Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

I can't disagre with your anaylsis, because it's correct. But... the thred was started around a 50cc engine basis. Given more latitude in engine choices, a Moki 2.10 would be a far better choice for any of the planes originally noted in the thread.

Something else that most of us, including myself, are missing, is that we should be adding input for OUR top 5 selections for a 50cc aircraft, and not grading those originally noted.

So here are a few of my choices.

1) Wild Hare Ultimate, a 3D animal

2) CH Double Vision, another extreme 3D plane, but costs too much

3) Wild Hare 28% Edge, lots of wing area to carry a little extra weight, low cost, performs well

4) BME Edge, right along side the Wild Hare, but costs a bit more

5) Aeroworks Katana

fasterthanlife

My Feedback: (2)

silver, I have a W/H so I'm denenitly not trashing it, but personally I think the BME Edge is better, it's lgihter and has less wing rock, and is more stable.

but of course, once again, this is just my OPINION

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

If I was to place a value on the order of the planes I listed, the order of performance levels would give the priority to the BME over the W/H. If that same order was given to price OR durability, it would be given to the W/H over the BME. Essentially the order would be determined by whatever criteria was being used for determining factors by the end purchaser. Not everyone uses the same criteria for making a decision. That criteria could be size, price, maneuverability, durability, weight, or any combination of those listed, and others that are not.

Taking my selections a step further, the DV is, IMO, a better plane than the W/H Ultimate, BUT... by how much? And how much is that difference actually worth??? IMO, not by enough to justify the differences in assembly difficulty, durability, and price, so Wild Hare wins easily in this case.

I think you can see where I'm going with this. All the choices most people make are subjective, and have numerous factors involved in the decision making process.

Is any one better than the other? One could truthfully state that the answer to that will be different for everyone.

BTW, no offense taken. One should not be offended by opinions, or truth[8D]

Pat

Flyfalcons

Good lord, any of these planes will fly well if you take the time to set them up right and teach your thumbs how to fly them. A good pilot will take one of those overweight, too-small aircraft and fly circles around someone who has the latest and greatest but hacked it together and hasn't done any trimming since the first flight. Sure, a couple planes mentioned like the Ultra 202 don't really fit in with the rest but anything built straight with around an 80" span should fly well.

fasterthanlife

My Feedback: (2)

Silver, while were on the subject. I'm in love with the sheeted wings / stab on my WildHare.

When you say duarbility, do you mean taking a hard hit, or just breaking aprt over time.

If I crash a plane and it breaks apart I can handle that...... but if I never *bump* it, and it falls apartr because of poor construction over time thats another thing.

Do you think a built up plane will hold up over time? without crashes?

What performace 50cc planes are built up now that I think about it?

-Wild-Hare Edge 540T
-BME Edge VI
-????

Mr.Extra 260

My Feedback: (11)

All right I only own one of the planes I listed and thats the 260. Do you guys think this is a good set up? gf45i for power and it weighs 12 pounds ready to go? Why is the da50 to much for the 260, the whole plane was designed around it and mike uses one in his so it must be good. Also Im just basing the 50cc thing on what I saw the engine listings say.

KEEP THE TOP 5 LISTINGS GOING

bodywerks

My Feedback: (4)

The H9 260 wasn't specifically designed around a 50CC engine. I was designed for a wide range of engines like the OS 160, or Saito 180 and 220. Then, for people that want a gas engine, a 50cc class would work, but it is by no means a 50cc class plane like the QQ Yak, AW Yak, etc., that have around 1300-1475 sq.in. of wing, and a heavy gas engine is by no means the best powerplant for a plane with less than an 80" span and less than 1200 squares, period. Trust me, a 14 pound plane with 1100 squares will be more dificult to fly well than a 15 pound plane with 1400 squares that is larger. It's response to all control inputs will have more lag than the larger, lighter planes, it will stall at higher apparent speeds and will have to fly faster and at higher angles of attack during some of the 3D maneuvers and knife edge.
Also, what is a gf45i engine and what muffler, batteries, other accessories are you using, and what kind of scale are you using?
My guess is your scale is either off, or just over 12 pounds means 12 pounds, 13 ounces, to you...

wgeffon

My Feedback: (4)

Very informative thread...

I didnt realize that any other company other than Extreme Flight makes 50cc planes.

Knowing that, heres my picks.

1- EF 87" Yak.
2- EF 87" Yak.
3- EF 87" Yak.
4- EF 87" Yak.
5- EF 87" Yak.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

Perhaps you're just a little too focused on this issue

bodywerks

My Feedback: (4)

Don't you mean:
1- EF 87" Yak.
2- EF 87" Yak.
3- EF 87" Yak.
4- EF 87" Yak.
5- EF mystery 50cc plane ?

bodywerks

My Feedback: (4)

nearly all of them are built-up, and hardly any, if any of the 50cc class planes even use foam cores. This is actually because it is dificult to keep them straight after they leave the manufacturer, due to drastic temp/humidity changes and the fact that they use pretty darn fresh, wet, balsa...

BasinBum

My Feedback: (2)

Hey Wayne,
I think someone in the EF Yak thread is asking how to set up a pull-pull for the rudder. Again.

bodywerks

My Feedback: (4)

Nevermind, I found it. Sorry, but you need to buy a new scale! That engine is at least a half-pound heavier than the DA and the lightest I have ever heard of the 260 coming in at with a DA was around 13 1/4-13 1/2 pounds, and I think that was no spinner or wheelpants...

