Carl Goldberg Kits
08-23-2008, 09:29 PM
#1
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (30)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Madison,
AL
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Carl Goldberg Kits
Well, some things never change! The poor quality of Goldberg kits is one of them!
The last Goldberg kit I built was about 16 years ago. It was a Goldberg Extra 300 that I built for a friend. I had never cussed as much as I did building that thing! The parts fit sucked, the die cutting was more like die crushing, and the wood quality was poor and frequently the density was not suited for the task. If I hadn't been building it for a friend I probably would have smashed it with a hammer before I finished it.
Fast forward 16 years. I'm building a Goldberg Extra 300 of my own. I had forgotten how bad of a kit it was back then when I ordered mine, and I also didn't realize Great Planes had one in kit form that was only slightly smaller (and $50 less expensive) or I would have bought it instead! Anyway, the only difference I see now, aside from the much higher price, is that the ribs and some other parts are laser cut... or should I say laser scorched. The wood quality still sucks, I have some ribs that are rock hard and others crumble in your hand. I've replaced most of the wing sheeting because what was in the kit was so warped it was useless. What was usable was rock hard and needed to be replaced anyway. The parts still don't fit; I've had to reshape just about everything I've pulled out of the box to make it work. One of the two shaped inboard trailing edge pieces was a shade under 1/16" thinner than it was supposed to be, so I have to laminate some sheeting on it and sand it down to the right thickness. Some of the parts were almost toasted by the laser, and others weren't even cut halfway through. On top of all of that I'm going to have to spend another $60+ on a fiberglass cowling wheel pants, and aluminum gear for this thing because the stock components are of unsuitable quality!
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me! Well this is twice, and I can assure you there will NOT be another!
Maybe I'm just being too picky, but I remember when I used to build kits all of the time and stuff was of much better quality. Heck, the Japanese kits like Yoshioka and MK were so good you barely had to even touch a knife or sandpaper until it was time to finish the model! Boy do I wish those kits were still available!
Oh well, back to ARFs after this one. I just don't have enough time to waste on crappy quality kits, and I'd rather be flying than building anyway. I just thought it would be fun to build my own airplane again, but the fun is long gone.
Sorry for the long rant, but it's been building (no pun intended) for weeks now! [>:]
The last Goldberg kit I built was about 16 years ago. It was a Goldberg Extra 300 that I built for a friend. I had never cussed as much as I did building that thing! The parts fit sucked, the die cutting was more like die crushing, and the wood quality was poor and frequently the density was not suited for the task. If I hadn't been building it for a friend I probably would have smashed it with a hammer before I finished it.
Fast forward 16 years. I'm building a Goldberg Extra 300 of my own. I had forgotten how bad of a kit it was back then when I ordered mine, and I also didn't realize Great Planes had one in kit form that was only slightly smaller (and $50 less expensive) or I would have bought it instead! Anyway, the only difference I see now, aside from the much higher price, is that the ribs and some other parts are laser cut... or should I say laser scorched. The wood quality still sucks, I have some ribs that are rock hard and others crumble in your hand. I've replaced most of the wing sheeting because what was in the kit was so warped it was useless. What was usable was rock hard and needed to be replaced anyway. The parts still don't fit; I've had to reshape just about everything I've pulled out of the box to make it work. One of the two shaped inboard trailing edge pieces was a shade under 1/16" thinner than it was supposed to be, so I have to laminate some sheeting on it and sand it down to the right thickness. Some of the parts were almost toasted by the laser, and others weren't even cut halfway through. On top of all of that I'm going to have to spend another $60+ on a fiberglass cowling wheel pants, and aluminum gear for this thing because the stock components are of unsuitable quality!
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me! Well this is twice, and I can assure you there will NOT be another!
Maybe I'm just being too picky, but I remember when I used to build kits all of the time and stuff was of much better quality. Heck, the Japanese kits like Yoshioka and MK were so good you barely had to even touch a knife or sandpaper until it was time to finish the model! Boy do I wish those kits were still available!
