Jake Ruddy

My Feedback: (40)

There is absolutely no moderating done in any way, shape or form like what you are mentioning. There is no moderating based on brands period. I am one of the main mods in this area for the last 1 - 1.5 years and that has not been done by myself or anyone that I have seen. If anything in the past I have been contacted by people looking for special treatment and I have under moderated because I don't play favorites.

To be truthful the Yaks you flew or atleast one, did not have the stab mod done which you admitted in the past.

I am not sure how you expect an 88" wingspan plane with a fuse as big as most 33%ers to manouver like an 84" plane which is much smaller? Was quiet sometime ago when Chris "admitted" the Yak would not be as nimble as the WH Extra or Edge. Last time I checked a 35% wasn't as nimble as a 41%.

I owned the old heavy WH Giles which was a smooth flyer although heavy. I have not flown the new one and probably won't get a chance to unless someone buys one that is close to me. I have owned 5 different WH planes in the past and considered 2 of them to be pretty good fliers, a V1 Edge and the 33% 260 I owned. Have I owned any of the newer lighter designs? No, I have flown a few, but ultimately I already had 5 so I tried other brands.

There are tons of options out there today, some do fly better than others, in my mind the EF Extra is one of the best 50cc planes on the market, however in general there are a lot of great flying planes out there today.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

In this we agree.

camss69

My Feedback: (46)

Thank you for your reply.

The only Giles I have flown is the 40% composite version that Air Wild used to sell and that was not my airplane.

If you will notice in this thread, I haven't said anything about how well the WH Giles or any WH airplane flies because I have no experience with it. Several times in the past in threads where several different manufacturers are being compared and they happen to include WH I specifically say which ones I have no experience with.

I just think it's pretty interesting to say that the WH Giles is the best there is and nothing else can compare. In fact that just makes me laugh because there are so many planes out there.

I've owned quite a few 35% planes from a variety of manufacturers and EF is very high quality. The one's that I have flown/owned which includes quite a bit of the EF line are all among the best.

To be honest I don't think you have really given them a fair chance since you've only flown two planes that may or may not have been setup properly. If you have flown a 110 or even the 88 setup properly they are extremely precise.

As far as overpriced, ALL these planes are overpriced in my opinion. Does the EF cost a little more? Yes, but IMO there is a difference and I'm willing to pay the additional cost to get a product I like.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

We have differeing opinions in several areas.

As I previously stated, the Giant Scale, 3d and Aerobatic forum of RCU became an EF sounding stage quite some time ago. I am not even close to being the only person that has noted this over the past year or so. If that so happens to correspond to other time frames, so be it. The fact that I have flown EF aircraft, be it two or twenty, and found the ones I flew not to my personal liking, does not disqualify my opinion. However, since we are comparing 50cc planes my opinion is quite valid for the size of aircraft. You don't know what I have flown, and though not owned, I have flown many brands and types of aircraft.

Your earlier posts were clearly intended to spark an arguement, and I really don't have a desire to engage. Just so you're aware, others PM'd me about your posts in this thread and noted the baiting as well. Had they not done so I likely would have never seen them. You have managed to strike one of the chords that generated a desire to contribute less and less at RCU. Thanks for continuing to justify my earlier decisions.

Shall we agree to continue in disagreement?

cjcyclesrc

My Feedback: (10)

LOL !!! That's funny. Come on you have to admit you like it as long as you're winning.

Jake Ruddy

My Feedback: (40)

Why don't you agree to disagree? Camss is a hardcore EF fan and Pat is a hardcore WH fan, don't think we just learned anything new

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

Jake,

I have other preferences in addition to Wild Hare. I'm quite partial to Comp Arf and Pilot aircraft products as well. Toss in BME, DLE, 3w engines, Airtronics radios, Fuchs carbon and PAU laminated props, and you start to see an eclectic mix.

CJ,

There's a difference between winning/losing and spitting into the wind. BTW, you should feel a sense of honor in that I elected to bother responding to one of your posts.

cjcyclesrc

My Feedback: (10)

LOL!! I'm glad to see you still don't mind to spit in the wind even though you know its goint to end up in your face.

BTerry

My Feedback: (8)

...I really shouldn't have said what I did, sorry...

