kit built vs arf built
 

right guys i just had a thought for a new subject,

My question is the following

1 what is you oldest kit built model in the hanger
2 whats your oldest arf in the hanger

what i am trying to find out is the average lifespan of an arf compared to good old kit built models thats usualy as strong as hoarses.
oh yeah if you have pics of them please do post them. hopefully it may point out to some of the new comers that arfs are cheap but dont last aslong as the good old kit built ones

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

Here's a picture of a YS 1.40 powered CGB Ultimate I built in 1998, the picture was taken in 2008. I don't own it anymore but I flew it every weekend for many many years. ARFs can't compete with a kit built as far as strength and longevity. They simply don't use the quality of glues or even care enough to glue every single joint. They are designed to last 2-3 years and then be tossed.

However, I think that ARFs crash more often because replacing a $250 plane doesn't even compare to 200 hours of sweat out in the shop.

Also in the fleet is a 15 year of 1/4 scale cub I'm recovering and a 5 year old King Kobra. Can you imagine recovering an ARF because it was 15 years old? Probably not!

Mike

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

to be honnest no i couldnt unles it had been left in the box from new.:)

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

My wife says , no more ARF;s as I have no respect for them. lol and she;s right. But I do have a GP SkyBolt that 4 years old, It's eonly ARF I care about and own. Have a new one in the box , just in case. lol

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

When I returned to the RC world about 6 years back, after being away for several decades, I scratch built from plans my first plane. Then the guys at the field recomended that I put it aside and get a good trainer. My next idea was a big 60 size J3 cub. After I got the kit, and started reading the manual, the first pages were dedicated to "THISISNOTATRAINER". So, I ended up purchasing a Lanier Exxplorer 40 ARF, my first ARF. I was less than satisfied with the plane. The wing incidence was off. The covering requires a lot of attention to get it sorta tight. The hardware with the kit was awful and I ended up replacing all of it. The ailerons were sloppy and I ended up cutting the torsion rods off and building in a servo on each aileron. I got a lot of time on that plane, I was buying 12x6 props by the dozen and that would last me about four flight days. I promased myself that I would never buy another ARF. My instructor finally saved me from hitting the power lines but planted the plane intoa rail fence. I salvaged the wing and built a stick fuselage using the tail fins from the ARF. Turned out to be a great flying plane. Ilost it when an ex club member shot me down. I liked the half and half plane so much that I bult a second one, using a wing that Lanier sent me because of my comlaints about the first one. My instructor suggested that I go to a 4*60 so I built one and broke it in half on my first solo. Back in the air again three day later and I soloed and got my wings. I flew it and the "pink Stick" until I ended up killing both. A second 4*60 and I flew it for quite a while, then one day. I was without a plane to fly. A couple kits in the works but nothing to fly. One of our guys was flying a Phenoix Fun Star and really liked it, so Ibought my second ARF. Well, I just couldn't see the plane when it was within 180 degrees to the sun. Three really white knuckle flights, and I skinned the transparent covering off and covered it with some solid colors with a pattern I could see. I've flown this little plane for close to three years now. I've had to patch the covering many times after running off the runway and the weed sticke punching holes in the covering. But the air frame is solid as a rock. It's taken it's share of rough landings and is still the plane that I fly most. I've picked up a few more planes along the way, some kits and some ARFs Two ARF that I got were a Cermak Soukoi Su-31 1/4 scale and another was a U-Can-Do 60. Both had hours on them and both were "built" by some good flyers, but not very good builders. Ikilled the U-Can-Do on the first flight, actuall the first three second of it's first flight, I got the ailerons reversed. The wing survived and will fly again in another plane. The Soukoi gave me fits on landing, my problem, not the planes and I crashed it twice.It's ready to fly again.

Bottom line, I think the ARFs of today are much different than those of just five years back. I still hear storiesabout firewalls fallingoff and other issues., but if you look at the planes flying at your field, there are less than5% kit built plane flying. Few planes, kitbuilt, scratch built, or ARF's will last more than 5 years of two to three times a week flying. Not because of construction, but most of us will dumb thumb a plane in at some point, and whenthat happens, it doesn't matter if its scratch built or an ARF, itstill endsup as a pile of scrap in either case.

