Hi all, i have just bought a X-cell 30. I have flown it before i bought it, so i know it fly's great. I am new to heli's well can fly round in forward flight and the odd stall turn. My question then, i have had a go of a Raptor 30 which i found very stable, a Nexus 30, well forget that, and the Shuttle i learned on. I love my Shuttle it is not as tuff as a Raptor, but is faster round the sky. How would rate the x-cell 30 with the heli's above. Is it worth an upgrade on the x-cell or is it fine as it is.

Regards

Paul

I have had my X-Cell 30 about a year now and love it. I don't fly 3D but do all the old style heli aerobatics (loops, rolls, etc.). Only mods I put on were the rear servo mount for tail rotor and a good set of composite blades. As far as smoothness goes, I don't think any of the plastic helis compare, especially after the hours start to build up on the machines. With an OS 32 performance is well beyond what I expected with the X-cell's higher weight.
These are my feelings, I'm sure others will tell you the Raptor or whatever is the best flying machine ever. I've tried them all over the years and keep going back to the X-cell.

George

Well What can I say? but that I have 3 of the Xcell 30's and wouldn't trade them for anything...

Ken

I have an X-Cell 30 and a Raptor 30. The X-Cell is a smooth flyer as is. Here's mine.

-Kevin

i flew my x-cell 30 stock for a month before i put an os 50 in it. now it does anything my extreme can do. it all depends on what you want to get out of it, and with that machine there's room to grow if you choose. i'm going to sell mine only because it's easier to keep an extreme in the air if you have 2 of them to swap out parts and there are only a few parts that the 30 shares with the extreme.

The Xcell is a very dated design that wasn't very good when it was new. The newer versions are just the same heli with fixes/upgrades for all the problems. It's a good stable flier for a beginner but there are many good new designs out there that will let you progress to heavy 3D and don't cost a fortune to maintain and repair.

The Xcells' frame is weak and flexes under any load. The aluminum is prone for cracks even with small engines and the radio tray is very flimsy without extensive bracing.

The front tail drive and the wimpy boom are a joke for HH gyros, even with the front bearing mod/upgrade which makes it even more of a pain to work on and adjust the mesh.

The 'tractor' tail is back-wards, the wire drive is good for little more than hovering and their brittle canopies crack like eggshells with the slightest bump.

Mine ate bearings like crazy and nearly always needing work at the end of the day.

If you don't plan on getting into 3D, you like to work on your heli as much as fly, you don't mind the outrageous prices for parts (if you can get them at all) and you can handle the *****s down in FL. then it may be OK.
IMO, that's an awful lot to put up with just to proclaim "I've got a MINIATURE".


I don't miss mine a bit.

Kirk

with miniature's sales, there must be a lot of idiots out there, myself included. there are plenty of testimonials about the longevity of x-cell 30s. if you want to talk about crap parts, i bet the list would be longer for any model other than x-cell.

Hmmm I find your comments very interesting Boom....Well I'll say that these are facts...

1. I flew Xcels way back in the late 80's. Seems the company has been producing for a great many years. I wonder why?

2. When I got back into the hobby (about 4 yrs ago), noticed alot of top flyers where flying Xcels.

3. I fly my xcels every weekend. I only have to due the normal maintenance and have had the same heli for 2 years. (of course you have to excuse my inverted crashes while leaning inverted flight).

4. I fly all 3 Heli's w/HH and have no problems.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. You certainly do not think highly of MA models, But hey that is your opinion. I for one do not go around bashing the other models. And yes I've had a total of about 6 diff types of heli's ranging from the Concept 30, Shuttles, Kalt Barons, TSK ect. but the end result is that I went back to the Xcels. I am in no way, shape or form an expert flyer or expert at mechanics...but I'm sticking w/ the Miniature Air Models,,,,OH and yes I do live in FL...I can order by 4:00 p.m and my parts are at my doorstep the next day and I have NOT had to Backorder anything from them. But again I say this...Miniature Aircraft has been in business for over a decade and still going strong....There has to be a reason for the longevity.

