Spoiler

Any comments on their range? Am thinking of the 60 size FW190 or Mustang.

BigSkyRCFlyer

My Feedback: (36)

I love TopFlite kits, they build straight forward, just be ready for some building. Get ready to sheet, they have full sheeting of the airframe, perfect for a glass finish or iron-on, add retracts and flaps and you will be very happy. My engine(s) of choice due to my alt is the ST-90 or 1.20 four stroke, depends on what you like. I have built most of the TF kits, and the P-47 is my fav, stang second, spit third, etc. I have my eye on the T-34 right now!!! Anyone else? Good luck, and happy building!

I am not sure what you mean on the range either, are you wanting to do a cross country flight?

nocrashesyet

I'm building the Top Flite FU4 Corsair 60 right now, this is my first kit and it’s turning out to be a real challenge. Its coming together just fine but I'm starting to worry about the final weight. 8.5 lbs before covering is applied. This last week I started glassing the wing, which is going well. Overall I think the drawings and instructions are very good. Kit wood and accessories all look top quality. I'm not sure what you mean by their range?

Doug D.

What do you mean by range?
I've built several of there kits, and they all go together well. Time consuming, but any scale or sport scale model will be. If you like to build, there decent.
Texan
P-47 Thunderbolt
Corsair (TWICE)
Spifire
In this order. And I'll build a few more.

DavidAgar

My Feedback: (108)

The Gold Edition kits from Top Flite are great planes to build and fly. You really cannot go wrong with any of these kit's. Good Luck, Dave

airbatic

I'm building the Stinson Reliant SR-9. Wow wow! And like BigSkyRCer says lots of
building. The Reliant should be airborne by January.

Kraus

powertoys

My Feedback: (2)

I love the Top Flite kits. As for going gold edition or not I think it depends on the features you want, as both are well cut and the instructions are the same between both. I'm just about finished with my 1.20 size P-47 gold edition, and have loved every minute of the building process. I built their Sierra, a .46 size high wing trainer that as far as I'm concerned the best trainer that I have flown. And trust me I've flown many of them over the years helping others. Their warbird line has many add-ons, and extras to help with going scale if that is what you are looking for.

Mike

powertoys

My Feedback: (2)

Hey BigSkyRCer,

What covering method did you use on the P-47? I'm debating whether or not to glass it. Is it worth doing, or should I just cover it then paint the detail onto the covering? Thanks

Mike

BigSkyRCFlyer

My Feedback: (36)

Powertoys,
I am not very good at glassing yet I have not done much over the years, so all of my top flite warbirds were MonoKote with Lusterkote Paint if needed for the scheme. The P-47 I did was Monokote Aluminum with Black and Olive for the trim, and red/white I cut for the tail. When I did my Spit I painted on the camo with lusterkote, after I did a base cover job with Dove Gray Monokote, then used steel wool to scuff up the covering for paint. I then used a light amount of Flat Clear for a top coat/cover coat, etc. They have held up good, and look good enough I think for Sport Scale stuff. I would rather learn to glass, and then go with paint. Nothing like a good paint finish for a warbird!!!! If you are good at glassing, I'd say go for it, or want to try it. Monokote is the easy way to go. I've seen some guys just fill, sand, fill sand, fill sand, fill sand, etc, etc the wood and then paint. Good luck with whatever you choose.

damifino

I think Spoiler means 'product line' when he says range.

saramos

I currently have a spit under construction. Main wing and tail feathers and upper half of the fuse are pretty much done. I like the kit, but I can't say I have much to compare it to. It is my first warbird. I've done a trainer and a 4 star. I got some practice with glassing the center sections on the other two kits and don't anticipate any problems. One thing that I have read over and over in posts is that the top flight kits tend to be tail heavy. Keep this in mind when building.

Scott

kqutob

I loved building the Contender so I ordered the FW190 this morning. There are great posts on all TF's warbirds on www.rcscalebuilder.com . Check it out

Larry S

My Feedback: (6)

Well guys, all positive comments so far, now for a negative. I build a Top Flite FW 190 and I thought it was not up to par of what I thought Top Flite should be. First, I was missing parts, had bad parts and missing the parts list. Second, there were changes that had been made to the kit without any notice of these changes in the kit. Third, it was a real pain sheeting this plane. Now I have built and flown war birds before so this was not my first war bird. I glassed and painted it and actually it came out great, but I thought heavy for this plane, between 11 and 12 pounds. I had powered it with an OS 91 Surpass. We have a very large flying field with a paved runway. On the first flight, it took every bit of that runway and then some grass to even start to lift off. I decided to keep the power on and finally the plane broke ground but started to rock back and forth violently so I powered down and ended up bending the landing gear. I and some other guys at the field figured it was under powered so I switched to a Saito 120. On the second flight, it took off like a rabbit down the runway, broke ground and started to rock back and forth again violently but I tried to get control and get some altitude. It went into the ground so hard on one wingtip that it destroyed the complete wing and some of the cowling. I checked to see about getting the wood for a new wing but the cost is as high as the complete kit. I did have a 60 size Royal FW that flew great and steady but radio interference got that one so I went with the Top Flite. I had years ago built a Top Flite Corsair that did the same as my Top Flite FW but I figured I had made a building mistake or pilot error. At this time I fly a P-51, Phaeton 90 with a 120 Saito, and several other planes, both tail draggers and trigear. Now I will say one good thing about Top Flite, when I called about the missing and bad parts, they replaced them immediately. Now I'll ask all you who read this, what did I do wrong? Please don't say "left rudder, balance", that was not the cause. Had I had the ailerons set for to much throw? Was there to much weight for that plane? I just finished a Pica Corsair and they recommend aileron throw at 1/2 inch +/-. I have a hard time believing that this is enough, but I'll try that first. I could have had more then that on my Top Flite models, can't remember, but I think I did. Could that have caused the violent rocking at take off? But back to the kits, I like the Pica kits 100% more then the Top Flite simpley because the Pica Corsair had very good wood, all parts and everything in the kit that I was suppose to have. I have ordered the Pica FW a few days ago to replace the Top Flite. Top Flite kits are nice, but make sure everything that is suppose to be in the kit is, and for any updates BEFORE building. One other thing I did learn, if I ever glass another plane, which I will, I'll use the largest engine I can and rid the tail of any excess weight. They do come out tail heavy. Sorry this was so long and I don't mean to "knock" Top Flite, I just had bad luck with them and had better luck with other brands. Larry

tailskid

My Feedback: (34)

