haf.mpty

I've been reading through a bunch of other posts on the Wingo vs. Soarstar comparisons. What I've been seeing is that the Wingo and Soarstar each have their supporters. What I've also seen though are a number of people who were pretty upset about their experiences with the Wingo and it's durability.

For example, one poster said that the wings were quite durable but the fuselage was a flying wad of glue because every time he would have a rough landing, the fuselage would break and he'd need to glue it. Of those people not happy with their Wingo experiences, it's been because of the fuselage. But, I was wondering if those out there who have Soarstars have had this issue as well. While I've looked, there seems to be nobody who has anything bad to say about the Soarstar but a few people who badmouth the Wingo.

I'm trying to decide which model to purchase. I know they are about the same in flight characteristics, build time etc. What I'm wondering about is overall durability. Anyone who can comment, I'd appreciate it. If you happen to be one of the few who've owned one or two of each, your input would be greatly appreciated.

mikefev

Hi,
I have had a Soarstar for over 2 years and it has it's share of mishaps. The Fuselage, wings and tail have all been repaired. I estimate at least a quarter pound of epoxy and it still flies well. I recently converted to LIPO batteries replacing the NiMH 9.6 V origional. I use a 2 cell 1200 MAH battery and had to add weight to the nose to balance it properly.
I have never owned a Wingo but I would consider one of the latest versions which have a plastic bra on the nose which is supposed to add strength or provide protection. Price wise they are close. The choice is yours. Enjoy!

VR Mike

stinger40

I have a Soarstar and my dad has a Soarstar. I'm speaking for my Soarstar when I say D-U-R-A-B-I-L-I-T-Y!!!! I've crashed this thing into a powerline, a tree or two, and one stinkin' hay bale! [:-] Anyway, this plane is rock solid. It was my beginner plane. Even though I had to glue it together again, it did no serious damage. This plane is over 3 years old and it still flys like new! I haven't flown it in a while because I've been so busy with my other foamies.

ssflyr

I have a soarstar 4 yrs old a few repairs and it still flys like a dream. even on those brezey days. 20+ min flights on 2100mah AA pack.

qban_flyer

I have had my Soarstar for four plus years now. I have also owned two Wingoes and from the performance point of view, the Soarstar outperforms the Wingo in many aspects.

Comparison:
The Soarstar comes equipped with a geared Speed 400 motor, an 8X4 propeller, a 16A ESC, a 9.6V 600 mil battery pack and an inexpensive but usable charger. All this for $99.95. The Wingo, on the other hand comes with a direct drive speed 400 motor and a Gunther propeller for $99.00 when on sale @ H-L.

A stock Soarstar will outclimb a stock Wingo, thus allowing it to reach flying altitude much quicker. A Soarstar will coast at level flight at approximately 1/3 throttle, the stock Wingo with its inefficient power plant (as compared to the Soarstar's) requires a bit over 1/2 throttle to achieve the same level of performance.

The Soarstar does not "tuck" when full power is applied to it as the original Wingo did. Then, when one adds the required ESC, battery pack (1100 mil) and an inexpensive charger to the price of the Wingo one ends up spending $95.60 more, and still the Wingo will not match the performance level of the Soarstar.

I flew a brand new stock Wingo USA today, and while it has improved flight characteristics (no more tucking), and an aluminum boom for added rigidity, its power plant still is inefficient and lacks the climbing power the Soarstar geared motor affords the RC pilot.

From the durability point of view I think that both can take a fair amount of abuse, though I would feel more aprehensive about "abusing" the Wingo since the expenditure is higher. IMHO, from the bang for your buck ($99.95 for the Soarstar vs. $194.60 for the Wingo) and performance vantage point, the Wingo can't even begin to touch the Soarstar.

