Some one know the - Fun Tiger Extra
#1
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Jerusalem, ISRAEL
Hi!!!
Some one know the Fun Tiger Extra
is that a good plane?
It do all the maneuverable that thay wrote in the site?
[link]http://www.acehobby.com/acehobby/products/airplane/funfly/ttr4518_funtigerextra/index.html[/link]
Some one know the Fun Tiger Extra
is that a good plane?
It do all the maneuverable that thay wrote in the site?
[link]http://www.acehobby.com/acehobby/products/airplane/funfly/ttr4518_funtigerextra/index.html[/link]
#2

My Feedback: (67)
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,066
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Evansville ,
IN
Nope! its heavy and not very well made. The fuse has lite ply on both sides and is very heavy. The wood in the tail is sometimes very soft, and will break off. Not a very good plane in my opinion. The covering is really bad! wrinkles everytime the weather changes. Look at getting a morris profile, maybe a goldberg extreeme 330, or the new hot knife by sportman aviation. They have to be better than the fun tiger. Just my thoughts!
#3
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
A very inexpensive 1st profile with all of the ills the previous poster expounded on.
Get the ARC version -- usually about $10.00 cheaper.
This will give you the opportunity to strengthen the glueing of the tail surfaces and give you a custom covering scheme. Definetely add a whole lot of glue to the servo mounts in the wing. I went one step further and litterally painted the cavity with epoxy and did the same with the opposite site of the ribs the servo rails are connected to -- no problems, my last flight was a dumb thumb and the only damage was a cracked fuselage, which I will fix one of these days.
Yes, it is heavy but will go ballistic with an OS FX .46. IMHO, a bearing .46 is the minimum engine for this airframe. It will do it all and not create a bottomless hole in your pocketbook.
Get the ARC version -- usually about $10.00 cheaper.
This will give you the opportunity to strengthen the glueing of the tail surfaces and give you a custom covering scheme. Definetely add a whole lot of glue to the servo mounts in the wing. I went one step further and litterally painted the cavity with epoxy and did the same with the opposite site of the ribs the servo rails are connected to -- no problems, my last flight was a dumb thumb and the only damage was a cracked fuselage, which I will fix one of these days.
Yes, it is heavy but will go ballistic with an OS FX .46. IMHO, a bearing .46 is the minimum engine for this airframe. It will do it all and not create a bottomless hole in your pocketbook.
#4
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Menasha, WI
I had 2 of them. I hated the ARF due to the poorest covering of all time. I liked my ARC. I used my own "real" covering, and did toughen up the horizontal stab. I flew this plane for probably close to 225 flights and sold it to a pal who had some prior bad luck with crashing. He had nothing to fly at mid season.
Yes, it is heavy. I think a 46FX or better is required. My Rossi 53 was a monster in this plane.
I have no regrets about buying this plane, and if it were not for the fact that I am now spoiled by the Morris planes, I'd say I'd do another TT Fun Tiger ARC.
Yes, it is heavy. I think a 46FX or better is required. My Rossi 53 was a monster in this plane.
I have no regrets about buying this plane, and if it were not for the fact that I am now spoiled by the Morris planes, I'd say I'd do another TT Fun Tiger ARC.
#5
Member
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: ...,
CO
ya i have one, it was given to me by a guy who was cleaning out his basement, it seems very heavy, and from what i have heard they fly bad too, oh well. i sill havent flown mine yet, i put a os 61fx in it just to balance it out, still a bit tail heavy, i put stanterd hitecs every where but gas, have an hs 81 there



