pete913

Everytime I pick up a magazine, or read posts in here, it's always the same ol tired wheeze about pre finished plastic film coverings such as monokote, being the last word in light weight. Sure they're quick, but that's really about the only advantage to 'em. I've used many a roll of it myself over the years, but I had my eyes opened to the weight of the stuff a long time ago. Here's an eye opener for you all. http://www.modelflight.com/weight.html

rickwallace45

My Feedback: (3)

Pete --

Good points, and a great link to some well-presented data.

I think the absolute weight factor becomes less important as the airplane gets larger, though. FWIW, I recently saw another chart pointing out that Ultracote is even heavier than MonoKote - to the tune of being about 1.5 - 2 ounces heavier on a 1000 sq in wing. (depending on color of course - because different colors in all films have different weights)

- and other factors / advantages for iron ons to consider besides time include the availability of shop spaces where a modeler can 'stink up the joint' with dopes and other finishing materials.

Some films also go on a LOT easier that others, and are more forgiving of temp variations, give little or no bubbling when applied in multiple layers, etc.

So I guess the good news is that we have LOTS of choices for LOTS of different kinds of toy planes -- which has to be a great thing!

pete913

Rick, I agree with your point about workspace issues, and not being able to stink up the place, as I was also there at one time. As a matter of fact, my favorite film covering was the old low temp Black Baron film. I'm not even sure if it's produced anymore, but that stuff was great for low temp applications, it'd stretch a mile around a curved surface. At the time, most of my models didn't last long enough for anything except ease of application to be a factor anyhow.

bbbair

Excellent Information!!
I was questioning the weight of coverings just yesterday with no refeance material available it was a limited conversation.

I'm about to cover a Clancy Aviation Stagger Bee - for anyone that knows this line of AC you know that weight is a critical factor, this list will go a long way to making my Bees fly better.

Thanks!!

Bruce

Lightfoot

My Feedback: (1)

Here is another chart that has more information and is probably more current.

[link=http://webpages.charter.net/rcfu/HelpsHints/IOCWeight.html]Weights of Covering Materials[/link]

rickwallace45

My Feedback: (3)

Thanks, Lightfoot!

That's exactly the chart I was looking for! Excellent!

ballgunner

My Feedback: (1)

Lightfoot that is a neat chart. I have aircraft of many sizes and find it difficult to justify changing to any one type of covering material based on weight. We are talking of a very few ounces for a fairly decent sized model. Even park flyers can stand one more ounce in most cases. The weight chart indicates a very small difference between material weights. In the days of indoor models when we made covering of film in the bathtub, fractions made a huge difference. The concern over an ounce or a few ounces seems to be a tempest in a teapot. Use what you like best.

3DFanatic

My Feedback: (5)

Ultracote is HEAVIER then Monokote? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO [X(]

pete913

Ha, yeah I'd like to know also how monokote magically became almost a half oz a sq yd lighter over the last few years myself. I've still got a large roll of opaque silver monokote that weighs 2.4 oz per sq yd on a very accurate scale. Maybe different colors have different weights. I just get tired of seeing this stuff hyped as lightweight.

Yak18

My Feedback: (11)

Yes different colors of Monokote have different weights. Compare Pink or Black, to White. The darker or deeper the color, the more it weighs. Also it seems the more it weighs, the worse it is. Pink will not stay tight no matter what.

Yak

3DFanatic

My Feedback: (5)

Maybe that's why monokoted airplanes are white?