Book79

Thanks for everyones option's but im going to see if any local hobby shops here have the 10cg or the aurora9. I'm a newbie when it comes to all these stuff.

Jetdesign

My Feedback: (8)

If you find a good hobby shop that has this kind of equipment in stock, please, PLeASE tell me! I will make the drive to Louisville.

Prop_Washer2

My Feedback: (26)

Just remember, the Futaba 10CG will be obsolete when you walk out with it, as you can bet your last dollar that Futaba is working on adding Telemetry as we speak. The Aurora 9 is already ahead of the field, Spektrum is trying with their DX8, but small screen, buttons instead of touch screen, etc...

If you buy the A9, you'll be happy especially when you see the Futaba guys scrambling to get telemetry versions of their radios. Flying with telemetry is peace of mind (NASA does it). Hey my transmitter starts beeping indicating "Low Fuel Onboard", "Low Airborne Battery Voltage", etc... I predict it will be standard on all Mid-Level to High End brands worldwide. Just my "Dos Pesos".

Charlie P.

NASA's flights usually last more than 15 minutes and are out of visual contact.

And all of those features will consume power for the airborne sensors. So, without telemetry perhaps, the rx voltage would have been fine throughout the flight.

And me, looking at my model instead of trying to figure which alarm is going off and looking at the transmitter at the worst possible time, may not lose the aircraft in a balsa calamity while trying to reacquire visual contactand correct.

For a lot of folks telemetry is an answer for a question never asked. If Idon't have it I am more likely to do a careful pre-flight and prevent a problem.

Just my thoughts.

victorzamora

I don't know if anyone can argue with the fact that the Futaba 14MZ is the most technically advanced and best Tx out there.  Regardless of whether or not you like FASST or Futaba....it's the best, undoubtedly.

Jetdesign

My Feedback: (8)

Telemetry would be pretty awesome. I'm working on some EE programming for flight training tools, which will require a transceiver or something extra on the plane, plus another receiver on my radio. Telemetry would have all that taken care of.

VF84sluggo

My Feedback: (55)

Yep...wish I could afford one. Will have to setlle with my 12FG for now.

victorzamora

I wish I would have to "settle" for a 12FG.

VF84sluggo

My Feedback: (55)

I should have mentioned I wrote that with tongue planted firmly in cheek...yes, a real hardship, having to "settle" for a 12FG...

Super Kupfer

I Love Futaba also and fly using the new 8FG, Would love to buy the 14MZ but the problem I have with it is that it is not dedicated to 2.4 (Sorry but I don't like the module in the back, Why can't they fix it like they did with the 10C to the 10CG? They need to update it, While they are updating it pleaseadd the telemetry package).

lorenzofgrs

My Feedback: (-1)

the best transmiter out there is the futaba fx-40...
this does not mean I have one, or that you should have one...
only listen to your real self

rcflip

Frequency hop is only a requirement when used over water, i.e. boats... besides if you want to hop frequencies be careful you do not overheat!!!

JR/Spektrum/Futaba/Hitec/Airtronics my suggestion is purchase one people use at your club, this way you can get help programming it.

LarsL

I've read through all of the posts (thankfully it has only been 4 pages). First off, most of the posters have gotten in correct... the major brands are all excellent including the ones not mentioned from Europe. I am struck by the posters who knock down the JR/Spektrum options and state a bunch of reasons. I don't see that reciprocated by the JR/Spektrum fans towards the other manufacturers; at most they state what they like (model match, BNF, etc.). One poster (Beavis) did speak to what he states is "older technology" with frequency hopping which is about as close as I read to putting down the other manufacturer's technology. He did that in response to the put downs from some previous posters. Besides that horrible slam, I think he got it right about the JR/Spektrum detractors being the ones overly sensitive. This subject I guess is like our current politics, where one party doesn't like the Tea Party, thinks they are way off the mark and should just be shut up/down. The shoe fits on the detractors’ feet, so they can wear it.


For the record, I think Airtronics, Futaba, Graupner, Hitec, JR, Multiplex, Robbe, Spektrum are all excellent radios systems. There are so lower budget options that one could also look at if on a budget. It really depends upon a lot of factors and one's situation. Aren't we lucky?

Lars

wazzbat

Well as a total newbie with most of the guys at my club using Futaba radios (including the majority of instructors) I think I will be purchasing a 7C.  I can get it with a reciever and 4 servos for under $350.  The next option is the 8FG which will cost me $520 plus servos.  I think the 7C should do me for at least the first couple of years and then I can make my mind up which way I want to go and by then, I'm sure all of the above mentioned brands will have a bunch of new models out which will outdate the model I buy anyway.  Remember I'm in Australia so even though we are pretty close to dollar for dollar with the US now, we pay a bit more for everything RC than you do in the US and if we get it shipped over, it ends up costing just as much anyway.

