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

What model next?

All Topics | Latest Posts

Search for:  in Thread Title in  
Pete Stevens11/04/2013 22:25:03
avatar
56 forum posts

Hi All

I'm after some advice, I spend 80% of my flying time gliding and I would say I'm fair to middling with a mixture of EPP, carbon and balsa gliders. The other 20% of time I spend power flying. I have a Black Horse Speed Air which has been my Power "Hack" for 10 years but is beginning to show its age. I'm looking for a replacement. But ideally it needs to meet following criteria:

  • Accommodate the OS 46 from my speed air
  • By easy/quick to build as I’m time poor
  • Act as a hack so be fairly strong
  • Be aerobatic without 3d. Maybe a little more lively than the speed air.

So far I’ve looked at following:

  • Ripmax Bullet – Discounted because other people at my club have had them and they’re not durable enough and covering falls off
  • Ripmax Acrowot – Not sure a 46 will be enough power but really like this one.
  • Hanger 9 Pulse XT 40 – Possibly, expensive is it any good?
  • Seagull Harmon Rocket 46 size – Is this a hack model?
  • Black Horse Twister – Possibly?

Any suggestions of advice?

Concorde Speedbird11/04/2013 22:29:11
avatar
2730 forum posts
649 photos

The Wot 4!

CS

Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator11/04/2013 23:18:56
avatar
Moderator
15748 forum posts
1460 photos

Starting with what you have been looking at:

  • I think you're right, an OS46 wouldn't really do it in an Acrowot if you are looking for good aerobatic performance.
  • I can vouch for the Pulse XT40 being an excellent model. Very well made flies wonderfully - nicely aerobatic without being unstable. Not cheap true, but a very good model.
  • The Harmon Rocket. I've not flown one, but I have heard many good reports. Stephen Grigg I know has one he certainly seems to be having every sucess in using it as a hack. Problem is I don't think the Seagull 46 version its still available from the distrubutor so you'd have to find one in stock in a shop.

Now for a few alternatives:

  • Yes the WOT4 - but to be honest if you want something that will really last I'd recommend the kit one rather than the ARTF - its much tougher! But I don't know if your time will allow for that. Its not a major build, veneered foam wings etc., but it will take more time than an ARTF.
  • Consider the Revolver. Gets a very good write up in the press and a clubmate of mine has just got one and I have to say, it lives up to its reputation. Another nicely built aerobatically able model that is straight forward to fly. The only problem is again it might not be too lively on a 46.

BEB

Pete Stevens11/04/2013 23:33:20
avatar
56 forum posts

WOT 4 - ARTF or kit? ? Revolver looks good. Thanks gents I'll consider both but any other forumites got suggestions?

Allan Bowker12/04/2013 10:00:10
avatar
1627 forum posts
227 photos

I love my Hanger 9 Pulse XT 60, the 40 is equally nice.

Simon B12/04/2013 10:13:54
avatar
1936 forum posts
284 photos

Another vote here for the Pulse 40...

Mark Harrison 57912/04/2013 10:19:52
36 forum posts

My Kyosho Calmato flies well with a 46. So far it's holding up well to less than perfect landings, inc one in a hedge. Really good kit and a doddle to put together.

NigelH12/04/2013 10:50:37
891 forum posts
1 photos
Post Deleted

 

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 12/04/2013 18:58:22

NigelH12/04/2013 10:51:20
891 forum posts
1 photos
Post deleted

 

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 12/04/2013 18:57:11

GrahamC12/04/2013 11:01:59
avatar
1240 forum posts
196 photos

If the OS is an AX, the WOT 4. Mine is an ARTF with an Irvine 46 and has hours and hours on it. The covering is a little tatty but not bad enough to sort yet!

Concorde Speedbird12/04/2013 11:29:45
avatar
2730 forum posts
649 photos
Posted by ConcordeSpeedbird on 12/04/2013 11:29:01:
Posted by Pete Stevens on 11/04/2013 23:33:20:

WOT 4 - ARTF or kit?

The ARTF's are good, but the kit will mean you end up with a tougher aeroplane. Also, the kit has two versions, the Mark 3 which has a tapered wing or the Classic which has a parallel chord wing similar to the ARTF (and the ARTF is a Mark 2, which is a little different to both). Confusing (!), but they are all very good fliers. I personally prefer the Classic and Mark 2 with the parallel chord wing.

If you want one that will go through anything, Dad's kit one lasted over 20 years and it went through a fence, several 'hard landings' and a lot of air time. If you want one to quickly get in the air, then the ARTF may be advisable. Then again, our ARTF one (the blue E one but with a Saito) hit a tree and still landed with no damage!