Oh well, back to ARFs after this one. I just don't have enough time to waste on crappy quality kits, and I'd rather be flying than building anyway. I just thought it would be fun to build my own airplane again, but the fun is long gone.
Sorry for the long rant, but it's been building (no pun intended) for weeks now! [>:]
08-23-2008, 10:21 PM
#2
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: St. Joseph,
MO
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
This is probably to easy or simple of a answer, buy a Sig kit. I have built several over the years, Sig has the bust quality of wood and instructions. The last Sig kit I finished was a blast. I think this last one makes three or four Sig kits I have built.
Have built other brands, they have not lived up to the "enjoyment factor" and that is why I build.
john
Have built other brands, they have not lived up to the "enjoyment factor" and that is why I build.
john
08-23-2008, 11:32 PM
#4
Senior Member
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
I always wanted a Goldberg Falcon, so I got a Falcon III kit. Big Mistake!
The laser cutting on the wing ribs was inacurate, and in places the wood
wasn't cut through. The trailing edges were badly bowed, and the notches
are not even close to matching the plans. I guess I'll have to get the arf
and re-cover it. I've wanted to build the Super Chipmonk for a long time,
but I'm reconsidering that.
I hope now that GP owns Goldberg, that the quality the kits improve.[sm=angry_smile.gif]
The laser cutting on the wing ribs was inacurate, and in places the wood
wasn't cut through. The trailing edges were badly bowed, and the notches
are not even close to matching the plans. I guess I'll have to get the arf
and re-cover it. I've wanted to build the Super Chipmonk for a long time,
but I'm reconsidering that.
I hope now that GP owns Goldberg, that the quality the kits improve.[sm=angry_smile.gif]
08-24-2008, 08:24 AM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bradenton,
FL
Posts: 2,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
I just finished a Goldberg Super Chipmonk kit this last winter. It had extremely good inst & plans to follow. The quality of the wood while wasn't the top of the line, it was a respectively good grade. Maybe you guys got a "Friday afternoon" kit. I've built kits from Sig & found them to usually be a grade above most normally priced kits, but not really that far above. Oh,skyraider, the Super Chipmonk is one of the easiest, best flying planes in my hanger, when youcome in to land, just come in a little hot & you can grease your landings every time.. you will really enjoy it !!!
08-24-2008, 08:26 AM
#6
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (30)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Madison,
AL
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
ORIGINAL: skyraider71
I always wanted a Goldberg Falcon, so I got a Falcon III kit. Big Mistake!
The laser cutting on the wing ribs was inacurate, and in places the wood
wasn't cut through. The trailing edges were badly bowed, and the notches
are not even close to matching the plans. <<snip>>
I always wanted a Goldberg Falcon, so I got a Falcon III kit. Big Mistake!
The laser cutting on the wing ribs was inacurate, and in places the wood
wasn't cut through. The trailing edges were badly bowed, and the notches
are not even close to matching the plans. <<snip>>
Since I KNOW this is supposed to be a fantastic flying airplane, I am going to do my best to continue on and finish building it. But I swear, it is supposed to be a KIT, not a box of wood where I have to cut and/or reshape every bloody piece! If the parts are going to be that bad, I wish it WAS a box of wood that I got to cut myself! At least they would be cut accurately that way.
Okay, I'm done ranting now. At least until I get to the fuselage...
And I sure hope you're right. Hopefully Great Planes will make this into the kind of quality kit it deserves to be!
08-24-2008, 09:51 AM
#7
Senior Member
My Feedback: (13)
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
I have built several CG kits. The first ones I did, circa late 80s/early 90s (Sky Tiger, Ultimate, Chipmunk), were quality items. Wood quality was okay. The last two were just prior to the sale of the company to Lanier, and the wood in both was simply atrocious. I didn't finish either kit (a Chipmunk and an Eagle). I have heard things have not improved at all; this thread would seem to confirm that.
Hopefully, The Empire will turn things around. In the meantime, if I were going to buy a new-production kit today, Sig would top the list. Actually, Sig and Great planes are about all that's left of "mainstream" kit producers, since MidWest went away.