Don</p>

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

OK, in the shop and one in the trash can in the shop, the trash can plane is/was 15+ years old, recovered four times. My CG Extra is over 12 years old I have a 120 size Kaos that is 10 or 12 years old and my scratch built Giant Boeing Bipe is 8 years old. My Hots is now just over three years old. What I see in the smaller ARFs, about 60 to 120 size is they seem to last about one season in fair shape but tend to die sometime in season two if they haven't been crashed first. If flown a lot the air frame starts falling apart due to lack of wood and glue. The bigger giant scale ARFs seem to last longer but I'm seeing a lot better construction in them. It just depends on how they are flown and taken care of. You just can't compare the two, kit/scratch or ARF. When you see them advertising how light they are it should give you a clue, they are leaving out something to get them that light. Wood and glue weigh more!! It makes no difference to me, as long as everyone I'm flying with is having fun who cares what they are flying. I don't have any ARFs but most everyone I fly with is using them and just as happy with there planes as I am with mine. There planes are all newer too!!!

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

Gene, I've got to agree that flying something you glued together gives you a lot more pleasure than buying one all ready glued together. I've got an older GP Super Aeromaster bipe that I built almost four year back that I've yet to fly. To many hours into the build. Got a couple things wrong and I've yet to correct them yet. All you've got invested in an ARF is money. Seem to me that my time is more valuable that the money when it comes to building. When the U-Can Do went to the big trash can in the sky, It was just an "Oh Well" The Aeromaster thoughthat I spent hours on is another story. It goes down and I'll be sad.

Gene, glad we got together for breakfest the other day. Next trip I'm going to bring something to fly. And have some more time forthe hobby shop. That is a neat shop.

I stopped by a shop in Palm Desert on the way home and found a LT-40 kit for my son.Ineed to got out to Ga and help him build it. though. Kids. 45 years old and you are still training them.

Don

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

I'd have to say kit built planes last longer for me, I plowed my oldest in a month ago, a precident 'bi-fly' with a YS91fz on the nose. I tore the top wing of her doing outside loops, and thats all she wrote. It was 12 years old. I still have an old trainer that I have fitted floats to and an old simitar wise guy, both get flown and both are at least 10 yrs old and kit built. I am currently helping a young fella assemble his new trainer and I am disgusted with the lack of quality in the materials and workmanship. I have reglued most joints, but the ply itself is delaminating as we work on it, and the wings feel so fliumsy I am tempted to rip the covering off, but I detest covering [:'(][:'(]. I bought a supposedly quality katana a while back, quality? it folded its wings up while practicing IMAC routines on its 5th flight. upon inspection it turns out there was nothing holding the wingtubes, spars were near non existant and glue wasnt much better and what little there was wasnt in the joints, but in nice beads next to the joints. Upon calling the people I bought the plane from and being told stiff &%@&, I am now sworn off ARF's for good. I am looking for plans and/or kits for 1.20 sized and up planes.
So my vote goes for kit built any day

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

I'm from the "old" school. I started building balsa and tissue models when I was about 7 years old. I continued building them until I started flying R/C models in the early 70's, I simply built bigger models!!! I have never owned (or had the desire) an ARF model. For me, the experience of building a model and taking it to the flying field and see it fly, is the "total" experience!!!

In today's world with a very limited number of quality kits available, I find myself still building models, this time, they are mainly from plans.
I do understand that there are MANY people that prefer the ARF's because they can spend a little time putting it together and spend more time in the air.

But for me, I'll take a good set of plans over an ARF any day!!! Just my 2 cents :D

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

Crashalot.... good theme for a thread.

