Seagull Turbo Raven

Brand: Seagull Models

Overall:
3
Ease of assembly:
4
Build quality:
4
Flight performance:
2
Value for money:
3

READER REVIEWS
Ian Offer  |  Jul 21, 2014

Strengths:
Looks very nice, and went together easily. . . .
Weaknesses:
1). Manufacturers recommended CG appears to be wrong, but didnh't get a chance to figure it out. 2). More serious is the wing stall with very little elevator.
Overall:
This model was built with an OS 60 2 cycle engine. It is difficult to tell if the disasterous flight performance of this model was caused by manufacturers recommended CG being in the wrong place, inadequate engine power, or some other problem, but like other reviewers, I found it very disappointing. A great shame. I was looking forward to flying this beautiful looking model.

Overall:
3
Ease of assembly:
4
Build quality:
4
Flight performance:
1
Value for money:
3
Paul Marsh  |  Jul 25, 2011

Strengths:
Great looks, great flyer and breaks down quite well. . . .
Weaknesses:
Wing fearing tricky to install, and not flush fit. . . .
Overall:
Mine flew straight and true, and was doing rolling circuits on it's first circuit!!!. . . .

Overall:
5
Ease of assembly:
5
Build quality:
5
Flight performance:
5
Value for money:
5
Lee Smalley  |  Jun 07, 2011

Strengths:
looks!!!!. . . .
Weaknesses:
c og g too far back for most. . . .
Overall:
ok some reports of poor c of g setting, mine come out nose heavy so i had no problems, she flies fantastically arrow like !!!. . . .

Overall:
4
Ease of assembly:
5
Build quality:
5
Flight performance:
4
Value for money:
5
Teut Wiehn  |  Jun 02, 2011

Strengths:
Looks Great, Esy to build,. . . .
Weaknesses:
Recommended C Of G is incorrect on the instructions. Way too far back, I set mine to 135 mm from leading edge and that worked. . .
Overall:
I managed to fly twice before crashing on landing approach. . gutted. .

Overall:
2
Ease of assembly:
4
Build quality:
3
Flight performance:
1
Value for money:
2
aerts michel  |  May 30, 2011

Strengths:
- look - quick built. . . .
Weaknesses:
- bad instructions : CG, auw and electric setup. . . .
Overall:
Crashed on first flight, I think CG in instructions is way too much back resulting in an uncontralable plane. Weight is a lot higher than on notice (3,5 kilos before crash and 3,8 kgrs after repairs). Electric setup recommanded with 4 s is really underpowered. 6s is the way to go if you fly electric.

Overall:
2
Ease of assembly:
5
Build quality:
3
Flight performance:
0
Value for money:
3
X
Login using Modelflying Login