.
Hopefully, The Empire will turn things around. In the meantime, if I were going to buy a new-production kit today, Sig would top the list. Actually, Sig and Great planes are about all that's left of "mainstream" kit producers, since MidWest went away.
.
08-24-2008, 03:34 PM
#10
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: St. Joseph,
MO
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
ORIGINAL: Rocketman612
I would not swear off building because of this kit but I understand your disappointment. I agree with jship and buy a Sig kit. Good wood selection, cutting and fit. Shake the box and it almost falls together.
Keep at it ,
Pete
I would not swear off building because of this kit but I understand your disappointment. I agree with jship and buy a Sig kit. Good wood selection, cutting and fit. Shake the box and it almost falls together.
Keep at it ,
Pete
08-24-2008, 03:41 PM
#11
Senior Member
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
I'm glad to see someone else post about this. I recently bought a Tiger-2 kit to have a simple, fun little "beater" plane and it was horrible. The parts didn't come close to matching the plans in some cases and some wing ribs didn't match the others even though they were supposed to be the same part. Some wood was so soft that it almost seemed rotten while other stuff was so hard and so heavy that I thought it might have been something besides balsa.
Faced with having to make a huge number of pieces from new wood, I just threw the kit out. It's not that I couldn't do that, I've built planes from plans before. It's just the principal that made me mad. I paid for a kit that should have contained adequate materials to assemble the basic airframe. That is not what I received.
I built a Cub from an old Goldberg kit that had been laying around for years and it went together and flew beautifully.
Now that Hobbico has Goldberg, hopefully they'll work on improving the quality.
Faced with having to make a huge number of pieces from new wood, I just threw the kit out. It's not that I couldn't do that, I've built planes from plans before. It's just the principal that made me mad. I paid for a kit that should have contained adequate materials to assemble the basic airframe. That is not what I received.
I built a Cub from an old Goldberg kit that had been laying around for years and it went together and flew beautifully.
Now that Hobbico has Goldberg, hopefully they'll work on improving the quality.
08-24-2008, 03:50 PM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bishop\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'\'s Stortford,
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
Sorry to hear of your dissapointment in the CG kit. Just glad I bought a SIG kit for similar reasons to yours. It has proven to be quite the opposite. In fact I am already looking at another SIG kit. the one I have now is the four Star 60 which will have a O.S.91 in it. At the moment the fuselage is siting hear looking very good - and held together by nothing other than rubber bands. the fit is that good that it just assembles and stays - just add Cyano.
Dont give up on kits just yet. do try a Sig kit. Absolutely bloody fantastic - and I certainly will not be looking at another ARF for a very long time. At least this is built one hundred times more stronger than an ARF and I have had to change one item - an aileron because of mismatched wood. Virtualy all was better than the choice I could have got in the model shop.
Best of luck finishing your CG model. At least you have given us the heads up NOT to try another kit from the CG stable. I guess the quickest way for them to go bust is produce rubbish kits.
Included is a pic of the aforesaid fuselage. - The cat is the workshop boss.
Dont give up on kits just yet. do try a Sig kit. Absolutely bloody fantastic - and I certainly will not be looking at another ARF for a very long time. At least this is built one hundred times more stronger than an ARF and I have had to change one item - an aileron because of mismatched wood. Virtualy all was better than the choice I could have got in the model shop.
Best of luck finishing your CG model. At least you have given us the heads up NOT to try another kit from the CG stable. I guess the quickest way for them to go bust is produce rubbish kits.
Included is a pic of the aforesaid fuselage. - The cat is the workshop boss.
08-24-2008, 08:01 PM
#14
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (30)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Madison,
AL
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
ORIGINAL: Rocketman612
Bill,
They do not, Sorry.
Pete
ORIGINAL: bronicabill
Does Sig make a .60-.90 size Extra 300?
Does Sig make a .60-.90 size Extra 300?
Bill,
They do not, Sorry.
