Pashka_22

Well, my honey approved me to get 50cc plane.
Have been researching for a long time - 6month or so. Narrowed down to the following aircrafts:
- TOC Yak 30%
- Ultra-RC 50cc
- QQ 85”
Bottom of the list:
- QQ 86” – reason: not available now
- EF 88” – reason: a little too heavy and not available now
- BME %30 Yak – reason: one of my friends did not have a good success with customer service and recommended TOC Yak.

I am really leaning towards TOC Yak, but I think UltraRC has better design which is I think improved clone of older EF Yak. But my main concern with UltraRC is customer service such as availability of support personnel at UltraRC and parts for the plane.
Also current TOC plane market price is about $200 cheaper – pretty good plus consider they are equally good performers compare to my other choices.

So, what are your recommendations would be?

marzo91

My Feedback: (57)

Don't forget about Wild Hare planes. They're over $100 cheaper than most and they are awesome planes.

Dav0012

The QQ yak is really only just over a month before it comes out in the 86" isnt it? (late feb i think) so why not just wait for his new and improved 50cc plane?, and from what ive read QQ has great customer service.

Pashka_22

Wild Hare would be on top of my list if I would go 33% - that is for sure. But their 50cc planes are on a heavy side from what I hear. Their new 50cc planes have smaller wing area that usual 50cc plane has. So they are just smaller 50cc planes.

QQ86" would be definitely on top, but it is not available. And knowing (reading) how RC planes business done - it could be delayed well into the end of spring. What I learned if you ready to buy something go with what it available now.

wryman

My Feedback: (9)

go with the toc yak or whatever they are called now, we have a few in my club and all the owners are very happy and they fly amazing

Josey Wales

My Feedback: (61)

Although I disagree about the EF Yak..definitely the Ultra RC out of that list followed by QQ's

Pashka_22

Josey,

Very interesting, I thought Ultra RC is a EF clone, the older model - why should it be out? I fyou like EF Yak you should like UltraRC Yak.
And why followed by QQ Yak - never heard anything bad about it.

shakes268

The QQ is on the boat from what I understand. They have a list so if you are going to order one please call them and let them know otherwise you might not get a plane. I think they will be here next month. My suggestion would be to call them and find out when they expect the shipment. It's not a matter of being pushed back any more - its on its way.

Yea, I'm biased toward QQ, I have 3 of their planes and I have 2 friends who own one each as well. We love our QQ Yaks.

I think what Josey was saying is that if he had to choose one of the list, it would be the Ultra-RC but he disagrees that the new EF Yak is too heavy. I won't go into comparisons - or say which one I would chose over another - just wanted to give you my opinion/experience on the QQ Yaks... LOVE my yaks and the service with Wayne, Quique, Reza and Molly is better than anyone I've dealt with before except maybe DA - but its definitely on par with DA from my viewpoint.

rctom

This is not correct. You hear wrong.

The newer Wild Hare 50cc planes are some of the lightest available. The Extra 300 is easily 16 lbs. with a DA-50, less if you use some CF parts and are careful.

The wing area of the Extra 300 is 1360 sq. in., the new Edge 540T V2 is 1390 sq. inches. Also a 16 lb. plane.

And FYI it is possible to have too much wing area, otherwise we'd all just make the wings huge.

The grapevine is a notoriously unreliable source of information.


TF

Bass1

I just aquired a nice/used/almost new Brison 3.2 and I am seriously considering the new Wildhare Edge. Nice specs. and ya' can't beat the price. I also think their 80" Yak would be a perfect replacement for my 80" Miles Reed Extra 260( ZDZ 40) should I plant it.

Rockyaged

Pashka...

You did not mention what type of flying you intend to do, which has something to do
with choices. IMAC, 3D or just fun fly. We have no idea of your experience level.
You need to understand that all 50CC models are not the same size. They range from
25% to 30% of scale. Notice that wing spans differ in size as well.. from 80 inches to
88 inches.. bigger wing, more lift.. Wing loading is a key factor, but is not an absolute
of how well a model will fly. The two lightest 50cc planes I know of are Wildhare's Yak 54
and Airwild's Extra 260. Both claim 14 pounds plus if built light. Which means some
carbon fiber or fiberglass after market parts may be purchased and substituted to save
weight. Compare the prices versus what is offered. Some higher priced models have
Carbon or fiberglass parts, which costs more to provide. The choices you make in battery
selection can save or add weight, depending on types selected.
Customer service and support is a very important matter. If you do alot of reading in the
giant scale forums, you'll learn who to listen to. And who not to listen to. If someone states
a negative happening, but gives no details, I'd not give it much consideration.
If you have time, visit a flying site that has alot of giant scale activity. Watch and ask all
the questions there and see the answers for yourself. Much better than basing a decision on
what you only heard.