BTerry

My Feedback: (8)

Back to the original question: The planes listed in the original question are some of the very best on the market. They also have very different flight characteristics.

I have flown most of the 50cc planes on the market, although I have yet to fly the Wild Hare 50cc Giles. The big Giles flies just like a big pattern plane. If you haven't flown a modern pattern plane then it is difficult to explain. They tend to fly like an arrow. It is extremely easy to keep the plane on line through snaps because they have exceptional directional control (due to the planform of the wing, which tends to keep the nose on line).

I had an Extreme Flight Yak that I really liked to fly, and it was a beautiful plane. It was light and nicely built and was light.

I currently have my 3rd SD-Model plane, which is the precursor to Pilot-RC. They are very well built also.

With a Yak one thing that I like to do is to close off as much of the cowl as possible, with only a small cutout for the cylinder head (or heads, as the case may be). This eliminates much of the "seeking" problem that plagues most Yak models by closing off that huge parachute up front. This makes a HUGE difference especially in downlines. For 3D this doesn't make much difference, but for precision flight it helps quite a bit.

What plane is "the best" on the market? I dunno. Most of the top manufacturers' planes are similar in overall quality, construction, fit-and-finish, etc.

The very best 50cc plane that I have ever flown was my old Aviation Models Extra. Why? Because I spent a lot of time setting it up properly and had several hundred flights on it dialing it in. Putting a large volume of gas through a plane and continually tweaking it will make it fly better (TO YOUR FINGERS) than anything else you will touch.

If I was in the market for a 50cc plane at this time I would get either the 3D Hobby Shop Extra, PAU Extra, Wild Hare Giles/MX2, or maybe the RC Xtreme SBack (HUGE plane, extremely light). Personal preferences of course, but those seem to be the best for me.

However if I lived within 1 hour of Extreme Flight as the original poster does the answer would be simple. I would drive to Cuming, GA, pick it up an EF Extra in person, and save on the big shipping charge.

Jake Ruddy

My Feedback: (40)

Wasn't my intention to say there weren't others by any means. Personally Comp-Arf makes a great plane for precision, not personally a big fan for 3D although the new Suhkoi has the surfaces for it. The one I gave feedback on was only setup for IMAC and was smooth as silk, after about 7 minutes of flying I believe my quote was "I could really get use to one of these".

closetguy

My Feedback: (13)

After two pages i just had to jump in here and throw a wrench in the works.I know it says HW,EF,or Pilot 50cc but there is a plane that out flies the EF Yak hands down and the Pilot,it's called 3d HobbyShop Extra SHP.I have a EF Yak and have flown the Pilot RC Yak and both don't even hold a candle to the Extra SHP IMO.It has more wing area,flies slower and has no coupling at all in a knife edge,you just need the rudder to hold the nose up,one handed knife edges just with the left stick and it comes in at 16lbs. with a BME 58.

mxcop114

My Feedback: (5)

You can't compare the Extra SHP to the Yaks because it's a totally different airframe design. You gotta love brand loyal guys, nothing wrong with it either. I can tell you that I've flown many planes, Wild Hare, Comp ARF, Pilot, etc... The key to judging how well a plane flies is making sure it's set up right, this can make all the difference in the world. I think all the planes mentioned will fly just fine if you're looking for something to have fun with. Now here comes the hard truth, and I'm sure I'll get hammered here because I fly for Extreme Flight. If you plan on flying competition and want the top of the line competition level wood arf where attention is made to every detail, and you are willing to pay a little extra for it, the Extreme Flight planes are what you are looking for, and I believe 3D Hobby Shop has some nice planes too when it comes to attention to detail and keeping them as light as can be. Extreme flight just released a new 88" Edge 540T, it's the most stable, locked in high alpha flying plane in that size I've ever flown. Now with that said, I'm not saying don't go with one of the other brands, I'm just stating the facts when it comes to attention to detail and the latest construction techniques. Here's a video of the new Extreme Flight Edge.

Lee

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqUt7kGkJsA

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

Pick a plane that you like to look at, and like the looks of.
Learn how to set up and trim a plane beyond what limited info is provided in the assembly manual.
Fly that plane A LOT and get to know the plane better than any other you may have.
Learn how the various functions work with your transmitter and use them to your advantage.
Use the best servos that will fit the application and understand how to set up linkages.