Tom Nied

I got a Wingo, lost the instructions. Can anyone tell me where it is suppose to balance? Rear mounting hole in the wing? Thanks in advance.

qban_flyer

Hello Tom,

I no longer have the instructions for either the Wingo or the Soarstar so I am afraid I can't be of much help. A quick call or an e-mail to Hobby Lobby International will set you straight on the CG point of the Wingo.

They have proven to be very helpful to me in the time I have been dealing with them.

Tom Nied

Right, think I might be right balanced at the front of the rear hole for the mounting of the wing. Noticed that I put some marks where the battery velcros and seem to be pretty close all the way back. Will scour the internet, but think I'm pretty close to correct. Thanks.

Tom Nied

I found it, CG is supposed to be right at the front of hole in the wing.

capngrog

My Feedback: (1)

Tom,

You're right. I found my Wingo instructions and here's what they sez: " Support the model on the front edge of the hole in the wing center piece with your fingers. The Wingo should now balance with the nose slightly down. By moving the battery, the desired C.G. point can be adjusted." Im not sure what they mean by "with the nose slightly down", but the accompanying illustration (on the instruction sheet) shows the airplane essentially level, but if you look closely, the nose is indeed VERY slightly down. I'm still a relatively inexperienced R/C pilot, and, for me, slightly nose heavy is easier to handle than slightly tail heavy.

Regards,
Bob

Tom Nied

Bob, if you're still as you say "relatively inexperienced", you'll be better off with the slightly nose down attitude. I balanced mine level at that location with the battery and motor back as far as I could get them and found it just a tad squirly in winds that I probably shouldn't have been flying in. Basically that point is an easy to find location, a point just ahead of that and the plane balances level. In the winds that I was flying I could bring the Wingo to a slightly nose up level hover, but it was like riding a bubble. Think I'll re-set it for a slight nose down attitude using that same point. Looking at the chord of the wing, that indicated point is a pretty far back. I'm sure the manufacturer is using that point because it is very easy to describe to a first time flier. I'm making a canopy from a 2 liter bottle and hope to clean up the front aerodynamics as well. It's a fun little plane, once tuned and trimmed, I think my g/f will enjoy and get some good RC flight time.

Good flights to you,

Tom

capngrog

My Feedback: (1)

Tom,

I vacu-formed a canopy for my Wingo but have not yet flown it. I carved a male mold from a block of balsa and coated that with WEST System epoxy for durability. I then made a suction plenum box from a wooden cigar box, with the suction provided by my trusty shop vac. The plastic was heated in the oven of my kitchen stove. Being thrifty (cheap) I initially attemped to use the plastic that so many items are packaged in these days, but that stuff was not at all cooperative. I wound up purchasing sheet plastic, in various thicknesses, from my LHS. I messed up 6 - 8 sheets of this plastic before I found the right technique. I'll attempt to include some photos with this post, but not having done this before, my confidence level is not high. If the photos are successfully attached, you'll notice that the my canopy design is not exactly what one would call aerodynamically clean as it has a fairly large flatwindshield. My initial idea install a camera behind this windshield, but I'm now not so sure that is a good idea. The canopy attaches to Wingo using a peg glued inside the cockpit which fits into a hole drilled into the front of the canopy base. The sides of the canopy are secured (hopefully) by rare earth magnets. In one photo you'll see the clear canopy posed on top of a block of balsa with a gray plastic "practice" canopy alongside. Well, here goes ... hope the photos upload.
Regards,
Bob

capngrog

My Feedback: (1)

Tom,

Please bear with me as I try to muddle through this photo upload process. Here are ( I hope ) the rest of the photos.
Regards,
Bob

Tom Nied

Bob, the photos uploaded perfectly. Nice work and I tip my hat to you taking on the canopy forming project. Actually, that will clean it up considerably, aerodynamically. It's a process worth working through. I'm off on a trip, but in a week when I get back, I'll have to take a photo of my 2 liter bottle canopy. I'm pleased with the results. Nice job on the work you did. Looks like you, me and my g/f will be flying our Wingos. They are fun and lots to learn from them. Good flights to you.

Tom