I don't know a thing about any of the transmitters apart from what I have read on here but there has been some good advice amongst all of the "mine is better than your's chit chat"  like   -  Buy what suits you!
                                                           -  Buy what you can reasonably afford!
                                                           -  Buy the same as everyone else at your club so they can help you with it.  (more so applies to newer folks)
But I think the first point covers it all.  I am looking at the 7C because I think it will suit what I need/want in a radio to start with.  There is enough channels to get me by for the first few planes I plan to fly, I can buddy up to most of the instructors radios and there are lots of guys at the club that will know what they are doing when it comes to programming.  I do think that as a newbie, it can be a totally different arguement about which is the best radio to get for the reasons I have already stated.

I think transmitters are a bit like ipods and iphones or any technology for that matter.  You want to get the best/latest one you can afford and that will be good enough to last you for years but if a newer/better model comes out, you want to upgrade.  If the newer model didn't come out with newer/better features (which you have been able to happily live without up till now), you wouldn't know what you are missing out on and therefore would be happy with the one you have???

Anyway, I love reading all the posts and I love how passionate some people get about which brands they recommend even if they do get a little carried away some times.  Keep on posting!

VF84sluggo

My Feedback: (55)

I run a blast tube over my rx area...and ESC if it's an electric. Same idea as full-scale using blast tubes directing air onto the magnetos.

victorzamora

I agree, and that's why my post is specific about my choice being regardless of manufacturer.  Feature for feature, the 14MZ is the best transmitter on the market.  Period.  I like JR.  The JR guys at my field give me crap but we all realize that between JR and Futaba, you're not really going to get a bad radio.  The 14MZ is still the best radio.

rcguy59

My Feedback: (8)

I always answer this question by saying that you should buy the best radio you can AFFORD. Also, going with something that other guys at your field also have ensures the possibility of programming help should you need it. (don't we all?) I was fortunate in that when it was time to consider a replacement for my trusty 9C, I was able to afford a 12Z. Three years later, no problems, glitches, or anything except a bit of frustration early on learning the programming. ( I was over-thinking it) To this day, I have NO regrets about buying this radio. Just remember that most of us in the hobby tend toward more and more complex airplanes, so just because you don't need more than six channels now, that doesn't mean you won't need them six months from now. Good luck in this hobby and I wish you well in your decision.

MX240

My Feedback: (4)

I have beed a JR driver for years...since 1982. I have always loved my JR10X's. Within a hour of getting them I could hook-up a scale warbird with retracts and flaps and be headed for the flying field........Not so with my new Futaba 14Z computer radio. It has to be the worst radio I have ever had to program. I have asked some of the local's that have this radio and they only get about half of the programs to work.....like down trim on elevator with flaps or differinal throw on ailerons. The instruction book is junk.
Wish I had bought a Hitec.

da Rock

And one of the best values for the money was the JR 7202 when it came out. Suited 90% of the market at an excellent price and has programmable frequency for each model in memory. Needless to say, not 2.4 but still illustrated how JR very often has a better radio in the mid range and upper-low range. And they don't look like you bought it a Toys R Us.

rcguy59

My Feedback: (8)

My heart goes out to you , MX. I tried to help a buddy with a 14Z he got with a jet. After a few minutes I handed it back to him and I haven't touched it since. As much as I like Futaba radios, I must admit that the more complex their radios get, the worse their manuals are. The 12Z manual is virtually useless as well. Having learned to use it, it's not bad, but getting to that point involved no help from the manual. $1500.00 radio, $0.03 manual. I've seen ads on matchbook covers that were more informative.

MikeL

My Feedback: (3)

I'd be shocked if the available telemetry sensors draw enough power to make the difference between having and not having a brownout.

Telemetry is a useful and forward-thinking feature. If I were in the market for a new radio, I'd be looking hard at what is available from Hitec and Spektrum. Telemetry is the feature that will drive existing 2.4ghz users to upgrade their radios.

victorzamora

Hey MX, I'll make you a deal.  If you have the 14MZ with a FASST module, I'll send you my 10CAP and $200 if you send me your 14MZ.  The 10CAP is very easy to program.

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

Ok. everybody has vented. Now the question is what is the best? You can talk to 100 people and get 100 different answers period. It is like the oil debate on Gassers, "what is the Best Oil" There's no complete answer, the information you research is mind boggling, and whats' worse, you have no idea what they are saying to begin with , when you read it..Get advise on or from your buddies that have been through this deliema, then only you can make a decision. Go with your gut feeling on what is right for you and your investment. Go Cheap, ok, but it show's up later down the road. Go the best you can afford and get it. It may save you an aircraft one day.

invert0914

My Feedback: (17)

Im sorry but does Spektrum not use DSSS technology versus FHSS? Spectrum would be Direct-Sequence Spread Spectrum Technology and FHSS Frequency-Hopping Spread Spectrum Technology? If that is true in 2001 Texas instruments among others did extensive testing on both for the walstreet journal. Although not RC transmitter and recievers but is the technology not the same? Here is how they faired.


