By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more
Forum sponsored by:
Forum sponsored by CML

Max Thrust Riot versus Wot4

All Topics | Latest Posts

Search for:  in Thread Title in  
Keith Miles 207/01/2020 19:50:32
394 forum posts
6 photos

I recently bought a Riot as temporary “hack” pending repairs to a Wot4.

Following on from a recent “Riot Upgrade” thread and some debate as to whether or not my view that it does not deliver on promise, that it seems underpowered and over-hyped and, also does not compare well with the Wot4, contrary to claims otherwise, I now offer the following.

I would point out that I have extensively flown the Wot4 ARTF over the years on both Irvine 40 and 46 IC power and not an EP, nor have I tried the Foam-E.

I have looked at the specifications for the Riot, Wot4 Foam-E And Wot4 ARTF EP.

Firstly, the Riot and the Wot4 Foam-E BOTH use 3S, 40A ESC and 2200 lipo set-ups.

The Riot seems to produce a maximum 330 watts giving between 100 and 110 watts per pound for the two quoted weights 1350g (3lbs) and 1480g (3.3lbs).

The Wot4 Foam-E, however, is a smaller and lighter model (7 1/2 inches less span and about 1/2 pound less weight) and calculations would suggest a power delivery of at least 135 watts per pound.

The Wot4 ARTF is about the same size as the Riot but (in EP guise) uses a more powerful 4S, 60A ESC, 4500mah set-up (40 IC equivalent) or 5S (46 equivalent) for a probable (at about 5lb flying weight) power delivery of 650-800 watts or about 130 to 160 watts per pound.

These figures have only further confirmed why, on the first flight, I was instantly disappointed with the Riot especially after having read reviews and the marketing narrative.

It has it’s faults, as all models, and, likewise, its positives but for me, it’s biggest attraction and selling point seems to be its price. In that context, it again seems to prove that you do, indeed, only get what you pay for!

A flight ready Wot4 ARTF would cost twice as much as the RTF Riot, if buying everything, but if you only needed the basic kit could be a cheaper and better choice.

The Riot probably does ,however make a reasonable choice for a first model or for flying in a more confined space than one might have become accustomed to!

So it’s not a bad model, especially for the price, but it comes nowhere near matching at least one 40 powered Wot 4 ARTF nor, I suspect, could it match the lowest powered EP version.

As for the Wot4 Foam-E, again, I sense that it, too, would prove to be a better overall performer than the Riot, especially on a calm day!

I’m just waiting, now, for the cheque from Ripmax to cover the costs of any law suit from Century!

😊

P.S. I should add, for clarity, and as I have said elsewhere, it doesn’t seem to be Century who have made Wot4 comparisons!

Edited By Keith Miles 2 on 07/01/2020 19:55:24

Keith Miles 208/01/2020 00:07:23
394 forum posts
6 photos

Correction to previous post!

I should have said, of course, that the Riot is “Plug N’ Play” not RTF!

Unless the price went up accordingly, the Riot would be even better value for money!

Tim Flyer08/01/2020 07:32:20
avatar
1295 forum posts
236 photos

I have flown the Riot and Wot 4foam E and would certainly say the Wot 4 foam E is a far more lively plane . The Riot is more of a stable trainer type whereas the Wot4foam E can be thrown around more with its better power to weight ratio. My only real criticism of the Wot 4foam E is poor quality parts giving it a bit of a “budget” feel . The Wot 4 foam e copes Welkom with windy days and I would say a bit better than the riot.

Keith Miles 208/01/2020 10:26:21
394 forum posts
6 photos

Thanks for that, Tim!

It just puzzles me when some personal appraisals of a model would seem to defy the maths especially when directly comparing two very similar, or almost identical airframes!

Bob Cotsford08/01/2020 10:40:35
avatar
8627 forum posts
483 photos

I got taken in by reviews of the Riot XL, I didn't rate the accessory or flying qualities very highly and quickly sold it on. I now have a Wot4 ARTF on 4 cell power and wouldn't swap back. OK it's a little bit more expensive after buying a power train but it flies so much better that I don't think there's any real comparison.

As for my Wot4 foamE, it's probably 50% packaging tape and Gorilla glue after several years of abuse but it still soldiers on and still puts a grin on my face.

Keith Miles 208/01/2020 11:58:42
394 forum posts
6 photos

Thanks, Bob!

Yes, a fellow club member had an XL and quickly sold his on as well. Mind you, he flies mainly EDF so it’s hardly surprising!

😊

Chris Walby08/01/2020 13:06:52
avatar
1275 forum posts
315 photos

Keith, I think you are missing the point completely.

