HerrSavage

Haven't read the whole thread, but I still run the 40mhz stock radio from my LST2 - with all four of my RC's.. Now with everybody else running 2.4, I really never have a problem.. Range, disturbance, etc.. - nothing to complain about.. Except maybe broken antenna tubes.. Only down-side really.. Plus I'm not going to spend the price of a whole new car for a new radio with four receivers to replace what I have now that works perfectly fine...

downunderdog

Downunderdog doesn't remember them. Downunderdog is quoting from page 2 of this thread, where Downunderdog had previously quoted most of ThunderbirdJunkie's thoughts on the subject. Forums are great in that when someone realizes that they're wrong and backpedals on their previous position without admitting to it, it is obvious and can be shown with direct quotes. Downunderdog finds that it is worth the effort to know what someone is saying, and what they've previously said on the subject, when discussing something with them, and it is not very time consuming to go to page 2 of this thread and read it.

Actually, Downunderdog was saying that it is surprising that that is, in fact, ThunderbirdJunkie's position - that they can both go as far as vision will allow, so who cares. Downunderdog has seen ThunderbirdJunkie throw out so many irrelevant supposed negatives that really are not negatives (see other quotes from ThunderbirdJunkie below) that Downunderdog is surprised ThunderbirdJunkie did not do the same in this instance.

Actually, ThunderbirdJunkie brought up a RC jet crash when someone said that 2.4G is less susceptible to interference than 75MHz. NO ONE has claimed that 2.4G is IMMUNE to interference. Downunderdog, and many others, believes that overall a given 2.4G system will be LESS susceptible to interference than a comparable (i.e. same price point) 75 MHz system. Does ThunderbirdJunkie disagree?

Downunderdog will refer to 2.4 GHz spread spectrum technology as 2.4G or similar, and 72/75 MHz as 72 or 75 MHz to reduce the possibility that ThunderbirdJunkie will continue to use technicalities to obfuscate the merits (or demerits in the case of 75MHz) of each system. Downunderdog notes that 2.4G has been around for several years, and equipment made by reputable companies has proven to be very reliable. A two year sample size is sufficient for Downunderdog. Slower adapters may wish to wait until future improvements in technology someday make 2.4G the second best technology available before moving to 2.4G. Downunderdog wishes to emphasize that in Downunderdog's opinion there is nothing wrong with (other people, such as ThunderbirdJunkie) using "second best" equipment.

Downunderdog raised his eyebrows when he read this argument. How often does this actually happen - $100 pieces of electronics, which are full of PCB's and tiny little components getting repaired? Downunderdog has, sadly, moved into the 21st century where typically repair of electronics components costs more than replacement (with better, due to improvements that are regularly being introduced) with new equipment. Easy fixes - like potentiometers or switches on a TX - can be repaired as easily on 2.4G as on 75MHz gear. Aside from that - the PCB, processor etc - on most sub $200 (replacement price) gear is not practical to repair.

It was Downunderdog's impression that ThunderbirdJunkie had never used "high end" 2.4G gear, but does use "high end" 75 MHz gear. Has ThunderbirdJunkie actually done a comparison between equivalent (price point) 2.4G and 75MHz gear? Downunderdog has NOT used 72/75 MHz gear, but feels that his 2.4 G reacts quickly enough for his needs (as do many operators of very expensive RC jet airplanes - as ThunderbirdJunkie mentioned earlier). Perhaps people who have used 2.4G and 72/75 MHz gear of similar quality/price point could chime in here? Kind of a survey to see if ThunderbirdJunkie is raising a valid point, or just more obfuscation.

Downunderdog read it, but was tired of typing "which ThunderbirdJunkie subsequently changed his position about" so Downunderdog let it go. Downunderdog guesses it is relevant, in that it is another irrelevant point that ThunderbirdJunkie brought up and then dropped when it was shown to be wrong - thus demonstrating credibility (or lack thereof) in the points that ThunderbirdJunkie raises. Downunderdog hesitates to say that it smacks of desperation, but hesitation only lasts for so long.

Downunderdog notes that the word "do" is not a preposition. It is a "pro-verb" or auxiliary verb. Downunderdog also notes that, although using big words might make someone sound smart to someone who is not smart, it is the thoughts that are being conveyed by those words that someone who is smart uses to form their opinion of the person who is using the words.

Haddi Taha

im out of popcorn[] keep debating please why i get some more

downunderdog

Downunderdog does not really wish to dubunk every statement of ThunderbirdJunkie... only the misleading or incorrect ones.

From Spektrum's website, some information [link=http://www.spektrumrc.com/DSM/Technology/DSM2.aspx]about Latency.[/link]

"With DSM2, the total latency of your radio system has been greatly reduced, while the bit-rate has been increased. When combined, these improvements provide hobbyists with a faster and more locked-in feeling when compared to traditional 27MHz, 72MHz, or 75MHz radio systems."

Does ThunderbirdJunkie have a link to anything that discusses latency comparisons between 72/75 MHz and 2.4 GHz systems which indicates 2.4G is worse? Or does ThunderbirdJunkie prefer to speak in generalities like "Latency. It's something that can be felt in similarly equipped cars." ThunderbirdJunkie never even stated whether the latency of 2.4 G was greater than or less than 75 MHz, or how the effect made the cars feel. Perhaps ThunderbirdJunkie believes that higher latency of 75 MHz makes the feel of the cars better? Could ThunderbirdJunkie please clarify?