Gerald

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

I've got one of the new W/H Edges on the way to my house now, and I'm certain that I'll have no regrets about the selection. I prefer 3D types of flying so the choice was pretty easy. I want a plane that's loose, light, well constructed, and good covering that's easy to match up if and when I do something dumb.

Something else that should be noted is that wing area and weight alone does not make any given plane a performer. There's a very definate relationship between weight, wing area, wing location in both the vertical and horizontal planes, percentages of maneuvering surfaces, fuselage rigidity, empannage percentages, and selected engine weights and power levels. To simply make a decision based upon weight and wing area can, and often does, bring an owner up pretty short. As previously noted, distributor customer service, price, reliability of the airframe, supply, and other factors should also be comtemplated.

I made my selection based upon all the above, along with a lot of previous experience with W/H planes. They always fly extremely well, usually better than the ability of the owner, and are sturdy enough to last for a long period of time.

Josey Wales

My Feedback: (61)

I was actually referring to the new 88" EF EF Yak..you mentioned that you thought it was too heavy..thats what I was talking about..I have the original EF Yak and thats why I suggested the Ultra RC because its same thing basically and mine flies awesome..

Flyin Hawaiian

You cannot go wrong with either Extreme Flight or QuiQue's Yaks. These planes are lightly loaded and WILL make any average pilot into a better show pilot. (I have owned both 50 cc and QQ 100cc) I know both of these planes are not availalbe, but WILL be worth the wait. TOC planes I would not even consider. I have seen a few of these planes, and they fly okay, but quality is not up to par compared to EF and QQ. Ultra RC is a good choice, haven't heard anything bad about them, and all of Ultra RC stuff flies great.

Just my 2 cents.

bodywerks

My Feedback: (4)

It's funny that you say the new EF 88" Yak is too heavy when no-one has even built one yet...
Anything under 17 pounds will perform well with a good 50cc engine like the DA. Obviously you want to consider everything that Silversurfer mentioned, but the actual design of most offerings are pretty good. Two that I do not like in regards to those criteria are the old W/H 300LX because the nose is too long, tail moment is too short, and the wings are too fat and I know two guys that had problems with them snapping out a lot. The other one is the Airwild Extra 260, IMO, because the nose on it is too long, tail moment is too short, and the wingspan looks out of proportion. Just because it is light and has a lot of wing area doesn't make it the best out there.
It is also interesting that you think the new EF Yak is too heavy when your favorable option is the TOC Yak - it's a 17 pound plane, too. Nothing against it at all, just pointing out that it is equally as heavy as the projected weight of the new EF Yak, and according to preliminary specs, 17 pounds for the EF is with a full-length tuned pipe! That adds a full pound to the plane...

Anyway, my first choice of the planes you listed would be the Ultra RC Yak. It is an exact reproduction of the old EF Yak and mine came in at 15 pounds, even. However, unless Ultra RC changes the wings, it is actually an 85" wingspan and only about 1380 squares - still puts it among the lightest-loaded planes available.
Others to consider that are currently available are the NEW W/H Extra 300 - no lie about the 16 pound achievability and looks friggen sweet! The other would be the Aeroworks 50cc Extra 260 - the highest-quality you will find, barr-none. The most complete, most useable hardware out there and it is ALL included, and it is the MOST finished plane you will find! The only place you will need glue, essentially, is on the rudder hinges.
I like the QQ design and if it was available I would say go for it, but it isn't, and you want something now...

BaldEagel

The QQ 86" Yak is a development from the 85" this tells you that it has been improved, too many mods to list here, QQ are not content to sit back on the plaudits of there products and improve the bread, the 86" should build into an under 15lb plane and thats a conservitive estimate, I have the 85" version and if that is anything to go by the 86" will be worth the wait.

Mike

BTerry

My Feedback: (8)

Why would this one build to under 15#, and why is that a "conservative estimate"? Somenzini.com reports an expected weight of 15.5# - 17#. I assume the 15.5# weight is with light batteries and a light side-dump muffler on a light engine, while the 17# is on a canister.

