Gleterno575

I'd appreciate some opinions, and testimonials where possible on Top Flite's kits.. Do they go together well? Are the kits well constructed, and how is their customer service? Especially fond of the Corsair and P-51, but I have heard many complaints reguarding the retracts available for the Corsair. Pictures and anything else would be appreciated.

nexuscrash

My Feedback: (12)

I got a TF corsair last year.... Got the full works, replica engine, scale cockpit, etc.

The Kit went together real well. Had a lot of sanding to get the contours of the tail just right. Covering it with monocote wasn't bad expect for the gull portion of the wing and some of the curves on the tailend..

During the building process I messed up one of the wing tip panel and their support got the parts out quickly and the price wasn't that bad. So I rate their support top notch.

One issue I did have is finding a pilot for it. TF discontinued theirs and I had a hard time finding one so I gave that up. No biggie.

Yes, the retracts are an issue... One good hard landing will take of the Robart Retracts. Mine hang in there ok, but we have a paved runway at our field... A grass landing will definitely take them out. I found that out taxing it in my back yard, the gear collapsed and I have to do some bending to get them to work right again.

Its a good plane with a OS 91 in it. It definitely gets a lot of looks at the airfield.

Good luck with whatever decision you make,

Michael

Scott G

I'm finishing a Sea Fury after a decade hiatus from the hobby. Before I got poor going to school the last kit I built was a Midwest 109.

The Sea Fury takes a while to put together but the instructions are first rate. Lots of great building tips you can use on the next builds. I would definitely get another...

BTW you can download the instructions for the kits on their website. I read those through a couple of times before I even ordered mine.

Scott G.

max911

My Feedback: (2)

Im working on TF Corsair (gold edition kit).
So far everything went really smooth, wood is good quality, all parts are cut nice...
Excellent instructions, plans etc...
regards

shupack

i'm really happy with my corsair too, most of the complaints i hear are from the scale "purists" but it still looks like a corsair to me

there are plenty of things you can do to improve the scale details, check out the thread i'm running to see what i've done so-far, and plenty of tips from others building the corsair right now too.

post any questions you have, someone will be able to answer them
http://www.rcuniverse.com/showthread...752#post865755]

Gleterno575

Thanks for all the responses. Now, I love the Corsair and It's probably one of my all time favorite warbirds, but those gull wings just look like a nightmare.

MILDBILL-RCU

My Feedback: (6)

i have the p-51,.....love it,.. all went well, the only thing i'd do different, is to use separete ailron servo's, instead of the kits wire's & belcrank.

Gleterno575

I hear the P-51 is a very fast airframe in general. What engine, ect were you using, and we're talking about the .60 size gold edition, correct?

Kirk RC

My Feedback: (4)

I have built about all the TF War Birds except the P-39 and the new T-34. The best flying I have found is the AT-6, its currently not in production but alot of kits can be found in the online classifieds. In my opinion the P-51 was/is my favorite and I have built the B&D versions. The P-47 is alittle more forgiving in the air but not as sleek and fast as the 51. My 2cents...
1) Good instructions but take your time and think ahead when building. Read and understand all the instructions before you glue the first stick.

2) Reinforce the gear ribs,rails etc. As enginerred they arent stong enough unless you fly off asphalt and grease it in every time. Use high quality sturdy retracts, I'm a Century Jet guy because they are tough tough tough.

3) A good 1.2 four stroke makes all the difference in the world. I had a ST90 2 stroke in my first 51 and P-40 and they where just underpowered. I also use a glow light system on my inverted 4 strokes for ease of starting and assurance on idle, power up to go around etc. These systems are now very cheap and the extra wt in the nose is always needed.

4) Keep the tail light light light! Especially on the Spitfire. In non critical areas don't be afraid to use lighter balsa if what was included is to dense. A few years ago I bought a mess of quality balsa sticks, sheets etc to substitute kit parts, make repairs, fix mistakes and the like. It was one of my best $100 investments in this hobby. The TF balsa is usually very good but at times you will get a bad cut or not great quality.