Pete
08-24-2008, 08:12 PM
#15
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (30)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Madison,
AL
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
I just posted a rather scathing but polite as possible message on the Carl Goldberg product improvement feedback page on their website, including a link to this thread. We'll see if I get any kind of response. A responsible company would jump all over it and try to find a way to make their customer happy! Let's see what happens...
For the rest of you who have had similar problems, I would love to see you post to their site also so they understand I'm not the only one, and that I'm not just being a whiner, but have a legitimate complaint. Here is the link: http://www.carlgoldbergproducts.com/suggestion.html
For the rest of you who have had similar problems, I would love to see you post to their site also so they understand I'm not the only one, and that I'm not just being a whiner, but have a legitimate complaint. Here is the link: http://www.carlgoldbergproducts.com/suggestion.html
08-25-2008, 10:39 AM
#16
Senior Member
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
What's funny is while I was struggling to build that falcon, the Arf was
introduced! I have several kit builds behind me, and don't mind having
to "massage" a few parts for good fit. But when each rib was cut
incorrectly, I take issue. If a begginer had bought this kit, he would be
turned off to building forever. GP seems to be commited to keeping kits
in their catalogue, hopefully improvments will be made.
introduced! I have several kit builds behind me, and don't mind having
to "massage" a few parts for good fit. But when each rib was cut
incorrectly, I take issue. If a begginer had bought this kit, he would be
turned off to building forever. GP seems to be commited to keeping kits
in their catalogue, hopefully improvments will be made.
08-25-2008, 06:01 PM
#17
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Wichita,
KS
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
I am building an old (1st gen) CG Sukhoi. This is my first Goldberg kit, but I have also built sig, and scratch built. All the parts are die cut and have fit relatively well. I have had a few things here and there, but part fitment doesn't really bother me much, with some patience, an exacto knife, and a sanding block, I can make anything fit. The problem for me has been with wood quality. I know that the kit is 13 years old, but it doesn't sound like the wood in their kits have gotten much better. I felt like the plywood was okay, but the balsa was a different story. Some of the wing sheeting is too soft, and the wing ribs are absolute crap. The leading edges are nicely shaped, but also very soft. I am still sweating bullets hoping that this thing will survive the build, I have already had to patch a few holes that were in honesty my fault, but wouldn't have been as bad had the supplied balsa been better. A few ribs sheared apart from the springback of the D-tube sheeting and main spar, and a few it seems broke just by looking at them. The square corners in the ribs are one of the stupidest things I have seen in a while, I had to reinforce all the square corners in the wing ribs with thin CA because thats where they were breaking.
I am going to try to buy a 2nd gen wing kit for this plane from Goldberg (and vacu-sealing and storing it), I am fairly certain that the fuselage is not going to break unless I make it a lawn dart, but I am going to want a spare wing. I probably would have been better off tracing the kit's ribs, scanning them in, tracing them in CAD, and getting new ribs cut, and replacing all the sheeting in the kit. I bought my kit second hand for less than half the retail price, but if I had paid full price for this kit, I would have been a little upset. Really, the only thing that has kept me going through this build is that I am in love with the Su-26 and have really wanted one for a long time, and no one makes an SU-26 kit. Good luck bronicabill.
I am going to try to buy a 2nd gen wing kit for this plane from Goldberg (and vacu-sealing and storing it), I am fairly certain that the fuselage is not going to break unless I make it a lawn dart, but I am going to want a spare wing. I probably would have been better off tracing the kit's ribs, scanning them in, tracing them in CAD, and getting new ribs cut, and replacing all the sheeting in the kit. I bought my kit second hand for less than half the retail price, but if I had paid full price for this kit, I would have been a little upset. Really, the only thing that has kept me going through this build is that I am in love with the Su-26 and have really wanted one for a long time, and no one makes an SU-26 kit. Good luck bronicabill.
08-25-2008, 06:56 PM
#18
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (30)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Madison,
AL
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
Thanks for all of the feedback and support so far! It is quite obvious I'm not the only one who is very dissatisfied with CG kits, especially when it comes to the quality of the wood! Seems the wood in mine is either so soft it crumbles just looking at it when it should be fairly dense, or it's rock hard when it needs to be a little softer such as wing sheeting. I just spent another $14.00 plus gasoline for a 20+ mile round trip to the LHS at lunch today for more wood. Most of the sheeting that came in the kit is now standing in the corner to be used for firewood or kindling this winter. Live and learn...
