ejh1850

Looking to purchase first real heli.....a bit confused as to whether Ineed to spend more for 2.4ghz versions or are the 72mhz versions OK?Iam looking at Esky Hunter or Co-Comanche or Dauphin, etc.......I would rather not spend more if its not critical. If anyone has any advice, it would be great....thanks.

edobeirne

I have the limited experience of having owned two 2.4gHz helis, so I can only tell you why I bought them and in what ways they have been satisfying. I can't really compare to 72mHz. The 2.4gHz transmitter has a much shorter antenna, doesn't need retracting when not flying. The receiver on the helicopter has a tiny nub of an antenna instead of a wire you must route and deal with. I have never had any interference while flying. You can supposedly "bind" most if not any 2.4gHz transmitter with any 2.4gHz receiver, if you're wondering about interoperability if you need to mix and match among your collection.

Hopefully someone more knowlegeable than me will chime in also.

One final word: I would probably not recommend the Co-Comanche for a beginner. The "wheel" landing gear do not easily accept the anti-crash gear, and the canopy is far too easy to break. A better choice would be the Lama, which is essentially the same helicopter but with skids, a slightly different battery tray, and a more durable canopy set. It's a few bucks more but worth it. If you ever want to convert it to the Co-Comanche you can buy the canopy, wheels, and battery tray. I actually have a spare Co-Comanche canopy you can have - I converted my original Co-Comanche into a Lama for the reasons I described.

If you get it at Xheli.com and spend over $100, use this code for free shipping: CJFREE2

Get plenty of spare blades, some extra skids, a center hub, and a spare flybar. Consider hitting up eBay for an aluminum head-set for about $10. It will take a couple of weeks to get to you but the breakages are much less with the metal parts.

Enjoy!

jerrymac

My Feedback: (2)

In my opinion, if the 2.4ghz is more expensive it really isn't worth the extra money for a stock radio. If you decide to move farther along in the hobby some day with collective pitch helicopters you will find that you will likely want to invest in a decent programmable radio system.

ejh1850

Thanks for the insight.....What about the esyk Hunter?I like the canopy. Is the landing gear better on this one also?Thanks!

edobeirne

The Hunter is pretty new, and I agree, it looks very cool. Judging from the parts list, the guts are from the Lama line. Hard to tell if the single piece canopy would make maintenance and battery changes a *****. You might have to take off the blades or even the head to lower the insides out the bottom. The canopy is only $3.30, which is smoking! Get a spare or two from the beginning. The skids look pretty solid in the pictures, and would definitely accept crash gear. I'm showing the 2.4gHz as $10 more than the 72mHz, so it's personal preference. If you can figure out the canopy issue from an actual current owner, I'd say go for it. Get a bunch of extra blades, or the Extreme blades, and a flybar at least, right with your order. And if you get the aluminum head parts, definitely Loctite every screw and piece, because they will fall apart. Blue skies!

RedGN

Don't be fooled with 2.4 ghz.  It is a new fad and has a shorter operating distance than the lower bandwidth (72mhz)

The only benefit is no long antenna.

Buy the 72 Mhz.

Aframomum

My Feedback: (10)

For my planes I fly 72 b/c I'm not ready to pay for the receiver switch over but for my heli I use 2.4. At our field we have an area of glitches that affect 72 but have no issues with 2.4. Flying a plane through it really isn't a big deal but if a hovering heli happens to "wander" into that area then bad things happen if that heli is on 72. Seen it happen on more than one occasion which made my decision for me. Plus, I don't have to worry about getting shot down if I want to go to a soccer field or even my back yard to fly my heli.

ilikethatsite

Sorry I am late to this party! I am surprised no one has brought up the obvious!!!

The primary reason for 2.4 is that if you are flying in in groups you will not have to worry about interefence with other pilots. The receiver binds to the onetransmitter and one transmitter only. If you are working off the 72mhz then you will not be able to fly until that frequency is available. I would rather spend my time in the air!!!! Overall it is a cleaner setup with less interence from other devices as well.