5) I have covered half in Monocoat half in glass and paint. My preference is monocoat for reasons of weight and ease of repair. I'm sure the glass pros will debate that point but its been my findings that the average builder gets better overall results with film.
6) Bell cranks are a thing of the past. Use individual servos for each aileron. I also use 2 quality high torque micros for the flaps.

7) Make sure all your components are easily accessible such as fuel tanks, air lines, tail wheel/ rudder tie-in to name a few. I put inspection hatches on my birds. These are not in the plans but they have saved a plane or two plus make often difficult fixes/trouble shoots a snap vs a pull out your hair thing.
8) Lastly I have found that war birds( Mine anyway) get flown harder and are heavier than most of the average fun fly/Cap/Extra type stuff plus have more systems. They require better preventative maintenances as more can go wrong.
Any way thats my Thoughts,
Kirk RC

Gleterno575

Thanks, Kirk. That answered a lot of questions. Well, I'll get this kit very soon. Thanks for the comments, everyone.

TRP

My Feedback: (1)

Kirk RC,

What were your overall thoughts on the P40?

Ted

psk560

My Feedback: (12)

If i built another topflite warbird i would definitely use 3/32 sheeting for the wings. The 1/16 is just not enough! I built the p51b and I wish i had used better wing sheeting. Love the way it flies though.

Craig

Kirk RC

My Feedback: (4)

Ted,
I first built the p-40 red box kit and it was a bad experience all around. That was 10 years ago and after alot more experience decided that I would try out the Gold Edition P-40. It was I think my 5-6th TF war bird so I felt pretty comfortable with myself. Little did I know what lay ahead. The P-40 is alot of work and the 90 degree retract set-up is a challenge. The plane is often very heavy and has high wing loading, flaps are a must. The gear stance is very narrow therefore I found take-offs very very challenging. I have seen many P-40s snap on take off. The flight characteristics are by far the worst of all the War Birds I have built. I feel this is really a plane for a true expert Fleur. That said it looks great in the air and is my favorite "Looker" as a static model sitting on the tarmac. If I ever build one again I would take out alot of wood, replace with composite in high stress areas, save myself the headache, cost and weight of 90 degree retracts, skip the scale add-ons, cover in film and put a very strong 120 up front. In summary I dont want to just bash this kit as you'll most likely find a few guys that mastered the beast and you may be a better flyer and builder than I. To me this plane is like a beautiful psycho women, You know its bad news but you keep being drawn back in. Good luck
Kirk RC

Kirk RC

My Feedback: (4)

Craig, Thats a good point on the wing sheeting, What I found is that I make the wing skins sand with 400 grit and then put them on the wing. Yes a few cracked and hanger rash is a problem especially before you cover, 3/32 is the way to go.
Kirk RC

justrfb

My Feedback: (2)

Kirk RC,
I am trying to get someone (with experience) to let me know what they did/are doing with the elevator clevis, supplied plastic to the metal enclosed elevator joiner. I'm thinking about making the bottom piece removable, the one that goes over the tail wheel. Please tell me how you handle this on your P51's? Thank you.

Justrfb (checking all my options)

shupack

kirk, on my corsair I made the horizontal stab removable and used a metal clevis, no problems(yet)

psk560

My Feedback: (12)

I left it plastic with fuel tubing over it. I made a hatch next
to the tail wheel so that I could get to it if i needed. The tailwheel linkage gives me more headache than the elevator.


Craig

Kirk RC

My Feedback: (4)

On my elevator I use a dubro swivel ball link, the type that bolts thru the control horn. I secure the bolt with a locking nut plus locktight on the threads. I then cut a port hole thru the bottom of the tail block that I use for a visual inspection. If the plane is film covered which my P-51 is, I cover the hole with a piece of monocoat and every so often peal it off to take a look see. With the ball link I have had zero problems as they are very well built ,just make sure to use a locking nut vs the nut thats provided. On a side bar I have gone exclusively to swivel ball links and Robart super ball link control horns on all my flying surfaces. I have seen a few crashes with the plastic clevis/plastic push rod setup. It takes alittle longer to set up and you need to silver solder a threaded coupler to one end of your push rod but the set up is rock solid and no play. With the time and expense of these planes why leave your fate to a plastic clevis and a piece of fuel line. Just two weeks ago my flying buddy had his P-47 on the run way about to start take off roll, gave his controls a stir and noticed his rudder wouldnt move. You guessed it, the little plastic pin on the clevis broke off in the control horn and the fuel hose keeper was still in place. He now is a convert.