08-28-2008, 09:54 PM
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Whitby, ON, CANADA
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
One thing we found around here is that though the Goldberg stuff does fly great and are, for the most part, classics, make sure you re-enforce the fuse behind the wing. That seems to be a weak point (on grass fields anyway) in the design. We've seen various models break in exactly that area on a less than smooth landing. Simple quarter stock and some light ply make a world of difference.
I finishing up a Sukhoi kit, been at it a long time. I found the plans didn't match the dimensions of the kit but customer service advised me that the paper was thermal so would change shape. Problem was the wood was too short for the plans. Other than that I didn't have too many issues, other than a few already mentioned. I wanted to build it the "old fashioned" way and used carpenter's glue. Now I know why people like CA
Still glad to have done it that way though; something different.
I do have to mirror the other folks on the SIG kits. Quality product and solid customer support but don't give up on the Goldberg kits just yet; things can and do change.
Best of luck.
Bob
I finishing up a Sukhoi kit, been at it a long time. I found the plans didn't match the dimensions of the kit but customer service advised me that the paper was thermal so would change shape. Problem was the wood was too short for the plans. Other than that I didn't have too many issues, other than a few already mentioned. I wanted to build it the "old fashioned" way and used carpenter's glue. Now I know why people like CA
Still glad to have done it that way though; something different.I do have to mirror the other folks on the SIG kits. Quality product and solid customer support but don't give up on the Goldberg kits just yet; things can and do change.
Best of luck.
Bob
08-28-2008, 10:44 PM
#20
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,972
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
I have only built a few Carl Goldeberg models over the years. Back before CNC and Laser cutting was adopted by kit manufacturers, the Carl Goldberg kits were among the highest quality of any kit you could buy. But now, compared with kits utilizing this new technology, the Carl Goldberg kits may seem only mediocre by comparison. But these are some of the best flying kits produced by one of the most famous names in aeronautic design. I have run across Carl Goldberg's name in NASA tech briefs and in other publications and consider him a hero as many of my generation do. And perhaps his notoriety , is one reason that his kits have been produced for so long after his death, but have not been updated to include the new technology.
If you design something well enough, it will endure long enough to seem slightly inferior . Even so, these kits are still very popular. And folks accept the fact that the kits are from a different era. Even so, they still build these kits and most people love them and speak very highly of their performance and ease of operation.
A 1969 Dodge Charger may fetch upwards of a half of a million dollars on Barret-Jackson, or even more. But compared to a modern automobile, that Charger can't match the performance, the fit and finish, the handling or the durability of a modern car. And a modern car can't offer the nostalgia and history of that Charger. Ford has recently made a wonderful offering to the American public in their new generation Mustang. It has some of the naostalgia, but with the new world electronic controls and technology.
The Carl Goldberg Chipmunk and Extra are the opposite of that Ford Mustang. They are 25 year old kits that offers 21 century performance. That is remarkable. They may not offer 21 century quality control. But they are still remarkable kits for what they are.
If you design something well enough, it will endure long enough to seem slightly inferior . Even so, these kits are still very popular. And folks accept the fact that the kits are from a different era. Even so, they still build these kits and most people love them and speak very highly of their performance and ease of operation.
A 1969 Dodge Charger may fetch upwards of a half of a million dollars on Barret-Jackson, or even more. But compared to a modern automobile, that Charger can't match the performance, the fit and finish, the handling or the durability of a modern car. And a modern car can't offer the nostalgia and history of that Charger. Ford has recently made a wonderful offering to the American public in their new generation Mustang. It has some of the naostalgia, but with the new world electronic controls and technology.
The Carl Goldberg Chipmunk and Extra are the opposite of that Ford Mustang. They are 25 year old kits that offers 21 century performance. That is remarkable. They may not offer 21 century quality control. But they are still remarkable kits for what they are.