Rickles56

The H9 Extra 260 was designed with the DA 50 in mind. It can be flown with other engines. The DA50 weighs 3.3 pounds with standoffs, that's less than my Zen26! Have you ever seen this plane fly with the DA 50 in it? It's a great match, it flies excellent with that engine in it and this is still my #1 choice for a 50cc sized aerobat.

bodywerks

My Feedback: (4)

Yep, and it flew nowhere near as light as my EF Yak, and this one was only 13 3/4 pounds. Like I said, if rolls, loops, and stick-slammin are your thing then strap a DA 50 onto an undersized plane like that one and have a blast, but for me to get the flight performance I would expect out of planes like the H9 260, it'd need to be under 12 pounds and still have plenty of vertical. The only engine that comes to mind would be a YS 160DZ...
BTW, the 260 is a Horizon aircraft, and Saitos are distributed by horizon, and the 220 came out at about the exact same time as the 260. Coincidence? I think not... like I said before, they definitely wanted a 50cc gasser to work in this plane, but not with performance in mind - rather, with an additional customer base in mind. Some people don't like nitro...

wgeffon

My Feedback: (4)

In defense of the H9 260... They are great flying planes. I have flown several with DA-50's and they fly the plane really well but like Bodyworks said, they make the loading a little high. Not bad, just higher than other stuff that the DA-50 is better suited for.

When marketing a product, Horizon cannot gear a new plane towards one specific motor. Its has to appeal to as many people as it can. Some like glo. Some like gas. Some like electric. The plane has to be somewhat in-between classes to make all that work.

Mr.Extra 260

My Feedback: (11)

I have a very nice scale and it works fine. Although once again I do the I got the light one in the batch. Btw doesn the da 50 weigh 3.0 by its self? And im almost sure It ways more than my engine completly dressed out considering my engine ways 3.5 with the big pitts muffler. I also used wooden dowles as standoffs which weigh next to nothing and are strong enough. If you have so much concern about this plane with a da50 why dont you go ask mike he'll help you out. But id also like to ask you were you got you ef yak and for how much because im tempted. PLEASE POST YOUR TOP 5 THATS HOW THIS THREAD STARTED.

BasinBum

My Feedback: (2)

Keep debating with this guy Bodywerks cause he obviously knows what he is talking about.

Mr.Extra 260

My Feedback: (11)

Whats that supposed to mean? I know where to buy a ef yak if thats what you mean? I also know that they cost around 650. I was just wondering if there was a better deal. Dont try to make fun of me just anser the dang original post ok.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

Fasterthanlife.

When I referring to durability, I was referring to the ability of the plane to last more than a season or two after numerous rounds of hard flying. With the exception of the composite planes, which have their own aging/stress issues, the super light stick framed planes have a tendency to self destruct over a relatively short period of time. The desire to construct as light as possible doesn't leave much room for stress relief in given areas, and those that are the lightest have proven to twist themselves apart under high stress flight regimes. I can think of a couple that just looking at them make them get shaky.

A little bit of weight in the right places on a built up plane can go a long way to increasing longevity. No, they won't hold up any better in a crash, but they well absorb a little "hanger rash" a lot better than the super lights. The sheeted foam wing is also stiffer than a stick framed unless the stick wing is built heavy with a lot of additional webbing. There will be some that want to argue that point, but I've been building (all types of materials) a lot more years than I've been playing with arfs, so the arguement won't wash. As for balsa quality, unless you select the lumber yourself, or order a Cardin kit, there's no way you will have any control over the quality of the wood used in a plane, so the "wet balsa" thing applies to any of the arfs.

Bottom line is that each type has advantages over the others, and the buyer has to decide which traits he prefers against those he is willing sacrifice. One size just can't fit all, but that's one of the things that makes this hobby so fun.

Pat

fasterthanlife

My Feedback: (2)

Wow Silver. Thats EXACTLY the type of answer i expected. Thanks.

I'm not the kind of guy that can go out and buy a new plane when mine just lets go.... ya know.

But then again I'm not the type of guy to keep a plane around longer than a season

budgetdude

My Feedback: (6)

I have only had 2 50cc planes and they were both H9 Caps. My vote is pretty simple.

1. H9 Cap if you can find one.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

The H-9 Cap was a VERY nice plane. Unfortuantely the production run was much too short.

However, Wild Hare is about to release two different sizes of the 232 which should nicely satisfy the 50 to 80cc market. I don't know how they will be constructed yet, so those questions, if any, should be directed the that company.

Pat

Mr.Extra 260

My Feedback: (11)

I have a dream that someday people will list their top 5 aerobats.

bodywerks

My Feedback: (4)

I know it sounds like it, but I'm not trying to knock the guy down - I'm trying to educate him...well, maybe more like forcing my opinion on him. I know - I am a bit of a smart ***** at times...
Mr. Extra, your engine weighs 3.63 pounds without ignition. the DA weighs 3.13 without the ignition.
Wayne is the best guy to listen to, here, though...he knows what Top of the line is, but also knows that every product has its place. The EF is a customer specific plane for the guy who knows what to look for in a plane and already has a powerplant in mind, while planes like the h9 260 are a "Joe Blow" plane that you can pick up at the local hobby shop on an impulse, based on the fact that it is right there in front of you and you have seen a full-page advertisement in every magazine you pick up.