|Peter Miller||04/02/2017 11:33:15|
10016 forum posts
JR has gone. They shut down a short while ago
|TIM Shaw||04/02/2017 12:21:25|
|166 forum posts|
MacGrgegor, Sanwa, JR. and Taranis in my history, with a brief, unsuccessful, flirtation with Futaba.
Recently gone over to Hitec Aurora 9x though, which I think is a super piece of kit - nice sticks, well balanced, easy to program and not ridiculously priced...
|Piers Bowlan||04/02/2017 12:50:20|
1804 forum posts
Not quite Peter although maybe the writing is on the wall? They shut their Japan operation but their factory in Malaysia is still going strong although no new products in the pipeline. My XG11 was made in the Malaysian factory.
1222 forum posts
Home made S/C until mid 70's then Futaba(27mHz AM; 35mHz FM and FASST) until now. Plug ins for the later Futaba(FF8,FF9,FF9S and T12FG) giving FASST, FrSky D & X, DSM2/DSMX. Got a Taranis with plug in for FASST and DSM2/DSMX but not happy with the programming and constant updating
Rx are Micron/GWS/Futaba/Hitech/Jeti//FrSky/Spectrum and OrangeRx for various frequencies and protocols. Everything still works fine, although I'd be a bit doubtful about using 27mHz AM other than for boats.
|Chuck Plains||04/02/2017 13:34:27|
1096 forum posts
I used Hitec a lot when I was racing cars way back, so I stuck with them.
|Vic Clare 1||04/02/2017 14:51:18|
|33 forum posts|
I started out with 35Mhz Digifleet, sometimes unkindly dubbed 'Dodgyfleet'. then moved on to Sanwa and Futaba. My two current outfitsin regular use are Spektrum DX6i's. I still have the Digifleet and Sanwa which are in full working order but choose to use the Spektrum as 2.4Ghz is less faffing around at the site with a peg board.
|Colin Carpenter||04/02/2017 15:35:17|
|548 forum posts|
Starting in 1969 McGregor S/C . Then Climax Digital from Peter Cabrol in Weybridge. Then Flight Link Control Duette. Next Sprengbrook ( Brand from Germany really ).Sanwa , Futaba , JR , Multiplex , Hitec (2000) . Last 3 years Spektrum DX9 . This set has had more use than most of the others put together ,as now retarded !! Did I spell that correctly ? Colin
1919 forum posts
Your Spektrum is "retarded" Colin? I know they don't offer the flexibility of OpenTX, but that seems a bit harsh...
The results so far are broadly reflective of the clubs of which I am a member (3), and the sample size of ~280 at the time of writing is sizeable enough to give confidence it can't be too far off. The only place I see anything significantly different is amongst the gliding fraternity; FrSky has a much bigger slice of the soaring club I belong too where they have pretty much eliminated the JR and Multiplex sets.
Whilst I get it's sensible to ask the same question as in previous years so we can compare results, I still think this survey doesn't really explain what is going on in the market. A better question would "What transmitters or modules did you purchase in the last 3 years?", and allow people to tick as many answers as they like. This would tell you about current sales rather than overall usage. For instance it appears around 7% use JR, but how many of them have bought a DMSS set? In my experience it's very few; far more have stick with their older DSM2 JRs or put FrSky modules in the back of the old bombproof 35MHz sets. If that question were asked I would bet on Spektrum in the lead, FrSky a strong second and Futaba third with everyone else in the low single digits.
Maybe we could run that survey in 6 months as a complement to this one?
Edited By MattyB on 04/02/2017 16:58:30
|Colin Carpenter||04/02/2017 17:14:25|
|548 forum posts|
Sorry Matty ! Should have put I'm in there ! As retired !!!!😁 Hence , flying lots in the week instead of only Sunday pm . Colin
|Tony Richardson||04/02/2017 19:05:01|
601 forum posts
Interesting point MattyB I bought a Spektrum module for my 72mz JR 9303 because I really liked the feel and heft of it and did not like the look or feel of the then newer style xg11, then as a backup radio bought a Taranis and really fell in love with it, the one feature I really like is I can take that same Spektrum module and put it in the Taranis set up the control throws accordingly and I'm good to go. I could also plug a FrSky module into the JR and reverse the process.