As for theshorter distance, I am sure that can be argued, but lets be realistic. As a new pilot how far are you really going to have the heli away from you? Even as an experienced pilot it is rare it is that far away from you. Primary reason....you can't see it when it gets a distance a way. You will lose sight of it before you lose range.

Just my two cents

Druss

Fad? Really? Because fads usually come and go but I really don't see 2.4ghz as a fad. Almost everyone at my field flies 2.4ghz whether a .90 nitro or 450 electric. I also don't have any problems with reception, as good as my Futaba 9C had. I use 2.4ghz for both air (JR 12X) and land (DX3R) with no issues operating out as far as I can see the reception. You don't need 1000m range, because if you're out that far you can pretty much kiss the thing good bye.

In this particular case, it doesn't really matter which you choose as you're going to be flying it within10-60 feet of yourself. Range doesn't come into the picture.

As for compatibility, not all 2.4ghz is compatible, just like with 72mhz (where they have positive and negative shift) not all 2.4ghz receivers will work with all 2.4ghz transmitters. JR and Spektrum are the only ones that are compatible. Futaba and Airtronics uses different methods.

deanwesterburg

I have only had 72 MHz gear, but have had very few issues with it. There is the issue of sharing a frequency with others, however, if your local field uses some sort of Frequency mangment, it will be fine. If you fly in a park or unmanaged flying site, Imight be inclined to get the 2.4 GHz stuff.

The 72 MHz band is just aircraft. The 2.4 GHz band has lots of other stuff on it. 802.11b, the most common wireless networking protocol for your laptops and iPhones that you will find in nearly every house and coffee shop around the US is also somewhere on the 2.4 GHz band. Because of the way the 2.4 GHz gear "BINDS", it is unlikly you would have a problem, but something to consider.

I have a HAM radio license now, so I'll be ordering 50 MHz Gear. The frequencies are almost always available and their is a portion of the Ham radio band carved out for just RC Aircraft and nothing else. The ham test is not hard and the reward is no waiting for a frequency! Checkout "Ham Radio PodClass" and www.hamtestonline.com if you are interested.

noobflyer01

the 2.4g radio is far from a "fad"  its the future.   72mhz will glitch very easily.   the range on a ar6100 (which is a spektrum receiver) is over 1.5 miles.   I dont think you can see your model at 1 mile away.  there's a LOT of benefit the 2.4g offer.  I wont touch an FM radio no matter how nice it is.  2.4g FTW

MentallyDeadKev

I've seen some that are in the 30's, would that be a major bad idea to get a receiver like that?

BarracudaHockey

My Feedback: (11)

35mhz is the European version of 72mhz that we use in North America.

If you fly at a busy club, like to go to events, fly somewhere open to the public that some kid could show up with a Walmart special and knock you out of the air..........its probably worthwhile upgrading to 2.4.

If you fly with a small group of people, or out in the sticks or whatever  and dont go to events, the benefit might be less.

Effective range, that which most of us can actually see a model to fly it, is the same between 72 and 2.4

If you're buying new though, you're better off starting out with 2.4

T-ster

2.4 is the way to go. Metal to metal causes glitches in the 72 mhz freq, but doesn't bother 2.4. Heli's have plenty of chances to cause the metal to metal rubbing.

Also, no worrying about someone turning on their radio and causing you to crash. That is worth the price as well.

Once I went 2.4, will never go back to 72.....

RedGN

FAD meaning " I gotta have it " That is a fad. There are little kids toys that are 2.4 GHZ that only reach 10 ft. but people see 2.4 GHZ and they think it mean something special.

i do agree it solves frequency problems at the field and that is why all the big names have it.

RedGN

2.4 is not the future. The fad is here now.....

The next fad will be 5.6 GHZ....Then GPS controlled....Then some mind controlled thing.

I'm saying you don't really need 2.4GHZ. 72MHZ is just fine.