Go back to day one and ask yourself what you would like to see in your first trainer.

Stable, slow, robust, forgiving and low cost

People seem to read into a name far too much, one of the US reviews absolutely slated the RIOT for its lack of aerobatic performance and ability to do unlimited verticals.

If it serves the need of the complete beginner and then provides a bit of fun beyond that then its totally achieved its goal. By all means modify it if you wish, but it will always be a RIOT (high wing slab sided trainer). By all means keep it as a winter hack or try out different TX settings, but once its got you through your A then its job is done. Time to buy a model that will challenge you further and unlimited verticals if you want.

PS Although capable and within the weight limit, in my opinion its not appropriate for the B test.

Keith Miles 208/01/2020 14:06:03
394 forum posts
6 photos

Chris,

I have not missed the point at all and, indeed, have repeatedly pointed out that the Riot, in my opinion, fits more into trainer category and I meant that quite literally. It was not an insult.

The Riot, you will note, is most certainly not marketed as “stable and slow” and that is precisely my point, one that you have missed, with the greatest respect.

I read the marketing description (and eventually the instruction manual) and took in the Wot4 comparison and mistakenly bought it on that basis.

Presumably you are saying that a Riot is a better trainer than a Wot4?

Exactly!

That is why I say that there is no equitable comparison, in reality, between the two, a comparison that some have made and  which I strongly challenge.

I have, in fact, also specifically recommended the Riot as an option for a beginner!

I am not a beginner and, at the time, I didn't think that I was buying a "slow and stable" trainer!

Your comment about the "B" test, strangely, seems to support the very argument that I am making!

Edited By Keith Miles 2 on 08/01/2020 14:34:16

Kim Taylor08/01/2020 14:29:44
317 forum posts
55 photos

Keith,

You've obviously got the bit between your teeth on this one, and that is fine.

But you're trying to compare a 3lb ish 330w foamy with a 5lb ish 750w wooden ARTF and not surprisingly, in your opinion, it's coming up short.

If we assume that the wing area is roughly the same on each (cba to look, but it can't be far out) then the wing loading alone will tell you the story. The Riot will fly slower 'cos gravity isn't assisting it as much.

A fairer comparison would be with the WOT4 Foam E, but I can't shed any light on that, as I haven't flown one of those, whereas I have flown both the Riot and WOT4 woody and as you have found out, they're completely different, no meaningful comparison can be made, in my view.

Btw, I think that you'd find, should you ever decide to build one, that a 'lectric WOT4 ARTF would weigh somewhere around or above 5 1/2 lbs, I know that mine, with a 3000mah 6S lipo fitted, was just over 6lb.

Kim

Keith Miles 208/01/2020 14:36:26
394 forum posts
6 photos

KIm,

Sorry to correct you.

Others have made the comparison and I am merely responding to it!

Your arguments are exactly the same as mine!

On the Wot4-E, see TimFlyer's response in an earlier thread.

But, as you suggest, considering the physical size difference, is that really a better comparison than comparing two models of similar size and design?

I admit that the quoted Wot4 weight of around 5lb was an estimate based on my own IC version but also info picked up elsewhere and with the Ripmax recommended set-up.

Flight experience cannot be argued, though, in terms of power available!

smiley

 

Edited By Keith Miles 2 on 08/01/2020 14:51:11

Kim Taylor08/01/2020 14:51:03
317 forum posts
55 photos
Posted by Keith Miles 2 on 08/01/2020 14:36:26:

KIm,

Sorry to correct you.

Others have made the comparison and I am responding to it!

Your arguments are exactly the same as mine!

smiley

But by who Keith - I can't say I've ever seen that comparison made on here anyway. It just can't stand scrutiny.

I know that you feel that you've been misled in some way by advertising, or 'hype' but at the end of the day, all you're seeing is the difference between a traditional model and a foamy. Apples and Oranges

Nothing to add, but I'll end with a smiley

KIm

Keith Miles 208/01/2020 15:09:49
394 forum posts
6 photos

Kim,

Oh, dear, you've done it now!

For starters, there is just such a review on this very website!

No clues, sorry.

I'm off to the bunker!

smiley

Keith Miles 208/01/2020 15:42:56
394 forum posts
6 photos

Somewhat off topic but a general point, no doubt made before!

I do not aim this comment at anyone in particular.

It seems to be in the nature of threads (unless you happen to be the instigator with the greatest interest in following one!) that people often comment, make criticism or false claims having clearly not read posts that preceded their own, even recent ones.