08-28-2008, 10:51 PM
#21
My Feedback: (-1)
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
In the last couple of years I have built three of the Extra 300 kits and not run into any problems at all??? Great wood and good fit. These were older kits I bought at auction though so maybe something has changed??
Plans and parts fitting, I was A printer for A long time, paper run through A press shrinks A little and paper that goes through A blue line or blue print maching is developed with ammonia and the paper has A coating that is light sensitive, should be no shrinking at all unless it is stored in A damp area and there should be no streching at all.
If you ever saw die cutting and how the dies are made you would understand the fitting problem A little better. It's not too bad sometimes but some of the old kits were just plain crap!!
Plans and parts fitting, I was A printer for A long time, paper run through A press shrinks A little and paper that goes through A blue line or blue print maching is developed with ammonia and the paper has A coating that is light sensitive, should be no shrinking at all unless it is stored in A damp area and there should be no streching at all.
If you ever saw die cutting and how the dies are made you would understand the fitting problem A little better. It's not too bad sometimes but some of the old kits were just plain crap!!
08-28-2008, 11:46 PM
#22
Senior Member
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
I think what happened on some of these kits is the switch from die cutting to laser cutting. Laser cutters require a digital drawing. My theory is that the original parts weren't duplicated accurately when digitized and therefore the resulting laser cut parts is way off from the plan. That's one possibility I thought of anyhow. It's definitely more than just paper growing or shrinking. My Tiger-2 kit had pieces that weren't even close. A little trimming and sanding couldn't get them right; they needed to be cut new from balsa or ply.
Then there was the notched TE... the plans showed the ribs even spaced with corresponding notches on the TE stock. The TE pieces included in the kit had notches cut at seemingly random intervals; as much as 3/16 off on a couple notches. This is just plane bad quality control. It would be a piece of cake to use some sort of jig on a table saw or something similar to make many identical pieces all with notches in the same spots. With modern CNC equipment, the accuracy should be even better yet. The manufacturer did not do this.
I'm not afraid to break into the wood pile and cut new pieces but that's why you build from plans. I personally think a kit should have the majority of its contents at least suitable for building the airplane.
Like I said, my Anniversary Cub kit appeared to have been from the 80's or early 90's and it was a joy to assemble.
Then there was the notched TE... the plans showed the ribs even spaced with corresponding notches on the TE stock. The TE pieces included in the kit had notches cut at seemingly random intervals; as much as 3/16 off on a couple notches. This is just plane bad quality control. It would be a piece of cake to use some sort of jig on a table saw or something similar to make many identical pieces all with notches in the same spots. With modern CNC equipment, the accuracy should be even better yet. The manufacturer did not do this.
I'm not afraid to break into the wood pile and cut new pieces but that's why you build from plans. I personally think a kit should have the majority of its contents at least suitable for building the airplane.
Like I said, my Anniversary Cub kit appeared to have been from the 80's or early 90's and it was a joy to assemble.
08-29-2008, 01:32 AM
#23
Senior Member
My Feedback: (14)
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
ORIGINAL: bronicabill
Well, some things never change! The poor quality of Goldberg kits is one of them!
The last Goldberg kit I built was about 16 years ago. It was a Goldberg Extra 300 that I built for a friend. I had never cussed as much as I did building that thing! The parts fit sucked, the die cutting was more like die crushing, and the wood quality was poor and frequently the density was not suited for the task. If I hadn't been building it for a friend I probably would have smashed it with a hammer before I finished it.
