldn't fly in anything but light winds. I think this is slightly more applicable than JapanFlyers Sea King.

WS = 48.5" (WS of Clipped is 40" but used basic Cub for comparison)
Length = 30"
Weight = 1.7lbs (to make it possible for electric flight... this is made extremely light, read between the lines, not durable.

Original Setup
Plane = $80
20AMP ESC = $20
2 x 7.4V 1500maH Lipos = $40
Protech Charger = $100 (up to 2 Lipo cells only)
Total = $240

Revamped
Brushless Motor with ESC = $130 Original setup is not worth keeping
2 x 11.1V 2500maH Lipos = $60
Kokam Handy2 Charger = $150
Total = $420 (Not including junking original equipment)

Even the EZStar
Original
RTF Plane = $200 including Plane, 8amp ESC, Battery, Quick Charger 3CH Hitech TX/RX and Servos. Assembly 15 minutes.

Revamped
20AMP ESC = $20
2 x 7.4V 3000 Lipos = $80
Total = $300

Both flies decent but nowhere as fun as my .26 WM Cub w/O.S. 30 Fourstroke (What else? Cub Yellow) which is one of my all time favorite planes

WS = 51" of very strong wing
Length = 33"
Weight = 3.8lbs (Scale-like landing gears)

Plane = $80
O.S. 30S fourstroke = $150
Extra Servo = $10
Fuel Pump = $10
Glow Plug Heater = $15
Total = $265

Extras
Robart Scale Wheels = $10
Sullivan Tail Wheel = $1
Total = $276

Of course these are NOT beginner planes BUT they give you an idea of what you're dealing with in terms of cost for similar sized planes.

Of course you could go with el cheapo ep RTF like these two.

Red Cessna - This plane would stall with any input of the elevator! But still my friend, who I buddy boxed and instructed with this plane, is holding this plane after soloing on it. Imagine that... YES, BOYS AND GIRLS, IT CAN BE DONE!!! Done bone stock except RX exchanged for a Futaba so that I could buddy box it.

Plane = $100 RTF Full Set
Extra Battery = $15
Wheels = Those plastic wheels lasted all but one landing on pavement.


Can't take off.. needs a very healthy toss. Flight time? 5 min max.

White and Purple Pop Angel - this plane is cute.. I eventually built floats for it and took it on a boat trip. It flies with some authority... read "some" but still no "force to be reckoned with".

Plane = $100 RTF Full Set
Extra Battery = $15

This plane could probably ROG but with exactly the right conditions. It is very light and flies beautifully. Dismally short flights on stock battery. Also switched rx to buddy box my friend. I heard you have to run after this one since the stock TX/RX is very weak. Everyone was surprised it would actually fly stock. Most people could never get it off the ground without changing to brushless.... imagine that...

NOT BEGINNER PLANES!!! But decent with the right instructions. NOT FUN PLANES!!! When I fly a nitro trainer I might be bored. Flying these planes was infinitely more taxing. First they run out of juice in a blink of an eye... That Cessna must have only made it back to the runway 20% of the time (I give my students a lot of stick time). Second, getting two mistakes high is like the entire flight... I had to settle for one mistake so that my student could actually fly. Third, holding altitude in a turn is difficult just because they are underpowered (Pop Angel was okay). I would've preferred a trainer but they purchased planes.

Last but certainly not least... my Multiplex EZStar

WS = 54"
Length = 36"
Weight = 1.5lbs

Toughest part was putting on the stickers!!! Serious!

[quote]ORIGINAL: forestroke

Not to rehash this but it is the assumption that "one is paying more and getting less as a disadvantage" that I was referring to as subjective.

My point was and is that saying that because an electric power source costs more then a comparable glow power source that the cost in and of itself should be considered a "disadvantage" is as silly as the electric crowd claiming that glow powers disadvantages is that its messy, noisey and smelly If that isn't a subjective opinion then I give up

I'd say go for the Nexstar. 40ish sized glow. I started on electrics. They are either really underpowered (stock motor) or nicely powered (brushless motor) but your gonna pay for it. I have a sailplane with an 05 sized brushless motor. This thing moves out!!!!
Plus, it glides pretty nice. Also, if your thinking of electric, the best trainer pound for pound and the most durable is a T-52 from JK Aerotech. The kit is $35. I put on a $20 car motor (mag mayhem) and a $20 gearbox. Fantastic performance without the brushless cost. I have roughly 20 electric planes. All but two of them use the suggested motor. All the rest are aftermarket motors and brushless. I also solder my own battery packs which really drops the cost of batteries. I fly both, electric and glow. I have lots of fun with each.

