downunderdog

P.S. Downunderdog, like many people, considers it impolite to answer a question with a question.

Haddi Taha

thunderbirdjunkie loves brushless and lipo doesnt he, 2.4ghz from hobbyking a now $16 for a basic tx rx set, so next time i need a radio i will get one, ive bent about every am antenner i got

ThunderbirdJunkie

My Feedback: (3)

Downunderdog, it is not necessary to forgo the use of pronouns. ThunderbirdJunkie should know; he does it all the time.

At any rate, it's pretty much beating a dead horse at this point. Why bother regurgitating the same exact posts every single time? It doesn't mean the feelings have changed, it simply means that there is no point in continuing to post the same thing. You can go back to the post you're referencing and revisit ThunderbirdJunkie's reasoning for yourself. There is absolutely no reason to continue asking. After all, it's so fresh in your mind that you can recite it word for word.

ThunderbirdJunkie

My Feedback: (3)

He also loves nitro and hot brushed 9 turn quads and NiCd batteries and Pro Line Fuzzie T's and Tekin G12CIIIs and Novak Cyclones and...

Haddi Taha

thunderbirdjunkie
loves everything big powerful and loud

ThunderbirdJunkie

My Feedback: (3)

You catch on quick

downunderdog

Downunderdog also knows that it's not necessary to forgo (sp?) the use of pronouns, just like it's not necessary to forgo (sp again?) the use of the self-specific pronoun "I". But Downunderdog is getting used to it, so why stop now, eh?

Although the subject of 2.4 Gig vs. FM should be pretty much a dead horse, as Downunderdog thinks that in the previous thread on the subject we agreed that there are advantages to 2.4 Gig and no advantages to FM (vs. 2.4 Gig), since it came up again Downunderdog felt that it was a good opportunity to seek clarification of ThunderbirdJunkie's position on the subject. Let Downunderdog recap the previous thread on the subject, with some editorial commentary, and perhaps ThunderbirdJunkie will understand the reason for Downunderdog's lack of understanding.

ThunderbirdJunkie: CD...alternatively...…could you tell us the advantages of 2.4ghz DSM over 75mhz PCM, outside of frequency conflicts?

Just curious how much research you've done on the subject.

Slo-V Flyer: I understand you asked Cummins driver, but I can answer this. That's easy. The advantages I've gained are I no longer have any sort of RF glitches in my radio control upon startup with any brushless setup I own. With 75Mhz FM, and more so 27Mhz AM, I had problems getting any further than 20-30 ft in front of my street, on one side, and maybe 75-100 ft on the other direction. With the FM, it seemed to work with my Emaxx using the same Mamba max esc and lipo power, but glitched regardless at random places. That includes going over humps, and bumps in terrain (not hops or ramps, 2-3ft "hills" and downgrades that block LOS).

With the 2.4 Ghz, I have driven out further on the very same street in every single setup I had issues with before with no adverse affects, which I got from my FM…

ThunderbirdJunkie: Honestly, ThunderbirdJunkie does not think highly of the 2.4GHZ DSM band. At best, it's AS GOOD as 75mhz FM…

Commentary: Here Thunderbird Junkie says that 2.4ghz is NOT better than FM. (Downuderdog assumes that the "75" was a typo.

Slo-V Flyer: Just curious, what experience do you have or research have you done on 2.4Ghz to attain that conclusion?

ThunderbirdJunki: A lot.

Apart from frequency conflicts, there seem to be no advantages using a good 2.4 DSM radio over a good 75mhz FM (or even AM) radio.

Commentary: Here, ThunderbirdJunkie gives a vague response to a question that he had asked someone else and gotten a specific response to. That seems unpolite to Downunderdog, and giving ThunderbirdJunkie the benefit of the doubt, rather than making Downunderdog believe that ThunderbirdJunkie was impolite, it made Downunderdog suspect that ThunderbirdJunkie was just giving a vague answer because the definitive answer would not support ThunderbirdJunkie's point. In Downunderdog's opinion, it is better to be wrong and evasive than impolite. Downunderdog also noted here that ThunderbirdJunkie had also conceded that there WAS an advantage to 2.4ghz here, contrary to Thunderbird's previous position on the subject which had been detailed in the post quoted further above. (for clarity, "At best, it's AS GOOD as 75mhz FM" changed into "Apart from frequency conflicts, there seem to be no advantages using a good 2.4 DSM radio over a good 75mhz FM…."