Fast forward 16 years. I'm building a Goldberg Extra 300 of my own. I had forgotten how bad of a kit it was back then when I ordered mine, and I also didn't realize Great Planes had one in kit form that was only slightly smaller (and $50 less expensive) or I would have bought it instead! Anyway, the only difference I see now, aside from the much higher price, is that the ribs and some other parts are laser cut... or should I say laser scorched. The wood quality still sucks, I have some ribs that are rock hard and others crumble in your hand. I've replaced most of the wing sheeting because what was in the kit was so warped it was useless. What was usable was rock hard and needed to be replaced anyway. The parts still don't fit; I've had to reshape just about everything I've pulled out of the box to make it work. One of the two shaped inboard trailing edge pieces was a shade under 1/16" thinner than it was supposed to be, so I have to laminate some sheeting on it and sand it down to the right thickness. Some of the parts were almost toasted by the laser, and others weren't even cut halfway through. On top of all of that I'm going to have to spend another $60+ on a fiberglass cowling wheel pants, and aluminum gear for this thing because the stock components are of unsuitable quality!
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me! Well this is twice, and I can assure you there will NOT be another!
Maybe I'm just being too picky, but I remember when I used to build kits all of the time and stuff was of much better quality. Heck, the Japanese kits like Yoshioka and MK were so good you barely had to even touch a knife or sandpaper until it was time to finish the model! Boy do I wish those kits were still available!
Oh well, back to ARFs after this one. I just don't have enough time to waste on crappy quality kits, and I'd rather be flying than building anyway. I just thought it would be fun to build my own airplane again, but the fun is long gone.
Sorry for the long rant, but it's been building (no pun intended) for weeks now! [>:]
Well, some things never change! The poor quality of Goldberg kits is one of them!
The last Goldberg kit I built was about 16 years ago. It was a Goldberg Extra 300 that I built for a friend. I had never cussed as much as I did building that thing! The parts fit sucked, the die cutting was more like die crushing, and the wood quality was poor and frequently the density was not suited for the task. If I hadn't been building it for a friend I probably would have smashed it with a hammer before I finished it.
Fast forward 16 years. I'm building a Goldberg Extra 300 of my own. I had forgotten how bad of a kit it was back then when I ordered mine, and I also didn't realize Great Planes had one in kit form that was only slightly smaller (and $50 less expensive) or I would have bought it instead! Anyway, the only difference I see now, aside from the much higher price, is that the ribs and some other parts are laser cut... or should I say laser scorched. The wood quality still sucks, I have some ribs that are rock hard and others crumble in your hand. I've replaced most of the wing sheeting because what was in the kit was so warped it was useless. What was usable was rock hard and needed to be replaced anyway. The parts still don't fit; I've had to reshape just about everything I've pulled out of the box to make it work. One of the two shaped inboard trailing edge pieces was a shade under 1/16" thinner than it was supposed to be, so I have to laminate some sheeting on it and sand it down to the right thickness. Some of the parts were almost toasted by the laser, and others weren't even cut halfway through. On top of all of that I'm going to have to spend another $60+ on a fiberglass cowling wheel pants, and aluminum gear for this thing because the stock components are of unsuitable quality!
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me! Well this is twice, and I can assure you there will NOT be another!
Maybe I'm just being too picky, but I remember when I used to build kits all of the time and stuff was of much better quality. Heck, the Japanese kits like Yoshioka and MK were so good you barely had to even touch a knife or sandpaper until it was time to finish the model! Boy do I wish those kits were still available!
Oh well, back to ARFs after this one. I just don't have enough time to waste on crappy quality kits, and I'd rather be flying than building anyway. I just thought it would be fun to build my own airplane again, but the fun is long gone.
Sorry for the long rant, but it's been building (no pun intended) for weeks now! [>:]
*********
The last Goldberg kits that I built were the Ultimate Biplane and the Anniversary Cub. Both went together smoothly and without a problem. That was in 1992. After that I bought their kit of the Bucker Jungmann, or whatever its name was. When I opened the box and saw all of the plastic parts, I closed the box and sold the kit on the internet. As far as I'm concerned, Goldberg model kits died when Carl passed on. Now, it is just a brand name, which stands for nothing. Makes me wonder why the folks at the Tower conglomerate even bothered buying it. Oh, it was probably included with the Lanier deal. Another questionable purchase, as far as I'm concerned. I have never owned anything by Lanier that ended up being a good purchase.