Dave...

I flown and still fly both. I'm currently flying the heck out of my new (2nd) GWS Tiger Moth. It's a lot of fun and what I like most about it is that it's just charge and fly here at home in my front street. Now when the weekend comes and I have off from work, I love the raw power, sound and smell of glow. Taking a plane straight up for as far as you can see it is totally awesome. I've probably owned more electric planes than glow, but I'm quickly catching up with glow. In all without trying to cause a whichh is better glow vs. electric war I enjoy them both, but will probably invest much more in glow planes, engines, etc vs. electric from now on. Good luck.

The two types are just variety. Neither is superior to the other. I fly both, and am not about to give up either.
The favorite electric I have is (was, it's met its fate) a Kyosho Cessna Cardinal, with the stock engine and prop. I flew it with either 7 cell 1800 NiCad or 6 cell 3000 NiMH cells. Two of the 7 cell packs date back 10 years when I first got the plane, and the NiMH packs are about 5 years old. The NiCads got about 5.5 to 6.5 minutes, and the NiMH packs get about 12 minutes, although I could fly longer on good thermal days. For longer flights, you just fly the model the way the full size planes are flown; max throttle for takeoffs, go-arounds, and aerobatics, and a lower cruise setting for the rest.
I get relatively good life out of both kinds of battery packs. I just don't pay to much attention to what the competition car drivers say, and pretty much go by what the battery manufacturers say. I never charge a hot battery, I charge at a C3 or lower rate, I never use a discharger between charges (I bought an electric that had an automatic discharger/charger as part of the package. Burnt up a 650 mah NiMH the first time I used it. The second pack started overheating on my second try, so I pitched the device). If a pack has been setting unused for over 5 or 6 months, I'll slow charge it before using it.
Electric park flyers are slower. The third fastest R/C plane I ever flew is a brushed 400 Wattage Mirage 2000 that I've had about 5 or 6 years. It's faster than most of the 40 or 60 powered glow trainers with the Graupner prop I'm using. For comparison, the fastest plane I had was a Quickie 500 with a high end sport 40 BB engine that had a pitch/rpm speed calculation of about 135.
You can also get higher powered electrics that hold their own against the glow planes. An engineer in another department put an Astro Geared 25 on an Ace Sundancer, and has witnesses swear it's faster than some glow 40 powered versions, and easily gets 8 to 10 minute flight, depending on how he controls the throttl. It'll do anything the glow versions do.
If you treat your batteries with respect and care, they'll last a long time, and could end up costing what a glow plane will over the same time, or maybe even slightly less. Abuse the batteries, and the electric will make your wallet wish you had glow over that same period.
Electric Park Flyers, Electric 3D, Glow trainers, Glow sport, Glow or Electric scale, whatever. Try whichever you think you have an interest in and the time and money to get involved with. Concentrate on whichever suites your skills interests and time aand money availability best. Don't dismiss any of the others. In fact, to sample the variety you can have in this hobby/sport, you might even look into the various facets of Control line and Free Flight. They also have the Glow/Electric mix nowadays.
Enjoy life, don't get caught up in making a hobby out of putting things down.

50+ Airyears - by Glow/Electric mix, do you mean like the Multiplex Magistrate, which comes with both electric and glow options in the same kit?

OR I was looking at the KMP Cessna 337. Many current owners complain that it doesn't balance out at the CG unless you just plain out leave the rear engine off. I was wondering... wouldn't it be great to have a large Nitro engine up front and a large brushless in the back with batteries up front... that would be a nice Glow/Electric mix!