My oldest kit built plane is a Sig Skybolt... built in the winter of 1976... It was flown a great deal for about seven years and then I was out of the hobby for seventeen years. I've flown it a few times in recent years on the 4th of July to celebrate our nations birthday as it was originally built to celebrate America's bicentennial in 1976. Almost lost it during its renewal to flight status when the new aileron servo proved to be slightly higher then the old, and the aileron servo rods fouled with internals causing it to crash into a thicket of saplings making a heck of a racket... but was hardly hurt. What happened was the ends of Z bends on the servo arm had bottomed against a balsa platform that held the flight battery in place. The arms rotated against the plate and just as I was about to turn off base leg to final, the rods finally dug into the balsa locking up the ailerons preventing the turn onto final... I cut power and she glided into the grove of small trees. She still looks pretty good today though the old K&B epoxy paint on coverite is chipping a bit. It is powered by a HB .61 PDP and the plane is too fast to my current liking and requires too much messy clean up.

My oldest arf is a Hanger 9 120 size PT-19. It is perhaps the best flying model in my hanger but has required rebuilding the landing gear mounting blocks in the wings that were very poorly glued in place. In fact, one side were even missing the ply false rib doublers that the hardwood mount glues to... yep, the mount on one side was simply glued to two balsa ribs and of course broke loose on the planes second flight if I recall. The other side had the ply false ribs but they and the hardwood gear mount were poorly glued. With those fixed, I've had no other issues with the structure other than a shoot down that knocked out the firewall but was fairly easily rebuilt. The plane is a really great flyer and an example of an arf that if persevered with, can overcome its frailties to be a well thought of flyer.

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

My oldest R/C airplane is an Airtronic's Olympic II sailplane that is 32 years old, then I have a Bridi .60 sized RCM Trainer that was built in 1982, but uses the wing from one I built in 1977. True, neither get flown much anymore. My oldest ARF is 3 years old.

Experience-wise now, when I crash, it is generally bad enough it will damage badly, no matter if ARF or kits/scratch built. My opinion is that the ARFs I've had are built pretty well. I think Hanger 9 and Seagull are O.K. as are Great Planes. Wasn't real happy with my Senior Telemaster and this was only because the instructions were worthless.

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

I have been in and out of the hobby 3 times since the 80's.  In it for good now, I hope.  So I guess you could say I am old school.  I have a couple of problems with ARFs.  One thing is my believe that if it is made in China then it is very poorly made.  I do not use the words "poor quality" as I do not think Quality and China go together at all.  For all you folks that think the guy from Alabama is just a racist I will tell you my other reason.  The biggest industry in the town I live in was sock mills.  7000 jobs in a county of 56K.  Everyone of those jobs have gone to either China, Pakistan, or Honduras.  Unemployment here is unreal.  I own a small business and I survived the worst of it (so far) but I really feel for the people here who have no job today and not much to look forward to.  So I do not buy Chinese products whenever I can.  I know that eventually I will have no choice.  But for now, I buy American whereever possible.  The truth is, even if the jobs had not left here leaving a sour taste in my mouth for all things Chinese, the poor quality would have been enough.   

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

You aren't stating Red Neck, your pretty much stating American. I still remember when the U.S.A. was an industrial power house. I went Xmas shopping last weekend, picked up some shirts call American Way?? What's in a name?? They were made in China. I didn't buy them, it just went against my grain. I too try to buy American but when the worlds industry all went to China and there is nothing left being made in America what are you going to do?? At least if you build kits, for the most part they are made here. If you buy your own hardware it's made here. All Americans seem to look at today is what it looks like, is it pretty and is it cheap, China fills that requirement. If you want your planes to last build it, if you want a cheap plane that looks good buy a product from China. Kinda one of those no brainer things.;) As long as your happy it's the right way to go.

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

Midwest Magician I built in high school ~35 years ago. Its been recovered 3 times, rehinged once, and had one control system replacement prior to the last recovering (silk). Its still flown regularly and has never been pounded in hard enough to do any damage that required repairs. I've flown it hard enough with fast engines to crack spars in flight though. Those needed repair ;-> The nose is getting a little oil soaked after many hundreds of flights, so I may be retiring it at some point, or may just build a new fuselage for it...the one in the kit was pretty heavy, like iron wood, and Midwest's plywood was crappy.