Maybe if you fill the wings with helium you could get it under 15#.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

Unless someone has come up with a means of developing a wood and covering built up plane that can match the strength of composites I can see where real soon someone will be making one so light it will fold up in the first wall. A 50cc plane coming in under 15 pounds all up, less fuel, is a bit unrealistic unless it's composite. If it is composite, then plan on paying a heck of a lot more than about 400 bucks for it. In 35% stuff, the difference in price between wood and composite is about double. With a wood kit, unless all the C/F stuff is already included, of course at a higher price, then you will be out another couple of hundred to drop another 8 to 12 ounces. How much is a few ounces worth anyway? Better still, how many are actually good enough to realize even 50% of the benefit of such a small weight reduction?

rmh

The BLING I just built - stock construction is 14 lbs even with a 50 -
the model is NOT a fly at full throttle type -it is a showplane -meaning it is for flips n flops and ring a ding crap -
It is very substantial for that kind of flying
I have done a number of wood n foam 1300 sq in models at 11-12 lbs which will withstand full speed flying . The composite stuf we have flown is stiffer but if they ever go resonant -they will and do and DID loose surfaces .

BaldEagel

The reasoning behind my statement is that they base the weight on using a DA engine there are lighter engines out there and weight savings by not going overboard on double batteries and match boxes and switch harnesses et all, with a basic set up and light engine IMO you could get this down to a low 15Lb plane. One of the guys on the QQ forum got the 85" down to under 15Lb so the lighter 86" should be able to achive this with ease.

Mike

Barry Cazier

My Feedback: (17)

One thing we do know for sure. AirWild has made the lightest true 50CC plane to date. And I can verify that it is tough and does fly very nice. I believe it is the best available at present. Mine weighs 2ozs UNDER 15lbs with a postal scale. And this is after adding a Slimline pitts muffler which adds 4.5 ozs over the stock DA. I'm using standard NiMH 1500mA batteries and SmartFly optical cut off switch. Nothing was done to make it lighter. This is also with aluminum landing gear and aluminum wing and stab tubes. There have been no reports of this plane "folding up" under stress. I've flown mine pretty hard a few times and it's done nothing funny at all. I've even had some wide open level passes with no problems. I can't find much fault with the plane.

Clearly, 15lbs is the new stardard by which all others will be measured.

I just purchased a QQ 86". I expect it to be about 16lbs. That's what QQ's is with canister and DA50.

For us high altitude people weight is one of the MAJOR considerations. And with a 50CC engine about 17lbs seems to be the logical limit.

However, I'm pretty impressed with my DA50. I'm getting 24lbs 4ozs thrust on a cool day (50 F) with my super accurate trustly fish scale. And that's just tieing a strap on it and hitting the throttle on a grass field. I expect if I did it on a paved runway it would develop a little more thrust. That's with a NX 22x8 prop. I think I was about 6800 RPM. Also the engine only has 1.5 gallons through it. And I'm still running the Lawnboy oil. Perhaps with a change in oil and a little more time I could get 25lbs thrust. Using a 1.5 to 1 ratio which I feel would be still favorable based on other planes I fly which have that ratio, you could have a sweet flying plane at about 16.5 lbs. To me, at my elevation, I wouldn't look at any plane heavier than 16.5lbs.

Thanks
Barry

DrDeath

My Feedback: (3)

If you are looking for a very good 50cc plane with little work to do but drop in servos and your engine, then the Aeroworks Extra 260 QB is something you should look into. The plane comes with everything you need except the engine and electronics. Tanks, servo horns, zip ties, foam, wire, pre hinged and glued aileron and elevators, and so much more crap that I can't even name. The plane can be built in about 6 - 9 hours. Nothing to it. I just finished mine and I am waiting for a nice day to take it out and maiden it. Something to look into as I went through a long process of reviewing the dozen or so 50cc class birds on the market today a couple of months ago. Just my personal opinion, but dollar for dollar this is one of the best deals out there.

DD

eastern

One no body has mentioned is the Extra from composite arf, a friend of mine has one with a DA50 in and its awesome. I have a wild Hare Extra 300 and although it is a bit heavy, mine flies with a Moki 210 and a smoke system, it would be a lot better with a 50cc petrol. If you need any convincing about the wild hare go to their web site and watch the video, it does fly just like they say and with a good head wind you can drop it down in front of you by just keeping a small amount of power on.

IFlyEm35

My Feedback: (5)

The nicest 50CC plane I have flown is the AW Yak QB. VERY nice plane!