Downunderdog: So, 2.4 Gig doesn't have the worry of frequency conflicts, has less glitching, shorter antennas, as good or better range, and is cheaper.

What, specifically, did your research uncover that makes you believe that FM is better?

Commentary: This is where Downunderdog began to seek clarification of the results of ThunderbirdJunkie's research.

ThunderbirdJunkie: …(in response to the quote "shorter antenna's than AM of FM") This is the only tangible advantage for ThunderbirdJunkie. He goes through antenna tubes in SCT more than all other parts combined…

Commentary: Here, ThunderbirdJunkie concedes another advantage of 2.4ghz, and has yet to list any advantages of FM.

ThunderbirdJunkie: (in response to "So why is FM a better option than 2.4? " in the same post as the previous quote) Never said it was. Just said that 2.4DSM is not better.

Commentary: Here, ThunderbirdJunkie has changed position from "At best, it's AS GOOD as 75mhz FM…" to "Never said (FM is a better option than 2.4). Just said that 2.4DSM is not better." However, ThunderbirdJunkie does not clarify why it is not better. ThunderbirdJunkie has acknowledged the benefit of lack of frequency conflicts and shorter antennas, but still reiterates that 2.4DSM is not better. So Downunderdog requests clarification (see below)...

Downunderdog: How do you define better? Because you don't seem to disagree that:
- 2.4 has shorter antennas
- 2.4 is free from frequency conflicts
and I don't think that you disagree that 2.4 glitches less (or do you? you haven't really said)

What about FM is BETTER than 2.4 Gig? If it's nothing, then the above 2 or 3 (agreed upon) improvements that come with 2.4 Gig DO make it better. All you've done so far is concede that 2.4 gig is better in some respects than FM, but then say that it's not better overall. What tips the scales back towards FM? The fact that you already have the gear?

ThunderbirdJunkie: Reliability and ease of service outweigh the advantages that 2.4 has. Why are you getting so angry?

Downunderdog: I'm not angry at all. I'm just curious what advantages you think AM and/or FM have over 2.4G. So far, you've agreed that about some of the advantages of 2.4G (shorter antenna, no frequency conflicts) and have not disagreed with the argument that it glitches less (other than bringing up the anecdotal "tell that to the guy who crashed his jet". This is the first time you've said anything about any disadvantages of 2.4 Gig compared to FM.

What has your research indicated with respect to reliability and ease of service of 2.4 G systems and how it is worse on 2.4G than FM? I haven't seen any complaints about 2.4G reliability issues, and how is it less "easy to service"?

ThunderbirdJunkie: (No response to the question)

redfisher1974

Very entertaining, It takes awhile but when TBJ is out talked he will back down.

Airplanes400

My Feedback: (349)

What's great about 2.4g is that you have more than a one mile range. So, you can (and people at my club do) fly your plane one mile high (5300 feet), which we confirmed with altitude recorders attached to the planes.

Next greatest thing about 2.4g is that you can blame your crashes on 2.4g technology lock-outs that have been claimed by several people. This saves your male ego!!

tonyob

What's great about 2.4? Less interference from other sources. Oh, and there's this other thing now called telemetry. COOL!

Slo-V Flyer

ROFL this thread is entertaining. Some people cannot concede easily. I am guilty of that now and then, too, I'll admit.

Yes I've heard of this issue on the "other" forum's FPV threads. This is one issue where FM may help/not be susceptible I think?

One advantage AM/FM may have for ground R/C is better obstacle penetration, i.e. ability to not lose signal or control as easily when the truck is out of LOS from the 2.4 GHz transmitter (lots of trees or walls etc.). With that said, I've yet to conduct any LOS obstacle based testing with my Fut. 2.4GHz system. Maybe one of these days.

cumquat

DUD (no offense, that is just what your initials spell), i think what TBJ meant was that 2.4GHz is good but the few things it has that 75MHz doesn't have isn't enough to make it "better". if they had some other real advantage other than no frequency conflicts (which, by the way, was some what fixed but the advent of synthesized radios) and the shorter antenna there is no REAL advantage for his use.