When kits are really bad, it is actually easier to scratch build. It is more expensive to scratch build, but if it comes out wrong, you have only one person to blame. Maybe that's why folks don't scratch build much? <G>
Ed Cregger
08-29-2008, 12:14 PM
#24
My Feedback: (-1)
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
Chuck, I haven't tried one of there laser cut kits but you may have hit on something. It would be nice if A kit cutter joined in and would tell us what is what. If you send in your old MAN plans to A kit cutter how do they do it or is that why some of these cutters are kind of hit and miss when it comes to fit??
I have to agree with Mr. Cregger about the nasty plastic they started putting in the kit boxes but the price of glass parts went so nuts they couldn't pass on the cost to the customers and expect to sell there kits. Scratch/plans building is alive and well with A lot of plans sellers out there. Just go to any big show or meet with venders and you will find them. I have been buying my glass parts and plastic canopy's from Fiberglass Specialties for A long while and they make A fine product. As to the cost of scratch building???? I can frame up two planes for the price of one kit by building scratch. Before Lone Star burnt down I had A wood supply that was my own fire hazzard, scratch builders do tend to buy in bulk!!
I have to agree with Mr. Cregger about the nasty plastic they started putting in the kit boxes but the price of glass parts went so nuts they couldn't pass on the cost to the customers and expect to sell there kits. Scratch/plans building is alive and well with A lot of plans sellers out there. Just go to any big show or meet with venders and you will find them. I have been buying my glass parts and plastic canopy's from Fiberglass Specialties for A long while and they make A fine product. As to the cost of scratch building???? I can frame up two planes for the price of one kit by building scratch. Before Lone Star burnt down I had A wood supply that was my own fire hazzard, scratch builders do tend to buy in bulk!!
08-29-2008, 01:59 PM
#25
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: St. Joseph,
MO
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Carl Goldberg Kits
ORIGINAL: ChuckW
I think what happened on some of these kits is the switch from die cutting to laser cutting. Laser cutters require a digital drawing. My theory is that the original parts weren't duplicated accurately when digitized and therefore the resulting laser cut parts is way off from the plan. That's one possibility I thought of anyhow. It's definitely more than just paper growing or shrinking. My Tiger-2 kit had pieces that weren't even close. A little trimming and sanding couldn't get them right; they needed to be cut new from balsa or ply.
Then there was the notched TE... the plans showed the ribs even spaced with corresponding notches on the TE stock. The TE pieces included in the kit had notches cut at seemingly random intervals; as much as 3/16 off on a couple notches. This is just plane bad quality control. It would be a piece of cake to use some sort of jig on a table saw or something similar to make many identical pieces all with notches in the same spots. With modern CNC equipment, the accuracy should be even better yet. The manufacturer did not do this.
I'm not afraid to break into the wood pile and cut new pieces but that's why you build from plans. I personally think a kit should have the majority of its contents at least suitable for building the airplane.
Like I said, my Anniversary Cub kit appeared to have been from the 80's or early 90's and it was a joy to assemble.
I think what happened on some of these kits is the switch from die cutting to laser cutting. Laser cutters require a digital drawing. My theory is that the original parts weren't duplicated accurately when digitized and therefore the resulting laser cut parts is way off from the plan. That's one possibility I thought of anyhow. It's definitely more than just paper growing or shrinking. My Tiger-2 kit had pieces that weren't even close. A little trimming and sanding couldn't get them right; they needed to be cut new from balsa or ply.
Then there was the notched TE... the plans showed the ribs even spaced with corresponding notches on the TE stock. The TE pieces included in the kit had notches cut at seemingly random intervals; as much as 3/16 off on a couple notches. This is just plane bad quality control. It would be a piece of cake to use some sort of jig on a table saw or something similar to make many identical pieces all with notches in the same spots. With modern CNC equipment, the accuracy should be even better yet. The manufacturer did not do this.
I'm not afraid to break into the wood pile and cut new pieces but that's why you build from plans. I personally think a kit should have the majority of its contents at least suitable for building the airplane.
Like I said, my Anniversary Cub kit appeared to have been from the 80's or early 90's and it was a joy to assemble.