|john stones 1||04/02/2017 19:11:08|
10432 forum posts
Radio is not just about your Tx, i agree we should have a poll on what Rx's we're using.
|Phil Francis||04/02/2017 21:38:39|
|53 forum posts|
Futaba 14SG Transmitter with a mix of Futaba and Frsky receivers.
|ben goodfellow 1||04/02/2017 21:42:50|
1069 forum posts
there should of been 5 futaba problems for every 6 on "you know who today.........lol
|Percy Verance||05/02/2017 09:02:17|
8109 forum posts
I use the genuine manufacturers receivers with my set-ups, and always have done. There are no 2.4ghz *clone* rx's available for my radio make.......
|Olav Sivertsen 2||05/02/2017 10:13:12|
8 forum posts
|Brian Spearing||05/02/2017 13:29:38|
|46 forum posts|
I had a Multiplex Evo on 35MHz for some years, and over a period of time fitted 2.4 modules for Spektrum, Jeti and FrSky, all satisfactory. Then wanting a 2.4 Tx, liking the Mpx logic but not wanting Mpx prices I bought a Taranis. Now all my models are on Frsky apart from two using the old Jeti module with a JetiBox.
Dabbled with a Hitec Aurora 9 that I liked, but sold after Hitec failed to keep up.
|Peter Miller||05/02/2017 13:43:24|
10016 forum posts
Try and buy a new JR Reciever
A friend recently bought one of the Retro JR sets at a "bargain" price. SInce then he has been desparately trying to buy an extra Rx or two. Ony the £160 versions are available, has to search elsewhere. A few in the USA at a price
Of course if you know of a supply let us know and I will pass it on to my friend
Edited By Peter Miller on 05/02/2017 13:47:52
Edited By Peter Miller on 05/02/2017 13:51:20
|Richard Marklew 1||06/02/2017 12:39:13|
|13 forum posts|
What an interesting spectrum of choice! I had an RCS single channel (as advertised in the Feb. 1969 RCME), along with a rubber powered pair of escarpments (one for the throttle as well) when I was 14 (1970). I then built a four channel set from kit parts to the design in "Theory and practice of model radio control" by Paul Newell. My next set was a Futaba 6 in the 1990s (there have been some very big gaps in my RC career!), followed by a Futaba MZ14 12 years ago, which I still have after adding a TM-14 module. I did live just a few miles from MacGregor when they were in Langley, but despite desperately wanting their 2 channel proportional set I never had the money.
Futaba take a lot of knocks for their prices, but they are (in my experience - my father used them as well) quite reliable. However, reading these forums, magazines and the interweb I can see that alternatives such as Frsky, Spektrum and so on are just as reliable. It is a pity that there are so many different systems around, it would have been nice to have a single one that meant we could mix and match equipmet. However, I can understand the commercial side, and with no mass market where is the incentive for the manufacturers to get round the table?
|Martyn K||06/02/2017 13:16:35|
4857 forum posts
Having a shared protocol would (I think) actually stifle development and allow costs to rise. We get all the latest bells and whistles primarily because their is competition for the limited market.
Long may it continue. The important things like servos connectors etc are now fairly universal. That is a good thing
|Richard Marklew 1||06/02/2017 13:44:57|
|13 forum posts|
I must disagree. Shared protocols rarely (if ever) stifle development. I work in IT and without common, shared protocols we would not have much of the connected world (like it or not) we have now. It also stops manufacturers locking users into their technology, which stops real competition between the manufacturers. Think what our market would be like if Futaba used the same protocols as JR and Spectrum. They would all have to compete for our cash (by providing more bells and whistles), and we would have the benefit. The IT market (as already mentioned) is a prime example of where common protocols have given manufacturers the impetus to get on with what really matters, and not inventing new ways of locking users into their technology. We can all exchange data (which includes what I am typing) because of this common set of protocols.
It is interesting that you actually contradict your own argument with your example. I remember when every manufacturer pretty well had their own servo connectors. These days they do not so we can choose to use whatever servo we wish without converters or re-wiring. In addition, they all use, or can use, the same signals from the receivers (SBus et al proving my point I believe). Has this reduced the competition in the servo market or increased cost? I do not see that.
Please login to post a reply.
Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!