Jo1234

well i just got the d3xe because its 2.4

Slo-V Flyer

Hmm I wonder how that sounds now? I have a feeling that 2.4 GHz only suites those who have a need for it, otherwise as evident here quite obviously, a few others have no need for it if their AM/FM radios work for them. Or they are too used to those radios and don't want to dish out money for something they, in their particular case, have no use for. That can be understood. But to say 2.4 GHz has no *real* advantage is not accurate. I have recounted several times along with other members where exactly the FM system failed consistently and the 2.4 GHz radio shined and worked flawlessly.

redfisher1974

You my friend are the voice of reason.

RC*PHREAK

i think the bottom line is that if you are using a AM/FM radio and are happy with it, by all means, continue to use it and have fun. if you are new to the hobby and looking for a radio, 2.4gig is the better option. that cannot be questioned...

ThunderbirdJunkie

My Feedback: (3)

So you're saying that anybody with a properly functioning FM setup that is happy with it should throw all of their radio gear in the trash and begin anew with 2.4?

Do you even know what you're asking?

Willystylz

I almost got my head taken off by a flying 10lb buggy going 40mph all because of AM...........NEXT!

downunderdog

No, that would be crazy, and Downunderdog is usually not crazy.


Yes, but apparently ThunderbirdJunkie does not. Also, Downunderdog now seems to have gotten a little more confused about what ThunderbirdJunkie has been saying. Initially it was that ThunderbirdJunkie has done "a lot" of research which indicated that FM is better then it was that 2.4ghz doesn't have any advantages... then there were some advantages, but it's not better. Now ThunderbirdJunkie seems to be saying that there are advantages to 2.4G, but they aren't big enough to justify throwing away FM gear, if someone has it, and switching to the better system.

As ThunderbirdJunkie seems to have misunderstood or did not fully read the previous questions, what Downunderdog asked was:

How does ThunderbirdJunkie define better? Because ThunderbirdJunkie doesn't seem to disagree that:
- 2.4 has shorter antennas
- 2.4 is free from frequency conflicts
and I don't think that you disagree that 2.4 glitches less (or do you? you haven't really said)

What about FM is BETTER than 2.4 Gig? If it's nothing, then the above 2 or 3 (agreed upon) improvements that come with 2.4 Gig DO make it better. All you've done so far is concede that 2.4 gig is better in some respects than FM, but then say that it's not better overall.

And the last questions Downunderdog asked... "What tips the scales back towards FM? The fact that you already have the gear?" seem to be the pertinent ones.

It now seems to be obvious to Downunderdog that:

- ThunderbirdJunkie has FM gear that is working fine for him (as it does for a lot of people)

- ThunderbirdJunkie recognizes that there are some advantages of 2.4G over FM (another way of saying this is that 2.4G is better than FM, if Downunderdog understands the interrelationship between "having advantages" and "being better")

- ThunderbirdJunkie does not believe that the advantages of the better system outweigh the cost of replacing his existing gear.

Downunderdog actually believes that the ongoing migration from FM to 2.4 GHz is making FM look more attractive to those who haven't made the switch - less chance of frequency conflicts and probably a good market to pick up used RX's.

Downunderdog just had a problem with the seemingly ThunderbirdJunkie-contradictory statements that ThunderbirdJunkie was making and the lack of clarification of such statements that ThunderbirdJunkie was offering.

redfisher1974

TBJ has a Nemesis, Awesome.[&:]

Willystylz

I personally think the only person allowed to talk in 3rd person is TBJ...

downunderdog

I'm on board with that, at least for most of my posts. It's a lot of work remembering to not refer to yourself as "I", and a lot of extra typing!

I have been doing it with ThunderbirdJunkie because we seemed to have a communication problem, and I thought it might help if I spoke his language.

I don't feel like a Nemesis, but it I do like the idea of being one. The whole talking in third person thing did give it a bit of a feel of "Hero vs. Nemesis" situation, though, didin't it? However, as "nemesis" does have a kind of negative connotation to it, so I prefer to think of myself as a defender of clear communciations, with those who are unclear or misleading in their statements being MY nemesis. LOL.

Casper06

Oooh! Like Dr. Evil and Austin Powers. Every hero needs a nemesis without one the universe would implode on itself.

SyCo_VeNoM

highlight your name ctrl+c whenever you want to type "I" hit ctrl+v to paste you name same amount of keystrokes seeing you would have to hit Shift + i anyways

cumquat

i didnt know TBJ had an Australian brother