You mentioned the BH Twister, which is basically an ARTF Precedent/SLEC Funfly. They are good aeroplanes, fly well (I have a SLEC kit built one). But again, the SLEC kit is probably stronger than the ARTF.

CS

 

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 12/04/2013 18:57:54

Reno Racer12/04/2013 11:46:13
avatar
1138 forum posts
168 photos

I agree WOT4 is not always the answer.

I've built a Kit Mk3 and now own the ARTF Mk2. The ARTF is certainly as well built as my kit, less the balsa rather than foam veneered wings. I've also got a Pulse XT40 and GP Revolver (albeit the 60 size).The  Pulse and Revolver can fly the pants off the WOT4.

I love my WOT4 as a fun fly machine (on a Evo 52 2 stroke and Genesis Pipe), but the WOT4 is an ageing design that is not as well aerobatically balaned as the low wing Pulse or Revolver. You need to fly all these types to get an holistic opinion of what is better, of course alot is also personal preference and flying style.

My Pulse XT 40 flys on an ASP 61 FS which has plenty of power for aerobatics, so your 46 2 stroke will be OK; the Pulse is quite light.

Pulse Xt40 lifting off

Now I grant you the Pulse is almost half as much again as the WOT4, but IMHO the differene is worth it.

Edited By Reno Racer on 12/04/2013 11:48:12

NigelH12/04/2013 11:50:35
891 forum posts
1 photos
Post deleted

 

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 12/04/2013 18:59:02

Old Geezer12/04/2013 12:18:51
670 forum posts

Another vote for an artf WOT4 - excellent hack as it comes out of the box whatever you power it with - the only mod' is to reinforce the floor where the u/c is attached, a little g/f cloth and some thinned epoxy gives a lot more strength for very little weight

Concorde Speedbird12/04/2013 12:35:44
avatar
2730 forum posts
649 photos
Posted by Gurth Scriven 2 on 12/04/2013 12:18:51:

Another vote for an artf WOT4 - excellent hack as it comes out of the box whatever you power it with - the only mod' is to reinforce the floor where the u/c is attached, a little g/f cloth and some thinned epoxy gives a lot more strength for very little weight

Yes I agree with that, the undercarriage on the ARTF is not as substantial as the kit. I have found the opposite to Reno Racer, since I have not found a better sports plane than the Wot 4, hence the reason we have 2 airworthy and an XL on the way! It may not always be the answer, but for this question it certainly is a very good answer.

CS

PS. NigelH, please read it and reply.

Pete Stevens12/04/2013 17:41:55
avatar
56 forum posts

Thanks gents, I thinki'm going for pulse and then get wot for kit for longer term project.

Concorde Speedbird12/04/2013 18:32:07
avatar
2730 forum posts
649 photos

Sounds like a good plan.

CS

Myron Beaumont12/04/2013 18:39:05
avatar
5797 forum posts
51 photos

Do you know ,I bet I'm the only aeromodeller of my age that has never ever seen any mark of Wot 4 "in the flesh" so to speak (or am I?) A while back I drew up the plans for one on brown paper compiled from info sent by some forumites & that's as far as I got.

Myron YO13 isolation dept ?

Braddock, VC12/04/2013 18:55:21
avatar
1645 forum posts
82 photos

Pete, just a thought, if your OS 46 is the LA version coloured blue then it won't provide serious performance in any of those planes.

Assuming that it is the la version have a look at the SC range of two stroke engines; Inwoods have them on offer with a 46 being about £50, the 52 is £55 and the 61 is £55, the cost of the pulse could buy you a wot 4 artf with a 52 which would be breathtaking or, if you really wanted the acrowot, for about £30 more than the pulse kit you could get the artf acrowot plus an SC 61. I bought the 61 and have flown it in several airframes and I was amazed at the performance it's in a kyosho calmato 60 low winger at present which is a league below the acrowot, imho.

Just my 2p.

Pete Stevens12/04/2013 19:01:55
avatar
56 forum posts

No mate it is the ax version so has plenty of poke! I will also make a confession I've never owned a foss power model. But have owned a middle phase and phase6. So I'm excused!

All Topics | Latest Posts

Please login to post a reply.

Magazine Locator

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

Find RCM&E! 

Support Our Partners
Cambridge Gliding Club
electricwingman 2017
CADMA
Sussex Model Centre
Slec
Wings & Wheels 2019
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