Perhaps, therefore, it would be helpful, especially when certain specific comments are made to an individual that the individual's preceding posts, at least, be read first before commenting.

It doesn't necessarily annoy or anger me but it can certainly be pretty frustrating.

And, yes, I do check back, as required, albeit within reasonable limits.

And, if I do slip up, I'm always quick to offer an apology.

Sincere best regards to all!

Stephen Smith 1409/01/2020 21:54:54
226 forum posts

Riot is just the wrong name for it reminds me of the Hooligan which was exactly as its name, should have been called the sedate or the leisurely the unhurried anything but Riot because it isn't.

Almost false advertising the name and advertising give the wrong impression. Straight from Century UKs websit. “Increase those throws and the Riot more than lives up to its name thrilling the most ambitious aerobatic pilot" don't think so

Keith Miles 219/01/2020 18:15:51
394 forum posts
6 photos

Just been doing some more testing, including a “head to head” with another similarly configured 3S Riot V2.

Firstly, there was no difference between the two in speed/power terms. One has the supplied 12x6, mine has APC.

Also, Just re-read the review which quotes 300watts/ 27A, on the supplied prop as “not far shy of 100w/lb”. Article also quotes weight as 3lbs 7oz (3.43). I make that about 87.5 w/lb. A BIG difference!

Unlike the review figure of 30A (for 330w) on an APC 12x6, I only get 27A on the same prop. My model weighs slightly more at 3lb 8oz, so similar power/weight of 87w/lb and well short of the 100!

Manual quoted weight for mine is 1480g (3.25lbs). So, at 300w, that’s still only 92w/lb.

At 330w (if you can achieve it!), I get figures between 96 and 101 watts per pound, based on the aforementioned weights.

It’s even clearer to me now why many owners have converted to 4S to get it to better match its description!

And that is my main criticism of it and certainly not its price!

I have suggested to Century a 4S Riot V3 i.e. no modifying required.

I would simply say, judging by the response that I received, don’t hold your breath!

Maybe they are happy with sales and happy to have a model which seems to me, in its current form, to sit in a category of its own?

If so, I can’t argue with that.

Keith Miles 207/06/2020 14:20:39
394 forum posts
6 photos

Just read a post in the Riot “Upgrades” thread from Shaun Walsh who is having problems getting his Riot to spin. So am I. It just won’t spin!

Never had any such problem with any of my Wot4s, ARTF or kit, nor did I have to make any additional adjustments to achieve it.

Despite adjusting to maximum rudder throw available, and application of in-spin aileron at the stall, it just drops into a spiral dive.

Like Shaun, I’m about to see if it needs a more rearward CG. Failing that.....?

Keith Miles 207/06/2020 14:37:47
394 forum posts
6 photos
Posted by Stephen Smith 14 on 09/01/2020 21:54:54:

Riot is just the wrong name for it reminds me of the Hooligan which was exactly as its name, should have been called the sedate or the leisurely the unhurried anything but Riot because it isn't.

Almost false advertising the name and advertising give the wrong impression. Straight from Century UKs websit. “Increase those throws and the Riot more than lives up to its name thrilling the most ambitious aerobatic pilot" don't think so.

Seems that the marketing hype has since been edited and is now a less “ambitious” description of the model!

To give it credit, it has taught me to confidently fly inverted left hand circuits. I’m currently just about okay with 90deg right hand ones and the occasional 180s! We’re getting there....! smiley

Peter Christy07/06/2020 14:44:06
1829 forum posts

I currently have a WOT-4 i/c, powered by an Irvine 46, which is a good sport model. However, I found the Foami-E version very disappointing.

I managed to write off a fuselage on the first flight, due to the instructions giving the wrong CofG position! With the CofG as per instructions, it was constantly trying to dive into the deck, and needed a LOT of up elevator to keep it airborne. In desperately reaching for the trim, I managed to switch the Tx off! Exit fuselage no.1!

The replacement fuselage came with a note explaining that the CofG should be (whatever it was), not what the instructions said!

Once that was sorted, it flew OKay-ish, but was never nice. On the plus side, it was quiet and had a very short take-off run. Perfect for less-than-ideal strips! On the downside, it was seriously unstable in pitch! A gentle climb would quickly increase until action was taken to stop it, as would a gentle dive. The elevator required constant correction to maintain level flight. I put it down to the ridiculously floppy tailplane, which must have been blowing all over the place in the slipstream!

I bought it as a test hack for suspect radio gear. Alas the radio compartment was only big enough for small receivers, so not even fit for that purpose, really.