You will then have a plane that works better for you than any other.

Once you learn and use all of the above you may find that the best plane for you may not have been on the list. Remember when Chip Hyde was flying a biplane and winning the gold when everyone was flying mono wings? How about when a young man flying a Great Planes box stock Spirit glider won the trophies at the AMA Nats, knocking all the ultra expensive, highly sophisticated wing planform composite gliders in the dirt?

It's not as much the plane as the person flying it.

kochj

"High Alpha Flight" Now that is a Garbarge bag term if I have ever heard of one.
If a plane is designed to do everything, then it can't be great at all the types of flying....
WIth the new, very powerfull servos, we can get away with very large control surfaces
and still have very good precision...
In the video, it seems to do a very great job of being stable, that is for sure...
That is the type of plane most people want to fly...

I wonder how the newly new FAI category - F6A Artistic aerobatics would place in "high alpha flight"?
Is there ANY Precision in this catagory??,
By design, ALL EDGEs should be Very stable, and excell, at ""high alpha flight"

I have been looking at the Krill THUNDER 3D. Little smaller than a 50cc... and much more money..
This is designed for 3D, but the manufactures says "It's not very forgiving and it will bite you if not
handled and flown in a proper way" ***??????


To me, a 3D plane should be VERY easy to fly!...
Shouldn't snap, or cause you to pucker, just because you threw the plane in at a odd angle...

JoeAirPort

My Feedback: (41)

Pat people on FG.com praise Extreme Flight just as much, if not more, than RCU. The common denominator is not a fictional group of people (on one website) who praise a company for no reason. People all over the world think these planes are just incredible and we are all very pleased paying customers. It's an awesome ARF aircraft company in all regards. To say that they are getting undue attention for no reason is just rediculous. We can all see through your BS dude, give it up.

mxcop114

My Feedback: (5)

What is your problem? You should have educated yourself before making yourself look like an idiot by making that statement about high alpha flight in your post. High alpha flight is a well known and understood term in both full scale and model flying, it refers to the angle of attack of the wing. During 3D flying, performing harriers, harrier rolls, elevators, etc.... the wing is at a high angle of attack (High Alpha). I stated that the plane is the most stable in it's size that I have flown in that aspect, and never said that not to go with other brands in that post either. Try reading below, maybe you'll learn something:

Very high alpha
Some military aircraft are able to achieve very high angles of attack. This provides the aircraft with great agility. A famous military example is Pugachev's Cobra.

Using a variety of additional aerodynamic surfaces — known as high-lift devices — like leading edge extensions (leading edge wing root extensions), fighter aircraft have increased the potential flyable alpha from about 20° to over 45°.[3].

Angle of attack (AOA, α, Greek letter alpha) is a term used in fluid dynamics to describe the angle between a reference line on a lifting body (often the chord line of an airfoil) and the vector representing the relative motion between the lifting body and the fluid through which it is moving. Angle of attack is the angle between the lifting body's reference line and the oncoming flow. This article focuses on the most common application, the angle of attack of a wing or airfoil moving through air.

In aviation, angle of attack is used to describe the angle between the chord line of the wing of a fixed-wing aircraft and the vector representing the relative motion between the aircraft and the atmosphere. Since a wing can have twist, a chord line of the whole wing may not be definable, so an alternate reference line is simply defined. Often, the chord line of the root of the wing is chosen as the reference line. Another alternative is to use a horizontal line on the fuselage as the reference line (and also as the longitudinal axis).[1]

Some British authors have used the term angle of incidence instead of angle of attack. However, this can lead to confusion with the term riggers' angle of incidence meaning the angle between the chord of an aerofoil and some fixed datum in the aeroplane


Lee

camss69

My Feedback: (46)

As far as "baiting" Tired Old Man, I simply asked a question "how many EF planes have you flown" and I asked it with as much respect as possible because I honestly wanted to know. I asked that question because of his repeated posts of EF being "overrated and overpriced". I don't see how asking a guy one question is baiting someone. Did I have a guess what the answer would be, yes, but you never know unless you ask. I don't understand what chord I struck? Asking you what your experience is with a product that you posted about?

