I bought this ARTF as a trial build as all my other models were built from kits. On opening the box I was very impressed by the manufacture and covering of the parts. The instruction book is well laid oud with colour pictures on every stage of assembly. I took me five evenings (about 8 hours) of assembly. My powerplant is an OS 40 Surpass which is more than enough. First flight was a delight hardly any trim correction, performed aerobatics with ease and with the coloufull covering looked good in the air. I am looking for my next Ripmax model. 

Wow, that is a massive co-incidence. I have just started a thread on RCMF asking for advice and opinion on this model. My son was given one by the LHS after his trainer was crashed during an Air Cadet flying day run by said LHS. The opinion on RCMF is that this kit is rubbish though, and I am quite concerned. He will be flying using an OS46LA and will be looking to use it as an aerobatic trainer.

Any build tips or problem areas?

(Just to claify, we are talking about the Wot 4 knock off by Ripmax, (high wing, tail dragger) aren't we?)

 I suppose it is a Wot 4 knock off but I paid about half the Wot 4 price for the exclaim from Ripmax and for the money I think it is good value and I disagree that it is badly made. As for build tips I don' t like cyano for hinges and I always use epoxy and pin the the hinges, I also substituted epoxy on the fin and tail. Apart from that the instructions are all in colour photographs and easy to follow. I would certainly buy one again.

I have two of these (One as yet unbuilt) I bought the second one as I'm so impressed with the first, and seeing them available for less then £60 I thought I'd snap one up. I dont agree about it being badly made at all, in fact mine took a very hard landing after I flew it out of fuel. I expected some damage as it came down very hard and short of the strip. It was totally undamaged.

My son is building his and the only problems were:

1) Engine mount is too short for an OS46LA

2) The ailerons bind slightly

3) The tail feathers will need to be cyano'd on as there is no way of getting epoxy into the gap for the horizontal stab.

Anyone got any other advice for him?

Shaun,

1. I had to add a shaped sheet of ply to the firewall to fix the engine mount as I too found there was to much front. I found the mount attachment bolts to short afterwards but substituted my own.

2. If fitted correctly there should be no bind I have not found a problem perhaps some careful sanding is required.

3. Add Epoxy to the hinges first onto one side - fit and pin then do the same to the other side. I have had aelerons and elevators come loose before so as a precaution I always add a pin no matter what the adhesive.

There are always minor challenges to building but a bit of thought before the glue usally works. 

We have fitted the stab and fin. We are undecided about whether or not to fit a tail wheel. What do you think?

Also, did you use the supplied wing bolts, or have you changed them?

What about the u/c mount? Any modifications there?

Hi Shaun, I did use the supplied wing bolts but cut them down a little mine were over length. I also fitted a tail wheel after the first few flights as I found it hard to turn when on the ground with the wire skid. Apart for that it's all pretty much as it came. No changes to the U/C mounting and it's survived despite my sometimes overenthusiastic landings.

Have Fun! 

My rough calculations indicate that my team and I have over the last few years reviewed almost 90 models for RCM&E and the Xclaim was the worst built, worst covered one of the lot.

Stangely - it flies quite well - if you can keep the covering and the tail on - and you get a straight one of course - and if your covering doesn't delaminate - or your bulkhead fall out - or your canopy crack.

It's light enough to take a knock but it was crap the first time they released it and worse the second. The more we as consumers accept this tat without kicking up a fuss the more we'll get it served up.

I distinctly hope they have made some modifications since I reviewed the kit.

Andy

Maybe some of your observations have been addressed, but certainly not all. The covering is still rubbish. The bulkhead is too far back for the supplied engine mount. But is appears straight and doesn't seem to be made of old tea chests. I have also glued as much of the wood as I can get to.