I suppose it was OK for "stick banging", but that's not my style. I finally wrote it off a few weeks ago when I got momentarily blinded by the sun behind a large, bright cloud! I wasn't sorry to see it go, and most of the electronic bits will live on in other models...

--

Pete

brokenenglish07/06/2020 15:15:59
avatar
580 forum posts
30 photos

OK - Enough.

Please stop this ridiculous Riot knocking. The early posts in this thread were pitiful with irrelevant and subjective "reasoning", to an extent that I considered it wasn't worth answering.

At the time, I had simultaneously assembled (and subsequently flown) a Riot and a Wot 4 foamie. IMO, the Riot is very superior in every area, with the exception of the wheel axles(!). Just extract both planes from their boxes simultaneously, and compare them, part by part. The Wot 4 is extremely flimsy in relation to the Riot, particularly the tail surfaces and the area around the motor mount. The front end of the Wot 4 is very weak indeed and any "one pointer", even in soft grassy ground, will cost you the model.

A couple of other points:
Your initial comparison was with an IC Wot 4 artf which, as you say, is a very nice plane BUT, I don't believe that you can have flown it for any length of time without replacing the ridiculous skinny elevator clevis, a very flimsy piece of plastic operated by a huge broomstick pushrod. You would have hammered the Riot for such a defect...

Secondly, you weren't comparing the "Riot" with anything. You were comparing an excellent electric foamie with an equally excellent IC powered built-up model, and the differences between these two types of plane were considered to be defects in the Riot...
You also criticised the Riot on the basis of your own "principles" of power loading, etc. which are clearly either wrong or being misapplied. My own Riot, and others, fly superbly as supplied, with the standard power train and prop.

Now consider the Wot 4 foamie. It's obviously an excellent design, but the kit design is very poor.
Starting with a new plane, on a smooth tarmac runway, after a dozen or so excellent landings, the u/c mount will be loose and flying will stop until you've epoxied it back in place.
Any less than excellent landing, or an excellent landing on a less than perfect surface, will wipe the u/c off.
Imagine your ranting if that happened with a Riot.
Next, I lost a Wot 4 foamie as a direct result of Ripmax non-quality. I went to great pains to get the CG exactly right. The quoted CG was severely wrong and, at the time, I didn't have enough experience to prevent a crash.
After I'd splatted my model beyond repair, Ripmax acknowledged the CG error.

One last point, I now have experience with a lot of Wot 4 foamies, because I've had to replace the plane at least 6 or 8 times over the last 8 years. But I only have experience with one Riot, because the first one is still flying, and has never needed any repair whatsoever, after a year of intensive "hack" flying. I really am totally satisfied with it (except for the wheel axles, but I had plenty spare from the crashed Wot 4s!).

So please, give us a rest from your Riot knocking harping...

Edited By brokenenglish on 07/06/2020 15:20:09

Edited By brokenenglish on 07/06/2020 15:22:40

Keith Miles 207/06/2020 15:25:34
394 forum posts
6 photos
Posted by Peter Christy on 07/06/2020 14:44:06:

I currently have a WOT-4 i/c, powered by an Irvine 46, which is a good sport model. However, I found the Foami-E version very disappointing.

I hope you didn’t think that I am championing all Wot4s. Certainly not. I bought the 26 inch ply/balsa Mini and it flies like a brick compared to the definitive version, especially if you chop the power for landing! Scaling a proven model doesn’t guarantee similar performance!

As for the Foam-E, I’ve never flown one and never fancied one, indeed I’m no particular fan of “foamies” and only bought the Riot as a “hack” to save money and build time and to keep myself flying pending Wot4 repairs. In fact, I recently decided that I’ve had enough Wot4s and need to move on! I just feel more comfortable, at present, flying high-wingers for “pushing my personal envelope” especially spins!

I only mentioned the Wot4 Foam-e in terms of comparing both it and the ARTF version with the Riot.

I’m aiming for my “B” certificate so if I can’t get the Riot to spin, I might have to just grit my teeth and try it with one of my low wingers or my WotsWot biplane or the Seagull Extra that I bought some months ago that currently still resides in it’s box!

smiley

All Topics | Latest Posts

Please login to post a reply.

Support Our Partners
Slec
Sussex Model Centre
electricwingman 2017
CML
Advertise With Us
Sarik
Latest "For Sale" Ads
Has home isolation prompted you to start trad' building?
Q: The effects of Coronavirus

 Yes - for the first time
 Yes - but Ive bashed balsa before
 No - Ive existing projects on the bench
 No - Im strictly an ARTF person

Latest Reviews
Digital Back Issues

RCM&E Digital Back Issues

Contact us

Contact us

Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!

Find RCM&E!