To be honest T.O.M. your response surprises me. You seem like the type of guy that would realize that flying two of someone else's planes that you did not personally set up would not qualify you to determine a specific manufacturer as overrated or overpriced. I have flown the same plane built by two different people and had them fly completely different. This is really why I asked (or "baited" if some prefer) you into a response because you seem like a guy that, had you actually owned one would realize the difference. If I built a WH Giles and asked you to fly it and tell me what you think and you had ZERO experience with WH and the balance was off a little from where you would like, the throws aren't what you like, expo is different from what you would put in, mixes are wrong, the engine isn't tuned the way you like, and the stab fell off because I forgot to put the bolts in, would you tell me that WH isn't a good choice?

If others PM'd you why didn't they just post their comments here, I suppose to keep the thread from going off track which it is.

**Not in relation to anything specific in this thread but message boards in general**

What I'm tired of is people posting about products with which they have NO first hand experience. If you haven't used it yourself you shouldn't be posting about it in my opinion. If your buddies buddies uncle's second cousin had a problem you heard about through the guy at 7-11, I don't consider that valid experience. This happens on all message boards not just RCU, not to even start on the brand loyalty craziness.

camss69

My Feedback: (46)

Totally 100% agree especially for the person that started this thread.

ALTHOUGH, honestly if you live 1 hour from a VERY GOOD manufacturer with proven products and proven excellent customer support (can we agree on that part?) it's pretty much a no brainer to drive down there and pick something up. How much better support could you possibly want than the manufacturer in your own backyard? Heck around here there are guys that drive that far just to go flying, and that's ONE WAY! In this particular case the money you save on shipping will make up for it being overpriced.

Barry Cazier

My Feedback: (17)

What is sorely missing in this industry is a media that honestly rates airplanes. The ones we have now (magazines) only praise the good. They don't compare and give us what they would change. Every manufacture can improve (if EF wants some ideas here are a few just off the top of my head: Assembled pocket style hinges, good axles and wheels, a cowl ring that eliminates unsightly screws etc., drop some weight) and a good magazine that was honest and not dedicated to their advertisers would help greatly. There is no such thing right now.

I'd love to see a "shootout" between manufactures with a declared winner. Nothing would do more for this hobby and influence the manufacturers to improve than that. You don't have to look any further than the motorcycle industry to see a perfect pattern for what we need. The folks at Motocross Action Magazine do it well. And they do it in spite of what the manufactures want. They do honest evaluations and print it like it is. Until we get an "authorative figure" that will evaluate and rate the manufacturer's product we are left to opinions and favoritism.

As for me...I've owned and built and flown: Wild Hare, Extreme Flight, Great Planes, TOC, AeroWorks, AirWild just to name a few. (all in the 50cc class) I keep extensive notes on each. I plan to do a shootout of my own in the coming months just to see if I can get the ball rolling.

I agree that you shouldn't discuss what you haven't owned and set up the way you like it. But if you've owned the plane and set it up to your liking then I think you have a fair opportunity to give your opinions on the differences, what is good and what is bad and what you'd like to see changed.

I really like the EF products, but in some areas they don't fly as well as others. Money doesn't always talk either. Some of the cheaper planes do some flying better. Now I know I'm not the best pilot in the world...but that's ok too. I rate them more like the average pilot would. In fact my opinions might be more like the average guy that wants to purchase a new plane. Might mean more to him actually.

Anyways...gonna add to the fun here.

Until then....everybody play nice.

Thanks
Barry

closetguy

My Feedback: (13)

Just because your hour away from a leading manufactor is not a reason to buy there product.
Your going to spend major money you want the best for your money.
I live a hour from OMP and i hate to buy there planes even though I have five of them,I have got to pay taxes on them!

Jake Ruddy

My Feedback: (40)

Barry, I understand the goal you are trying to accomplish but the amount of work is takes to build, fly, setup, and fly a plane makes it nearly impossible to do a shootout for a magazine. There just isn't enough time. The average RCU review takes upwards of 80 hours all said and done for one 50cc plane. The other issues is you would almost want 5 engines so you could go back and forth and fly them. By the time you were working on the 5th one you it would be hard to give an accurate comparision to the 1st one unless you could throw it up in the air and refresh yourself with it.