I've built two (F4 and P-39) and enjoyed the experience, both building and flying!

Jerry

Darren40

My Feedback: (2)

I've had 4 TF planes over ~25 years in the hobby and was generally happy with them all. TF kits have been the standard in .60 sized fighters for decades...until recently. The TF kits are good, but not excellent. They build heavy and you'll find that, in general, you need to put more power in them than they recommend. I would strongly urge you to check out Skyshark's FW190s. They have both the 190A-8 and 190D-9 versions in .60 size. The FW190 is not one of TF's best kits, closer to one of their worst. I've built the Skyshark Val and can tell you the Skyshark kits are much better than the Top Flite kits. I don't want to see Top Flite disappear like other kit manufacturers have over the years, but they need to improve the quality of their kits if they're going to compete with the likes of Skyshark. Check out forum on Skyshark kits at www.rcscalebuilder.com. If you do decide to build the TF 190 make sure you focus on keeping it light.

cknaack

My Feedback: (1)

I have built the Corsair and the Thunderbolt. Generally speaking, both were good kits, with excellent instructions and pictures. the wood was also good quality. On the Corsair, about 80% of the work is in the wing. I replaced all of the 1/16" sheeting with 3/32" so I had something to sand. The P-47 was very straight forward and fun to build.

powertoys

My Feedback: (2)

Larry,

Not saying that I know what your rocking problem on take off was, but I have seen it twice caused by different problems. The first guy just eye-balled his throws and had way too much aileron dialed in with no expo, so when it twitched left he reacted and then it was a fight until he gave up and the plane leveled itself out just before it hit. The second time I saw it a guy got his plane in the air, it reacted violently back and forth as he fought it to the ground and landed (not pretty). He double checked his throws and max limits were correct as per the directions. He took it up again and the same thing happened. After a couple of us looked at it for about 15min. we discovered that when he switched from Futaba to JR that he forgot or didn't know the two are opposite when dialing in any expo. 90% neg expo on a futaba is not the same as on a JR. Once he corrected that the plane flew perfect. I am also building a Pica Mustang kit. Trust me if it is anything like my other war birds you don't need much aileron throw at all I would start with what is recommended then adjust for your tastes.

Mike

Larry S

My Feedback: (6)

I was seriously thinking of the Skyshark FW 190 but decided to go with the Pica kit instead only because the Pica is just a little larger (wingspan) and I found building their Corsair was a pleasure. I was thinking this morning of trying something that I haven't seen in here, lengthening the the nose of any plane I plan on fiberglassing and going with the largest engine the plane can handle. Should be easy to build out at the firewall. I hate to add unnecessary weight which seems to happen with fiberglassing.
Larry
PS: Happy Thanksgiving to all

Larry S

My Feedback: (6)

Thanks Mike, I do believe it was because the throws were set more then they should have been and on my Pica Corsair I'll leave then set where they are suppose to be, at least for the first few flights. I do use expo. Next time I'll use the Dual rate to set everything where they are to be set.
Larry

cknaack

My Feedback: (1)

Larry,

I also use the dual rate method with expo, and have never had an issue. It seems to cover all of the bases. I was surprised to see how many guys at the field did not use dual rates.

Regards

Craig

Spoiler

Thats it exactly, sorry for the confusion. Thanks for all the replies. Good to hear so many people are still building kits. Over here kits and the finishing products are hellish expensive so ARFs rule.

weslewis

I am currently building the Top Flite giant p47...most of it is framed up and so far the kit has been excellent..plans are drawn really well, part fit is great..and has just been an overall joy to build.

Larry S

My Feedback: (6)

For what it's worth, I stripped out my crashed Top Flite FW yesterday and decided to look things over to see where I could lose some tail weight and found many places I could have cut back without losing strength. On my plane I had a sliding canopy and had the servo mounted in the tail section so there was one thing I could have moved to balance the plane without adding lead in the nose. I will build another Top Flite plane some day but one thing for sure, I'll cut whatever weight I can if I plan on fiberglassing it which I probably will.
Larry

Flight Hawk

I'm building a P-51 60 size kit and agree with everyone as to they are buildy kits. As for the kits turning out tail heavy this might be a good thing for me as I'm using a Satio 150 engine. I bought the covering for it but I would really like to glass & paint it (just never done it and don't know how). Anyone got any suggestions?

I wish TF would have offered a detailed cockpit for their 60 size P-51.

Tsutomu Mabuchi

My Feedback: (1)

And the C.G is the most important factor how the airplane reacts
to the elevator with.
TF FW190 tends to be tail heavy( short tail moment) that will result
too sensitive responce to the elevator throw.
There are some points we have to check before the flight, weight
and C.G, incidence of the wing, control surface throw, engine
power and thrust line, main gear position relative to the C.G, etc.
Some are designed by the kit maker and the rest (weight and C.G,
control surface throw) veries depending on the builders so we have
to check ourselves.

Tsutomu Mabuchi