Lanier Quality
 

Been building and flying powered models for somtime now. Wanted to try my hand at sailplanes, so bought a GL to start with. This has got to be the worst kit for parts fit I've ever built ! Trailing edge rib notches not even close to matching plans. Spar slots on several ribs needed to be re-cut. Precut cut gussets pretty much unusable. Lots of flash on leading and trailing edges. Ply laser cut parts require lots of cutting to remove. So far I've completed the tail feathers and half of the right wing.

Has this always been the case or was someting lost in the transition when Lanier took took over Goldberg ? I've always wanted to build the CG Chipmunk and Ultimate, but if is any indication of the quality I may pass.

RE: Lanier Quality
 

I've always liked Golberg kits. Good fit, easy to build, the wood quality wasn't the best, but it was ok, and the end product alwaysflew well. I've never built a Lanier kit, they looked lousy in the box. I didn't know they took over CG kits, but I doubt that will benefit the quality of Goldberg's kits. Too bad, Golberg had some great designs. The chipmunk is certainly one of the good ones too.

Good luck!
Larsen

RE: Lanier Quality
 

I built a couple of Gentle Ladies when CG was making them and they weren't wonderful then, either. Acceptable, but not great. My contact with Lanier is limited, but the two or three I've seen weren't very good. I hear some grumbling about QC and customer service at Lanier, too.

The GL is such a nice flying glider that a laser kit would probably find a new home with us right away. It's a shame to have to do it, but you could use the parts for patterns and work out the fit issues.

RE: Lanier Quality
 

Lanier !!!! Three unbuildable kits in a row.
Kit#1 I purchased a Shrike 15 kit for something small and easy to transport. Wood was marginal but one of the fuse sides looked like it had moved on the table during laser cutting. Rear of fuse was mismatched by at least 1 1/2". I ended up cutting a new fuse side and building it up into a nice little plane. Numerous e-mails to Lanier and their response---- NADA
At that point I realized that they don't give a hoot about customers or quality so bye bye Lanier.

Kit #2 Our club decided to fly slow combat last season so my father gave me a Slasher kit for Christmas. Wing cores were so mismatched that when you line up the spar slots at the roots of the cores the leading edge was off by at least 3/8" and trailing edge was off by 3/4" I could have sworn they were cores from two different planes. Again, Numerous e-mails to Lanier with no response. Kit is currently in the attic collecting dust.

Kit #3 So one of my flying buddies shows up, to my dismay, with a Lanier Dominator kit wanting me to build it for him. I am just about finished framing it up and all I had to do was buy aileron stock and one sheet of 3/32 balsa to finish the wing skins that they didn't bother to include. Just think, if they don't include this in all of the Dominator kits that they cut they could save how much money ?? (attempt at sarcasm) This plane will get finished and I will let my good flying buddy pay for the missing pieces in my building bill.

If a novice builder had received any of these kits they would be unbuildable, in my opinion, which is a huge shame because I like to see any novice meet with success. I have not bothered to try to contact Lanier about the missing pieces because----why bother, they have made it very apparent to me where their priorities lie. $$$$$$

Shame shame shame on you Lanier !

RE: Lanier Quality
 

My Lanier Ultimate Pitts almost cured me of the building bug. Poor instructions, rock hard and heavy balsa, poor fitting pieces and really heavy design. It became a chore to work on it but kept at it and finally finished it. I'm building a Top Flite kit now and it's such a joy to work on.

RE: Lanier Quality
 

Did you know that Lanier now owns Goldberg?

RE: Lanier Quality
 

Really sorry to hear that Ed. Goldberg had some great kits out. Their Sukhoi, Ultimate and Chipmunk were all really good builds and great fliers. I hope these don't go the way of other Lanier kits. There was a day when Laniers weren't bad but in the last few years their quality is horrible. I'm sorry that I don't subscribe to RC Report any more. You guy's are the only magazine that gives truly honest reviews on products. Have you done anything on Lanier lately?

RE: Lanier Quality
 

If you really want a treat, call and complain about something. There a a female who I talked with that will just make your day-------NOT.
I am thru with them, to many good companys with great service in this sport to put up with what they are about.

