I thought that Vmar/ Pheonix and Seagull were all in the same catagory w/regard to quality, but now that Hanger 9 is handles the line I'm tempted to try a conversion of their Decathalon at 6-7 lbs it goes
67"WS with 762sq. inches gives a 21.oz wing load. For the money @ $130 It seems like the best bang for my buck against say HL'S larger scale acrobats at $200!. ANy input on this notion before i hit the piggy bank would be great! Mykel-t :)
That presumption is invalid. VMAR are still crap. Seagull and Phoenix aren't any more.
If it's Seagull's Decathlon OE or rebranded H9 you're speaking of, then it is undeniably heavy. Big wing and aerofoil though. It flies "nicely" and will do all the manoeuvres the real one will.
Forget the box art engine capacity recommendations. This bird
*requires* a *powerful* .53 two stroke or .70 four stroke *minimum* if you don't want to restrict it to the flight profile of a Cub. Personally I don't think either of those respective engine sizes are powerful enough to do the model justice, although it will fly scale-like with them. Mine's got a two stroke .61 aboard and I'm content, though if you sought ballistic vertical performance most R/Cers are conditioned to expect, you'd want more.It should be mentioned that Phoenix (same factory and literally 'brother' company to Seagull) are now also doing an ARF Decathlon. They may simply be consolidating with successful selling designs, be consolidating brands or market segmenting them, I don't know which, but Phoenix has recently launched their Tucano 40 (Seagulls PC-9 redecorated) and Decathlon of which I've already spoken. I suspect the Phoenix version might have since lost some of the Seagull variant weight bloat, but can't confirm either way.
You can tell them apart by the colour scheme. The Seagull has an all red fuselage with white trim stripes whilst the Phoenix is covered to represent the more commonly seen Decathlon fuselage trim of a red upper fuselage with black stripes dividing it from a white fuselage lower and underside. Both bear the ubiquitous Decathlon Starburst in contrasting white trim.
VMAR and Seagull have about the same quality and it's not really that bad.You get what you pay for.
You'll get ten thousand responses,mostly negative. Just DON'T LISTEN.
You be the judge.I went thru the same flaming and stuff four years ago when deciding whether to buy a VMAR. Glad I didn't listen to all the negatives.I just decided to be the judge myself and I bought an Edge from VMAR....That was four years ago and the plane is still flying very well. Yeah,it's a bit heavy and you need to reiron the covering but what ARF comes with perfect covering that dont' need some tlc?? Same goes for Seagull....Had the Spacewalker II.....Talkin' bout some bad treatment....Broken in half probably four times,reglued with popcicle sticks and she still flew.
Give it a try YOURSELF and be the judge.It's not an arm and a leg anyway.
Having once owned the Seagull PC9 and now being the proud owner of
Phoenix Tucano .40, the 1st thing that was apparent to me was that th Tucano .40 was a bigger model all round than the old Seagull PC9. If it is a re-release of the Seagull PC9 model, then it has had really major makeover! However I doubt that it is. The finish and quality of the Tucano is also far superior to th Seagull PC-9. Apart from the nose wheel mounting block being held on with sel tapping wood screws (swapped for Dubro blind nuts and bolts), wheel too small for flying off grass (I substituted 2.5 inch wheels) and th tank being factory set up for 3 fuel lines, where I prefered to use via a remote filler, there is not much wrong with the Phoeni Tucano.40. I solved the tank issue by plundering the rubber stopper from a Sullivan tank from the "spares drawer" and some lengths of bras tubing. It is a pity though that Phoenix did not use the current an spectaculer Blue and Green Brazilian Airforce Display Team livery o this model, rather than the old livery that the team once used. As for flying characteristics. The Tucano outperforms the Seagull PC all round. It has a very low wing loading. Adequately powered, (I am using an MVVS .49, but an OS .46 AX, Supe Tigre G.51, TT Pro .46, or for 4 stroke lovers, something in the .7 range, would also be just fine) this bird can do all the F3A patter manouvers with ease. Knife edge is superb, 4 point rolls are crisp. A fine model that is also docile enough to be used as a 1st low winge for a novice flyer
-- Crashem Dav
----------------------------------------------------------------------- Crashem Dave's Profile:
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.