some intresting thoughts here. having flown glow for two decades plus 6 years electrics,
seems to me depending on what the person wants to accomplish decides the issue.
glow will generally fly longer but requires more support equipment no question. also certain skills- engine wise do not come easy to some. yes, there is a mess to clean ( which can be lessened some)and very few enjoy it. noise is a big factor & your neighbors are the ones who decide that issue -not you.still glow is what a lot have grown up wit &its familar
electric is very dependable but planes are more fragile yet fly slower.the quiet aspect is an advantage in local playgrounds for undisturbed quick flights. flight times (unless glider) are low. it requires more skill knowlege to be applied to be successful in some instances. soldering , polarity , charging. the batteries WILL usually out last a gallon of glow fuel by a country mile.(nicads , nimih) the goldberg Electra makes a fair trainer even with the stock ferrite motor. the hobbico superstar EP makes a decent trainer but flies better with geared motor. I have one with cobalt geared .05 , 3 ch &its a nice plane but the gear is flimsy &had to be replaced.cost of operating electric can be low . were not talking big buck setups here -isnt neccesary.

Hmm.. any body heard back from Skaggydog or did we scare him off the whole idea?!?[]

Thanks for the idea of mixing glow and electric on the same plane. I'll have to try it sometime. I meant that I will continue to fly glow airplanes, electric airplanes, rubber powered free flights, free flight hand launched gliders, rocket powered R/C boost gliders and whatever else comes along.

I'm still here, reading with much interest. You guys are a great source of information and I wish to thank you all very much. Both sides are so well represented here that the answer is even farther from me now than when I first asked, but be assured I have not been scared away from this excellent forum. I an also impressed with the way people act around here. Seams like model planes may be a hobby that will also offer my son the kind of friends that a young man needs to keep his head on level

Right now my son and I are seriously thinking of going electronic. Not like I just misspelled electric but like a computer simulator first. I am sure we will glean much more information from this forum before we get that first plane up in the air.

thank you

Skaggydog - while i think the simulator is a great way to get better. i wouldn't say that it is the best way to get someone interested. if I didn't fly before, i would find the simulator, even a $200 one, a little boring. with all the video games out there... something like R2 is just a bit on the bland side. my advice would be to go to your local flying fied first. take advantage (i mean leverage... not like wring them for what they're worth!) of the people you will fly with in the future. and just let them know that you're interested in the hobby... you might be surprised what you'll get. If there were someone like that at the field and he seems truly earnest, I would buddy box him on my EZstar just for kicks. I mean as long as you know the basics of flight and can drive, you can take the sticks of my EZstar (2 mistakes high that is). I don't have a nitro trainer... but if i did i would completely buddy box someone for a first flight.

now i use to think i was one-of-a-kind of guy that was super nice... but i tell you, people here on rcuniverse have proved me wrong! if the people here are the same as those at your field, i'm sure visiting them at the field would be the most valuable experience you had in learning how to fly.

Glad you are still with us Skaggy! Following the posts, it looks like the focus is on performance of e power over glow power and value. Flyers in favour of e powered planes seem to be ignoring the fact that ythis plane is supposed to be a trainer. As such with the planes batterys you may get 5-8 minutes flight time. Say you even manage to get 10 minutes on the pack. Now do you replace the battery pack, recharge it, or pack up and go home?? If you think you just recharge it and then fly again consider that the battery will be hot after a flight and that you are not supposed to recharge a hot battery. So you let it cool, but, even a fast charger could take around 40 minutes to recharge. Does the field even have electrical outlets for a fast charger ?? Speaking as an instructor, waiting 40 minutes is a bit of a wait and instructors don't want to be standing around waiting for you to get your plane flight ready! I have timed it for interest and even with 3 spare battery packs and a fast charger the glow planes are refueled and ready to take off a lot quicker than the e powered planes. [8D]

with the electra which will fly off of 6 cell packs , its not too expensive to get two packs and by the time you land (10 min to 30 min later- thermals!) the packs are cool enough plus you DON'T need electric outlets -car battery works fine for several flights no problem with smaller jobs. the Super star would require larger packs or lipos for really good endurance. gas would be better for easier endurance for a 4 ch plane.

They both have valid purposes in our sport. They both belong. I also don't think electrics need to be considered as only low powered trainers, either. Three 6 or 7 cell packs was great for a long days flying with my Electra. One pack flying for 8 to 50 minutes, one pack charging, and one cooling.
As far as mixing electric and glow on the same plane. How about a Ryan FR-2 Fireball with something about a 40 size up front and one of the larger EDF units somwhere just behind the CG? If I can get the idea into my todo queue, I might see about blowing up the CL plans I have and setting it up for this.

there ain't nothin like the smell of nitro burnin lol