RE: Lanier Quality
 

This spring I built a Lanier Shrike 40, I grade the laser cutting excellent, the quality of the wood ok and the plans/instructions lousy. It went together fast and turned into a nice flying plane good looking plane. The kit only cost $50 so I think it was a OK deal. Although if I was to spend almost $200 for the Goldberg Sukhoi kit and got the same quality I would be Pi***d off.

RE: Lanier Quality
 

can anyone tell me why the stinger is so popular? i see a lot of them at the flyins. i wonder if them kits are lousy also.

RE: Lanier Quality
 

Funny you should ask, I have a Stinger 60 kit-built. This is a nice flying airplane that could be soooo much better. It is heavy because of the foam wings, ply in the fus. and a lot more including the liberal use of plastic in the fus. top.
I have a 91 Mag. 4 stroke in mine, great combo but the plane is heavy and will not go unlimited due to this. Maybe the problem is the several required fixes due to weak fus at the wing saddles. Hit a little hard and the plane splits, not just me but two others also that I witnessed.
Contacted Lanier on their site and never got an answer, ever though they were asking for suggestions?
Combine this with the crappy engine cowl and you hate to give them any business.
A friend needed some parts for a Goldburg Ultimate, they wanted an arm and a leg and were really snotty(a female). I know as I made the call for him.
I will not deal with them from this point on, I am well treated by other companies who try an make the customer happy.

RE: Lanier Quality
 

I have built two Laneir kits--small planes for .09 since I had an .09 and thought it would be neat to have something I could fly anywhere. This is before the electrics became to easy. Both kits were really crummy. I'll never even consider a Lanier kit in the future. I noticed the interest in Shrikes. I have built two Sig Wonders and found them to be excellent. I have one with a .15 and small gear. Very spirited performance.

My two cents.

Greg

RE: Lanier Quality
 

Is your friend the one that posted on RCU about wanting the fuse kit for his ARF wings?

RE: Lanier Quality
 

My personal experience with Lanier wood kits has been very good. Good wood, good to excellent parts fit, instant replacement for a missing or damaged part. Their instructions have been skimpy in the past but are showing strong improvement in later kits and later production runs of long time kits.

I have built the 1/4 scale Laser 200, several Stingers, Extra 3.35 and the small Giles 202. All built well with minimal issues equal too or better than other kits I have built.

As far as quality diminishing in the Goldberg kit line because Lanier now owns it, I will disagree. The two original Goldberg kits I built (Extra 300 and Ultimate Bipe) were riddled with poor wood, crushed die cutting (the Ultimate was in the first kit run), marginal parts fit and flimsy plastic parts.

Never had a bad experience when calling Lanier, always a helpful conversation and prompt service.

Have a number of their wood/foam kits in the rafters and pick them up at swap meets when ever I can. They build and fly well. A little heavier...yes. Fragile like a lot of other kits and arf's...no!

RE: Lanier Quality
 

Well well.
In this very moment I'm building a Lanier Laser 200 1/3 scale, i'm not impressed with the quality and customer service just like a village in Russia.
Missing wood, poor quality, poorly matched abs parts, so bye bye Lanier, crossing my fingers for approval of my plane as requested by the danish laws.

brgds

Joen

RE: Lanier Quality
 

I'm building a Shrike 10 right now and both the lazer cutting and wood quality are very good. The instructions are the weakest point in this kit but it also isn't a beginners kit. This is my third kit build overall and I haven't found it difficult to build at all despite the minimalist instructions. This kit does seem to assume the builder knows how to read a set of plans which isn't necessarily a big negative in my opinion since it isn't a beginners kit. If it were a trainer the instructions would be completely inappropriate.

Everyone raves about Sig kits for being easy to build but many people forget that they still have a few older models in their line that aren't the easiest to build yet their reputation is still much better. It seems Lanier's customer service is doing a lot to give them a bad name.

I have a Goldberg Ultimate that I will be starting this winter some time. Before buying the kit I asked around about their current quality since Lanier took over the shop and the general opinion was favorable so I went ahead and bought the kit. Hopefully I got good advise before buying mine!

RE: Lanier Quality
 

Joen,

What do you have to get approved? The safety of the plane at the club by the safety officer? Or, something more strict?

RE: Lanier Quality
 

I have built a couple of Stingers and they were ok. That was a few years ago and maybe they have changed. Have never been impressed with their plastic planes. The fuses stress crack. I have always rated them at the bottom of the barrel in my opinion.