This is my opnion and my opinion only

Ken

I never said the parts were junk.

I said the design was very dated compared to the newer 30's out now days, (Venture, Raptor, Caliber, Kalt etc.) as Paul asked for a comparison in the first post.

I started flying in the 80's too when there were no gyros and inverted flight was only for the experts and 3D was unheard of.
I learned forward flight on the Xcell 30. It was advertised as being able to fly inverted out of the box and back then, this was state of the art. It was the only machine with enough collective range to load a .32 in both directions.
Then came the Concept, Kalt, Raptor and the rest, proving plastic could be very light, rigid and with a smart design, be able to handle extreme forces of 3D.
Bottom line, what sets these things apart from one another is the design. The Xcell was a flimsy design from the 80's. The head design was it's strong point but the frame, drive, servo tray, and tail design is weak, not necessarily the parts themselves.

Kirk

Well, let's see:

The Concept's DDF head will boomstrike at the drop of a hat.

The Baron's collective linkage was prone to problems, not to mention the lousiest tail rotor pitch change linkage in the industry. Even the MFA Sport 500 has a better one.

The Raptor has it's blade flutter and other issues.

Shall we continue?

I've had all the machines you mention, to include an X-Cell 30. Each has it's warts. But to call the X-Cell 30 "weak" is rather laughable, I'm afraid; IF you mean that the ship overall is prone to breakage under the stress of stick-banging. Over half of it's parts are from the 60, for Pete's sake. It's too heavy, sure. But weak??? Give me a break.

It's obvious you have issues with MA. Okay; say so. Don't hide behind the facade of bashing the product, particularly with specious comparisons that won't hold water.

Steve

We're talking the original bent frame Xcell 30 here!!

The frame sides were way too thin, way too close together and way too much distance between the main shaft bearings (which are only an inch apart) and the eng. mount. Just grab it by the top and bottom of the frame give it a twist.
If the frame was so rigid, why did they offer a thicker replacement frame later? Sure, it was a little stiffer, but still flexed and still cracked. The problem wasn't solved until the stacked frame version came out.
Hell, even if you set the thing down soft, you'll here the gear whine change because the frame flex's under it's own weight!!

The stock plastic servo tray flex's side to side with un-loaded control inputs because the only mounts were narrow spaced screws at the very back. This is only fixed by bracing the front to the lower frame; another 'upgrade'.
The front tail drive is a real engineering marvel; a bevel gear (with lots of side loading) on one end of an undersized aluminum shaft that's supported by two narrow spaced bearings at the other end of the shaft!! The soft shaft bends, the bearings wear into the shaft or the bearings fail because of the load leverage on them, the gear strips and loss of tail. This was only fixed with a third bearing supporting the gear end of the shaft. You guessed it, another upgrade.
Now, add a small diameter boom with only one support and a wire drive. I'm sorry Steve, but rigid is the last thing that I would call this design.
Maybe a stacked frame version with these upgrades (or should we say 'fixes') the push-pull setups, twin boom supports, tube drive, pusher or twin tail, uni ball start and all the other upgrades available would be a strong, reliable machine. But, to compare a stock, original Xcell 30 to any new 30 size on the market today is a laugh!

Kirk

I never said it was rigid. I said it wasn't weak; which is what YOU said originally (it was weak, that is).

I rather doubt Ernie Huber would have operated two dozen or so of these ships for all those years at his school if they couldn't stand up to abuse.

As for not being able to handle 3D, I'm sure you're right. In fact, I'm certain that the current rage for flinging model helicopters about in the most outrageous manner imaginable is the reason for most of the sudden parts failures a lot of people are complaining of these days.

After looking at some of the videos folks are raving about, I'm amazed the machines stay together at all...

Steve

HI all I don't know if this is the right forum for what I am about to ask as this is my first time here but I have a x-cell 30 kit on my shelf just laying their, since my x-cell 60 blades struck and broke my wrist ,I don't have much interest anymore.
If anyone is interested in buying it email me.
Thanks Rcpete

rcpete347 I would be interested in your xcell Email me at [email protected] I live in Troy VT