I don't think you can really do an accurate comparision without having all 5 (or whatever number) in front of you and get to fly them on the same day a bunch of days in a row.

Add in the fact that everyone has different tastes, "unslightly cowl screws" personally, they don't bother me or many know from your postings you didn't like the way the EF yak did a waterfall, you don't like them slow and dramatic, you like them fast. I like them and dramatic, but there isn't a right or wrong way there. You also couldn't get flatspins to work the way you like, while others have no issues.

I am only using this as an example because I am most familar with these examples.. but I can think of another one. I was never really a fan of WH hardware, does it work? Sure it does, but I think others have much nicer hardware. I just think there are too many variations.

A bike you jump on and ride and put it through a bunch of tests. I don't think you are adjusting tire preasure, tweaking the shocks, etc. You don't have to worry about CG, rates, trim, thrust, etc.


Just my 2 cents.. not saying I wouldn't like to see it.

rctom

Which is why Wild Hare always prices hardware separate from the plane, so if someone doesn't care for our selections they can use whatever they like and the don't have to pay for a bunch of stuff that they then throw away.

TF

Barry Cazier

My Feedback: (17)

Jake,
So....we just leave everything as status quo? I still think it would be nice to know what someone with a decent knowledge of planes and how to set them up thinks of a plane before I buy one. Right now we got nothing of any worth at all. I've read many magazine reviews and they all do a crappy job. Basically you get nothing of worth. I'd much rather hear something on these forums.

Regarding waterfalls....wouldn't it be nice to know that the EF planes do them slow and other planes are capable of doing them faster. That's a difference in the way two planes fly. Unsightly screws? So you are saying there is no room for improvement? I say there is. Do the screws really bother me? Yes. I think it is an area that could be improved. Tell the truth...wouldn't you rather have no unsightly screws vs. having unsightly screws? Oh and just for the record....if I hadn't have posted comments concerning flatspins and waterfalls etc with EF it wouldn't be known. There are differences in the way they fly. It isn't a terrible thing and maybe it's what most want. But somebody (RC media) should tell the story. They let their readers down terribly. In real life fact...I could write a more realistic and comparitive review personally than any I've seen in the magazines. I simply don't even waste money on them anymore until someone comes along that will do fair comparisons.

See we are already discussing something of substance. Don't get me wrong I don't want to make this hobby a job for me. I do enjoy building a lot of different planes and setting them up the best way I know how and sharing with others. But I find the criticism almost unbearable. But I actually really do try to see differences and tell it like it is. Others chose to only say the good and leave the other buried. If I'm buying a plane I wish there was someplace to go that would offer a realistic review that would honestly tell me the good and bad tendencies of a plane.

BTW you are just wrong on the motorcycle reveiws. They are extemely tough and complete. They expose every little thing. MXA takes 3 months to test a bike. The race it every weekend during that time. They use an expert, interemediate and novice racer and post the comments of each. They change gearing, shock oil hieghts, fork oil heights, air cleaners, tires, jetting and then at the end they usually tell of modifications they've made to make each bike better. You really expect their tests to be fair and honest. Obviously this is not something that we hobbiests can do with our airplanes. But it is something that the magazines should do. They would be surprised at how sales and adverstisers would increase if they had the nerve to really do it.

Thanks
BArry

Barry Cazier

My Feedback: (17)

closetguy...
Just for fun...what is the weakest flying attribute of this plane? You really make it sound good. 16lbs is very light. Did you do any work on it to get it that light? Of course the AirWild Extra is much lighter if lighter is better. But after reading on these forums it sounds like the trend is to heavier planes. They seem to fly better and the heavier the wing loading the better. At least that's the way it seems.

Also, please name three things you would change on this plane. Landing gear? Canopy hatch? Pocket hinges instead of the basic kind it comes with? Covering or visability? Take an honest look at the plane and let us know. I've flown the EF and WH planes and I'm thinking it's impossible for this to be that much better. Doesn't even hold a candle???????? I'm not even sure what that means.

Anyways...I like what you say about the 3D Hobby Shop Extra...but fill us in on what it is really like. Not just empty claims.

thanks
BArry