RE: Lanier Quality
 

I say Lanier is one of the better kit makers but at the bottom of the barrel of the better ones. I have built one Lanier and one Goldberg, the Goldberg Ultimate kit I'm building right now. The Lanier kit was overall adequate. The parts could be made to work and the instructions gave adequate hints when used along with the plans to build the model. Compare this to a SIG kit where the parts are obviously and purposefully made, say if you pick out a piece you can tell it was specifically made to be rib #3 of the left wing. The Goldberg Ultimate is a recent laser cut kit. The laser cut parts have been very good and the wood has been very good except for one trailing edge which was shaped like half a figure 8. The fit has been good. They have substituted some 3/16" thick parts where the plans, manual and other parts require 1/8" thick. The parts can be made to work but whoever cut those parts was probably snickering about the extra sanding and clean up of sawdust the builder would have to do. The ply fuselage parts are typical Lanier, they can be made to work and appear to have been cut by a router with a broken screwdriver tip for a bit. The Goldberg manual is OK, it could easily be improved and really needs updated. All they have to do is offer me another Ultimate to build and I would update their manual. I won't buy another Lanier kit, but possibly another Goldberg.

RE: Lanier Quality
 

We must have planes weighing in more than 16 pounds approved by the danish organisation for model airplane. They will check the work quality, the planes quality, hinges, engine mounting etc etc.
When plane is approved, I must be approved too, I must show I'm able of handling this bird, and the plane MUST be stressed at the very first fligth to show is capable handling the figures,

Joen

RE: Lanier Quality
 

Joen,

Okay, I see now. Is that good for a weight of 16 lbs, or too picky? I guess the only thing I would object to is that first flight. If it were that big I would want to fly a short flight and land to check the hardware, wing attachments, etc before giving it the workout. Are the inspections hard to pass or expensive?



I spoke to a friend of mine who has built/is building his 5th or 6th Lanier Laser 200. He said that he was very happy with the quality of the kiits. I don't think he has built other Lanier kits.

RE: Lanier Quality
 

Hi There.

Yesterday evening I did have the inspector to pay me a visit, he went thrue the airplane both fuselage and wings, only 2 minor comments, one triangle needed some extra epoxy and remember to file a notch in wheel shafts ;).

Weigth of mine Laser will be around 9,1 kgs ehhhh 20 pounds.

No it is not expensive part of the fee we paid.

But we must stress the plane in the first flight, but assembly of the plane is part of the process,.

Engine that's gonna be used are the new ZDZ80RV-J with Krumscheid tuned pipe, turning a 28x10 Biela at 6300 rpm, waaaauuuuuwwww awsome power.

Joen

RE: Lanier Quality
 

Joen,

Good luck on your first flights. Hope you have fun with it and maybe you can send pictures too.

RE: Lanier Quality
 

Hi There.

I have pictures ok, here we go.

I don't know if this works.

Joen

RE: Lanier Quality
 

I was warned off of Lanier kits by my neighbor who's been building 20 years. He told me that the one Lanier he tried didn't have a straight line in it and that he would never buy another product from them. As far as them buying Goldberg, I always thought Goldberg were a little, if not a lot, high on their prices so I'm not likely to buy either any time soon.

RE: Lanier Quality
 

Joen's post from Denmark serves to remind me of how fortunate we are to live in America!

Inspectors and registration fees for model planes - sounds like government of Denmark has far too much time and money on their hands!!!

DT56

RE: Lanier Quality
 

Try and see what it is like in other countries. I haven't even been to Denmark, but I've lived in Germany and visited other countries like Holland and Belgium. Those countries are jam packed with people, buildings, and roads. It is almost impossible to find a place like the little field we take for granted where I live. What I learned in Germany from the rc people was that crowded conditions meant lawsuits if a plane went out of control and the unthinkable happened. I was really surprised by this and that was in 1983! Plus, it doesn't take a lot of surfing on RCU to find that most European countries suffer from strict noise controls. I remember reading a message from a guy in England who was asking for help to get his OS .46FX to pass the noise test. Yikes! So, I would find the inspection system understandable. Also, I know that you have to take 'checkrides' in England to participate in their tiered system. We have it pretty good in almost all aspects.

Okay, I've said my thing about what European rc people have to deal with. I'm certainly not one to enjoy excessive bureacracies! Ask anybody who knows me. I find most rules unbearable. I'm not defending senseless rules/regs. Just thought I would throw this in before I get flamed.