N/A

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

One things for sure, a plane that is personally built will get much more attention to detail than the typical arf. I know I use more glue on my planes than you can get on an arf. An extra ounce of CA is not much on a 600 square inch wing but makes a drastic difference in the overall integrity of the total structure. No amount of glue will help a total plow in but a little more CA goes a long way in bouncy rough landings that we sometimes have. Over time, they add up eventually causing stress breaks in some planes and I believe a little more glue and attention to detail makes the difference.

Besides, I get a lot more satisifaction seeing a plane fly that I built vs. a plane someone in China built.

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

The only way to get real quantitative results for this would be to take two identical planes. Say Sig Four Stars since they are made in ARF and available as kits as well. Set them up with identical gear and have the same person fly the snot out of them, putting equal time on each airframe, untill one falls apart and can no longer be repaired. You will never convince someone that does not enjoy building that the kit built is better. There are too many factors that go into the decision with the time from purchace to getting it airborne being the bigest for those that choose ARF. We enjoy the building facet of the hobby and sometimes have a hard time understanding why another flyer does not. I for one won't proselytize to the ARF masses like a Jahovas Witness going door to door.

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

i guess it wouldnt be too bad if those arf companys thought well we can produce kits even cheaper then the arf's. lets face it there are some arf companys out there using good wood. those that do so should think about providing there planes as a kit which by rights should be cheaper then he arf as it hasnt been built and covered, and it is then upto the builder to decide how much glue goes in. iv owned a few arfs over the years and yes most flew very nice but none of them lasted long at all.

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

I have a Midwest Aerostar 20 size built in 1986 crashed ones but looks ok after repair. Actually learned to fly with t and it flies great. Have an ultra stick 40 has over 100 flights and it is about 3 years old. Looks brand new still. I agree that if you build fromstick you enjoy them the most.

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

iv built a fair few kits in the past but unfortunatly due to giving up the hobby a few times i dont have what you would call and old plane, however iv always loved building from kits and plans and also the few scratch designs. it is a guess one of my passions to build, thats al iv done for the last 2 years is build and build, i havent been able to fly as such due to the lack of equipment but that recently has changed a great deal thanks to a good friend on here. hopefully il be able to get some flying in very soon indeed just after xmass. so i will then be flying and building which will of coarse get me even more motivated for more building and finishing a few more projects off. then thats when il be scratch designing again and making plans for the next projects.

In away i feel alittle cheated as i first started the hobby back in 1996 1997, i never had a kit until 2000 and since then the budjet has always been really tight so all in all i have only built around 6 kits maybee a few more. and now i try to get some cheap kits there isnt any. the kits prices have doubled they are also becoming harder and harder to find. I really do feel that the arfs have cheated me out of a part of my hobby and it is all because of money.

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

The kit vs arf debate has been ongoing for a long time with about everything said on the subject. One issue that I've not heard before was spoken a couple of days ago by the local hobby shop owner.

I commented that he didn't have any Sig on his shelves, and he responded that he had ceased to stock any Sig. That there isn't any profit and related that Sig's shipping cost plus local sales tax plus as he argued that Sig is now in a discount relationship with mail order suppliers just doesn't work economically for him to handle their line on his shelves. That is a big change from years ago when Sig was a big staple on the LHS shelf.

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

As you know crash, they only arf sitting in my fleet right now is the GP super skybolt, besides the awefull covering it came with it's a good solid plane, all arfs tend to have something that needs to be reinforced or fixed. But when you build a plane you have the choice up front to build it better or work out all the flaws before it's covered. Plus, your more in control of which hardware and equipment installation you choose, so kit's outlast your average arf hands down. Unless you take the new arf, and fuel proof the tank compartment, reinforce weak areas and seal all the seams on the covering real well, it will only have a limited shelf life. But thats just the way I build planes, I build-in life expectancy.