Frequency-hopping spread-spectrum (FHSS) uses a narrowband carrier that changes frequency in a pattern
known to both transmitter and receiver. Both the access point and client "hop" between frequencies based on the
same pseudorandom pattern, transferring a piece of data during each hop. Properly synchronized, the net effect
is to maintain a single logical channel. To an unintended receiver, FHSS appears to be short-duration impulse Whenever interference corrupts the signal, the devices can resume their data transfer after the next hop to a new
frequency that is clear. Bandwidth drops each time the device encounters a blocked frequency. However,
interference does not break a connection. In the presence of interference, the connections do not fail and
throughput will degrade gracefully. Adaptive hopping (avoiding frequencies that are known to be blocked) can be
used to increase throughput.
The hopping pattern (frequencies and order in which they are used) and dwell time (time at each frequency) are
restricted by most regulatory agencies. For example, for operation in the 2.4 GHz band in the US the FCC
requires that 75 or more frequencies be used with a maximum dwell time of 400 milliseconds.
All FHSS products on the market allow users to deploy more than one logical channel in the same area. They
accomplish this by implementing separate channels on different, pseudo-random, hopping sequences. Because
there are a large number of possible sequences in the 2.4 GHz band, FHSS allows many non-overlapping
channels to be deployed in the same space.

DSSS transmitters spread the signal over a frequency band that is wider than required to accommodate the
information signal by mapping each bit of data into a redundant bit pattern of “chips” known as a chipping code.
The longer the chipping code used, the greater the probability that the original data can be recovered (and, of
course, the more bandwidth required). Even if one or more bits in the chip are damaged during transmission,
statistical techniques embedded in the radio can recover the original data without the need for retransmission. At
the destination the chips are mapped back into a bit, recreating the original data. Transmitter and receiver must
be synchronized to operate properly.
The ratio of chips per bit is called the "spreading ratio". A high spreading ratio increases the resistance of the
signal to interference. To an unintended receiver, DSSS appears as low-power wideband noise and is rejected
(ignored) by most narrowband receivers. A low spreading ratio increases the net bandwidth available to a user
Several DSSS products in the market allow users to deploy more than one channel in the same area. They
accomplish this by separating the 2.4 GHz band into several sub-bands, each of which contains an independent
DSSS network. Because DSSS truly spreads across the spectrum, the number of independent (i.e. nonoverlapping)
channels in the 2.4 GHz band is small. The maximum number of independent channels for any
DSSS implementation on the market is three.

FHSS Devices are More Interference Immune than DSSS devices
One of the clear advantages that FHSS systems have over DSSS systems is their immunity to interference. With
Figure 1, above, in mind, it is easy to understand the two attributes that make DSSS poor at rejecting outside
interference.
1. DSSS products spread their transmission power thinly across the spectrum. Transmitted power in any
specific segment of the band is low. As a result, low levels of interference can easily overpower the
DSSS transmission. FHSS products, in contrast, use relatively high power in a narrow segment of the
band for a short time. This allows the FHSS signal to overpower the interference in their segment of the
band.
2. Multi-channel DSSS products use statically allocated pieces of the band. Interference in any significant
piece of this allocated band will interfere with the transmission, possibly destroying it entirely.
All channels in an FHSS network hop around the entire 2.4 GHz band. Strong interference in a segment of the
band may hamper some of the transmissions, but FHSS transmitters - being frequency agile - will use the remainder of the band effectively. Users may see a decrease in throughput but the network will continue to
operate.
When interference occurs, it has a marked difference on the two different technologies. FHSS can overpower
and/or hop around the interference, experiencing, at most, some limited degradation. The DSSS signal, on the
other hand, can neither overpower nor avoid the interference.

Not a scientest but this article is interesting. 5 airplanes gone at my field this month all on Spectrum. I was one of them. It was not setup and its a P-51 that has flown all over the east coast including the nall for 4 years. I hate to say it but JR has lost me as a customer due to there inability to say sorry and there continuous brand protection cover ups. It is amazing how there is never anything wrong with the equipment sent back and its always the users setup.

lv2fly

2nd that.

I own a Futaba 14mz, JR X9503 and now the Hitec Aurora. It is now my favorite.
Since Futaba doesn't make the 9ZAP anymore (really miss the tach in the side of the TX), I'd have to agree the Aurora is by far the best bang for the buck. I have posted other threads about my bad luck with Spektrum stuff. It is flawed technology, IMO. Granted, of the 20+ airplanes and helicopters I have, and the thousands of flights on Spektrum I have had only a handful of problems, but that handful cost more money than I should have lost with technology where it is today.