I think Joen would appreciate the wide open freedoms that a lot of us have over here if he were to fly with us. We, on the other hand, would find it frustrating a lot of times to fly in Europe. And, I didn't mention the excessive costs of nitro in a lot of countries either.

Only Joen and other Danes can tell us if the system is excessive.

editted to add: DT-56, I wasn't trying to come on as argumentive and maybe I didn't do a good job. I see what you meant after I reread what you wrote.

RE: Lanier Quality
 

Hmm. I was actually thinking that Denmark is on the ball. The proliferation of those 40% and up ARFs with 100cc engines cranking out ten or more horsepower readily available to anyone with a cedit card is a truly unnerving reality these days. Add to that the current trend to fly very close in to the flightline/spectator area and hover, etc. and it's a wonder the AMA is still able to provide insurance.

Anyway, this is a timely thread since one, I just dug out an old Lanier Stinger kit last week that was half built with the intention of finishing it, and two, I just finished stripping the Monokote off of a Goldberg Tiger 2 kit I built about ten years ago that I plan to recover with Worldtex (I'm no longer a fan of plastic film).

I now remember why the Stinger was only half finished. The laser cutting and wood parts fit was very nice and went together well. However, all that ridiculous plastic is another story. So I sort of redesigned the top half of the plane by building it out of balsa. I'm not sure why I bought the kit in the first place, but foam and vacuform are not my idea of fun modeling. It's like they designed the kit part way with nice wood and laser cutting and then just decided to quit and simply throw in a bunch of plastic to finish it off. I won't buy another Lanier, but not because of the quality, because I don't enjoy those particular building methods. Fair enough.

Now, the Goldberg kit pre-dates the Lanier acquisition. In the process of removing the film and sanding the structure I can see that the model was maybe under designed. Goldberg clearly cut corners to keep the price down (or their profits up, which is completely unrelated to price, btw). The balsa density is inconsistent and in many cases the wrong grain is used for certain parts. The wing has shear webbing, but the pieces only cover about 3/4 of each wing bay and do not extend to each rib. I figure they saved maybe less than a foot of material/25 cents with that decision. The LE sheeting is very thin on the wing. I can punch through it by breathing on it. The tail is much too flimsy in my opinion and the wood is either too soft or too dense. The only part of the plane that I would call high quality is the liteply fuse. It builds into a very straight and study structure that is remarkably light.

So, the Stinger went back in its box until one day when I'm really bored. The Tiger I decided to work on and get ready for covering. I sheeted the built-up tail surfaces with 1/16. They are still very light but are now far more rigid and will look a lot better when covered. Since I'm putting in a 4-stroke this time the extra weight will cancel out anyway. There wasn't much I could do to the wing other than go over any weak glue joints and handle it very carefully. It won't survive a deadstick in a cornfield, though.

On the other hand, I love Goldberg's plans. They are well drawn and provide a lot of info. If I build another Tiger I will use the plans and not buy another kit.

For what it's worth, I just finished scratchbuilding a Goldberg Senior Falcon from plans and I felt that every aspect of that design was well engineered. Of course, it is a forty year old design and I selected all my own balsa, both of which make a big difference.

All of the planes I have lined up to build are no longer available as kits - only in plan form - so unless someone gives me one of the new "Lanberg" kits I guess I'll never know how they build.

RE: Lanier Quality
 

BLWBLW, your rigth on the spot, but it is not bad or we have just adjusted our minds to it, it would however be VERY nice to fly almost anywhere without noise restrictions, which is the biggest factor to overcome, noise limit in general are up to the citcouncil to decide, fluing fields way in the open, if we are able to get the permission from those livinf "nearby" .
At our field we do have a noise limit on 82dB with engine running full thrittle at 10 m. distance ehhh that's 33 feet. plane 3 feet above ground.

The fee does include insurance to, I dont think it is crazy, but sometimes people does crazy things, and these rules an restrictions are only meant as a help to us, however we are not allowed planes over 25 kgs (56 pounds)inc. fuel and smoke oil.

Rainedav, excastly Lanier do some nice things and turttledeck in ABS!! I did throw my away a made a built up off balsa and light ply, quality off balsa in the kit did go from soft to hard without any reason.

Joen