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

Iwould not want to own a hobby shop now. The big box mentality is taking over the hobby business also. Since I got back into the hobby some 5 years back, I've seen four of the five stores with in a 40 mile radius of my house close, one of them reopened about 9 months ago and when I drove by the store two days ago, it was an empty shell again. The LHS just can't afford to keep all of the engine parts, plane parts, kits and such in stock. They are going to stock what sells, not what one of us is gong to need one day. There are a few LHSs that are going to do OK as the have a different business model, small cramped space stuffed with both old and new. Racks of parts and pieces that have been gathering dust for a couple decades. But they have that one item you need. They probably don't have two each of the latest Extra or Cap on the shef and they don't have a store full of paint ball guns, scate boards, magic tricks, trains kites, etc, they focus on airplanes. Gene AKA Grey Beard, took me to such a store in Las Vagas last week. I tried to find it in the yellow pages, it wasn't there, I looked in the white pages, it wasn't there either. BUT the place was packed with customers. Yes, they sold ARF's, The had a small collection of Kits, but ARF's were the main stock of new planes. Right now, it's all but impossible to find a kit in a LHS. Istopped by one in Palm Desert, Ca on my way home and ask what he had in the way of kits. He had two of the llittle Gallow kits and a LT-40. That was his entire stock. He now has just the two litttle Gallow kits as I tood the Lt-40. $105 and I'll add another 40 or 50 in coveing and glue. Or, I could get very nearly the same plane for $79 in an ARFformat.

Last, Ithink that one reason ARF's don't last is that they are not assembled by a builder, but by someone who is going to have trouble putting the swing set together tonight. Just a thought to kick around.

Don

Merry Xmas.

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

My oldest kit is a Goldberg Electra I built in 1996 or 1997 when I was about 13 or so...still have it. It's "old" by my standards seeing as I'm about 1/2 the age of the average RCer. I have an Goldberg Ultimate I built in 2002 that's got to have over 1,000 flights on it. Has had two motors.

I've only had one ARF...that's been a Great Planes Extra that I still have..but has been decommissioned. It's probably got more than a 1,000 flights on it too, but it looks like complete hell. I've abused it...it's my "beater"

The kits I built I really care about. I take good care of them, and am really good about maintaining them. My ARF I could care less about. I've crashed it several times...patched it back together without matching covering, without the cowl, without the canopy, etc.

So...I imagine barring a crash, or a fire or theft or some other disaster, I'll probably have my kit built planes for my whole life. I would never sell them. There's a real value to me....since I spent significant time building them

The ARF's on the other hand...have no "soul"

Merry Christmas!

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

So true, even up here in Canada. With my hobby guy the only way he stays open is by going to events every weekend with ordered stock and regular stock. His events take him to at least 10 cities in our valley areas routinely. For this I am grateful as he passes through every week, saves us LOADS in shipping. Unfortunately he and I don't get as much time in the air together lately as he is over worked just trying to stay afloat in this business. However he says that he has seen an explosion in kit sales his year. Arf sales for him are down.

I would personally like to see some new influx of precision/pattern and 3d capable 90 size kits like perhaps a Pitts Challenger or some Yaks like the 55m or even an Extra 260. The reason I suggest a 90 size opens the market for 26-30cc gasser "KITS" as there is an obvious hole in the market here an there are a lot of people wanting to fly gas due to the ridiculous prices of nitro not to mention that a 30cc gas plane can still be transported in most small cars. I for one really enjoy going to the gas station, spending $10 and getting enough gas to fly my 50cc Extra everyday for a week straight. $10 in nitro will last me a half an hour!! in my goldberg ultimate. Manufacturers have to be stupid not to see this. Also there s too much of the same stuff in production. Fun fly planes galore. Manufactures must realize that some diversity is needed.

RE: kit built vs arf built
 

this is a really good thing, i guess arfs are ok for those who work 24/7 and dont have time to build. but to be honnest if i was in that situation id make time to build. so many new comers are turning to arfs rather then starting from a basic kit to build and then to fly. also when someone learning crashs an arf its like oh well il go buy another il be flying by the weekend, not all but allot of people think like this. however flying somthing you built from a kit makes them alittle more concerned about crashing which has a good afect, one of these things is level of concentration whilst flying. and 2ndly they bought the kit and built it they could easily build a new wing or fus from it as they have the plans. lots and i do mean lots of things can be learned in the first few months of learning to fly by just buildig your first model skills that once learned will stay with you for life, theres not much to learn about an arf apart from mild assembly flying then crashing it to find a bunch of sticks you wouldnt even throw on your fire and the lack of glue and quality