Eclipse vs Optic?

Oct 15, 2004 2 Replies

Ryan- I bought the Eclipse, Tx only, with synthesizer module. Very satisfied with it, had it about a week before I had the 7-model memory filled up with models formerly flown with other radios. A few weeks ago, I went with one of my student pilots to the LHS to pick out a new radio for him. Comparing the Eclipse and Optic 6 side by side, the Optic 6 won hands down as far as being the best value to suit his needs. The complete system with Rx and servos was about the same price as what I paid for the Tx only, and all the bells and whistles of a modern computer radio are there. Not that I'm disappointed with the Eclipse, as I already had many airborne packs and the systhesizer and selectable modulation shift makes it compatible with nearly all of them. That was of more value to me than having another set of airborne equipment. For him as a newbie, and so not having accumulated a lot of equipment yet, the Optic 6 was clearly a better value. Unless you really need 7 channels, that's the one to go with.

Abel

Hi all,



New to the group, so excuse me if someone has already asked... Can anyone give opinions on a relatively cheap computer radio to buy? I am looking at either the Hitec eclipse or their new Optic 6. Any opinions apprectiated.



Ryan


Both represent very good value for money, especially with the forthcoming synthesised modules on most International Frequencies. refer to =

formatting link
section "Radio Systems, Accessories, Alterations and FAQ" one entry refers to the availability of a comparison chart = Eclipse vs Optic vs FF6 vs 9CAP vs RD600 vs JR652 vs JR3810 (8103) - email Alan for Excel sheet..

The sheet has been read by many and no errors or amendments have been advised to date.

[Note: Any synthesised 40 MHz modules and 40 MHz synthesised RX purchased for use in NZ should be clearly labeled as (re)programmed for use in NZ. 40 MHz aircraft frequencies used in NZ differ by 5 KHz from the International Standard 40 MHz in that NZ aircraft use channels 40.xx0 rather than the International Standard 40.xx5.]

regards Alan T. Alan's Hobby, Model & RC Web Links

formatting link

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required