Hope that helps
Kirk RC

justrfb

My Feedback: (2)

Excellent! Thank you. I will now go out and switch... I have over 1K into this (I am flying the RCS140 up front) plane and I was real uncomfortable riding it all on the plastic kit included clevis. Thanks.

Justrfb (checking all my options)

rthorne

My Feedback: (29)

JUSTRFB:

Which plane are you putting the 1.4 in? I have the 1.4 in a world models F3D and its performing pretty well. I wonder if it would be too much engine for the 60 size Corsair?

justrfb

My Feedback: (2)

Hello Rich,
Going on Evan Q.'s lead (he has a RCS140 in a Pica 60 sized Fw190 d9 http://www.homestead.com/evoshangar/home.html ) I am putting the RCS140 RE in my TF P51B 60 sized plane. All information I have gathered says the RCS 140 performs on par or slightly better than a 4 stroke 120. My plane will be glassed and painted so... I usually don't join the "lots of power, you can always throttle back" group but I want to go gas and this is a fit for this plane. I will let all know how it flies as soon as I finish... Thanks for your reply...

Justrfb (checking all my options)

justrfb

My Feedback: (2)

Kirk RC and All,
OK, here is what I did (and I think it will hold permanently) ... I combined the best of both worlds. I went to the LHS looking for the Dubro Ball Link and all they had was the 4-40 size. I bought a pack of 2-56 screws and locking bolts and went home to work. I cut the pin off the plastic clevis and drilled a hole where the pin was, so now I have the plastic clevis with holes on both sides. I enlarged the hole on the elevator crank to just clear the 2-56 screw. I lined up the clevis and screwed through the crank. Effectively replacing the plastic clevis pin with a 2-56 metal screw. I then screwed the 2-56 locking nut onto the screw and then for good measure, I put a dab of JB Weld on the end so the nut never comes off. Now to permanently hook the tail wheel steering arm... somehow. I will let all know when I complete that task and then I can close the back of the plane up per plans and not worry about it. I hope this helps...

Justrfb (checking all my options)

shupack

Justrfb

on your 2-56 bolts, are they threaded all the way to the head? if the threads rub against the hole in the elevator crank one is gonna give way to the other, and you'll have slop. i don't know how long it'll take, but you shouldn't use a threaded section as a pivot (engineeringly speaking) if the bolt has an un-threaded shoulder you'll be fine. if not i think it would be in your best interest to wait for the right parts to come in to your LHS.

great problem solving though! never stop improving.

justrfb

My Feedback: (2)

Shupack,
Thanks for the info. I thought about a bushing and could not find one that fit the bill, but here is my reasons for forging ahead with my idea. I too am an engineer by trade. I design printed circuit boards (used to design housings in the late 80's early 90's). Here is what I came up with... I used a No. 2-56 screw, very tiny. I have 56 threads per inch on the screw and the crank is (I figure) anywhere from 62 mils to 125 mils thick. Doing the math, the inside surface of the hole in the crank is seeing anywhere from 3.47 threads to 7 threads. That is "solid" enough for my thinking. The way I see it, the crank will "see" the 3 1/2 to 7 threads as a shoulder. Also, the distance it will be traveling is very short, plus the screw and nut are "snug" so there is some surface tension/friction between the clevis sides and the crank. Another thing I thought about is the Dubro Ball clevis will be hanging on the side of the crank and the pull will be rotational (very small amount for sure) to the crank where as mine will be linear, effectively pulling from both sides of the crank. I hope this is clear and I hope I am right. It will be nice to have the plane long enough for me to worry about this connection point. Way down the road if I have to open the side and change it out, I will be happy to do so because that will mean I will have many, many flights on the airframe! . What do you think?...

Justrfb (checking all my options)

shupack

that's a good way to think about it
just remember to check frequently for slop