I had the 60 size ModelTech Mustang. Build quality was ok, but not as good
as Kyosho or World Models stuff.
Flight experience needed on the Mustang was "expert". Needed FULL rrudder on
takeoff to stay straight, land it hot because it dropped a wing easily,
refused to steer at all with the tail wheel etc. Typical scale mustang.
Looked brilliant in the air though. Unfortunately met with it's demise
because the Rx crystal packed up in flight. Freak incident.
I would probably buy another one - just to stay sharp. :-)
I have a Magic w OS46 and Pitts muffler. Wing converted to bolt on. Fuel tank
cracked after about a year, so iit was only giving short flights. Fortunatel I
bought it from the fellow that put it together & he epoxied the inside for fuel
proofing. Fine flying plane, I'm sure it can do more than I can make it do.
Let us know what you get & how it goes. Andy
We can make a box of wood.....FLY!!
I've been flying the Magic for about a year now. It's really a fun
airplane. I have flown better 3d aircraft but it does 3D fairly well.
Easy to hover , great slow flying characteristics with no bad habits
that I've found. One thing I don't like is that it's very poor at
knife edge flight , actually , hardly knife edges at all.
Kit quality is as good as some ARF's costing more , and IMO gives
you quite a bang for your buck. It does does have a poor landing gear,
so I put a heavier landing gear on it. I stayed with a wire gear but
just a little heavier. I like to have some flexibility there. Better
to straighten out the gear than repair the bottom of the fuse.
I have an OS .46 FX and it has great vertical. Will hover a little
over 1/2 throttle and pull out with authority.
Hope this helps.
I have heard mostly good commentary on both. I have the Magic Fun-Fly. It
is value for the money. It has a wide flight envelope that will suit many
personalities you may want to give it. The covering is heat shrinkable. The
manual is helpful though some printings have had a couple confusing
passages. The balsa is a little soft but good and light as the design is
for. You would want to check the visible glue joints and reinforce the
firewall and landing gear blocks as you see fit common to most arfs. Overall
the airframe is good. Numerous members of the local club have one and praise
it. Many have two and some are getting their third one this month, they
support modifications well.
I have been flying the Magic hard for over one year and have been impressed
with its flight charactoristics and durability. I use a Saito 56 and it is a
pleasure to fly. I just finished "building" the Magic Extra and hope to fly it
this weekend. Good planes for the money.
| I did a product review of the MAgic for RC Report. Great value for the money.
|What engine do you plan to use?
Ever review the Impress by Wattage? I am thinking of using it as
a trainer that can progress into something more interesting. If
nothing else it will make a good park flier.
The Impress we had was a pig. Underpowered and wallowed around like a
Finally destroyed itself during a launch by stalling and augering in. I
suppose it is possible they have improved as this was 2 years ago.
|> The Impress we had was a pig. Underpowered and wallowed around like a
|> pregnant yak.
|> Finally destroyed itself during a launch by stalling and augering in. I
|> suppose it is possible they have improved as this was 2 years ago.
|Most wattage planes are totally underpowered. No idea why.
|They fly quite well if upgraded, but that rather spoils the point of a
|cheap ARTF supplied with motor...
here is the web page
It has a 27-turn Super 400 Cobalt Motor, is that good?
BTW, it is now called the Super Impress.
Would have to be better. The one we had wasnt called a super anything and
had a stock speed 400 motor which wasnt enough oomph to make it fly worth a
With a cobalt motor, it would probably have flown much better.
|Would have to be better. The one we had wasnt called a super anything and
|had a stock speed 400 motor which wasnt enough oomph to make it fly worth a
|With a cobalt motor, it would probably have flown much better.
Just out of curiosity, how does one evaluate electric motors.
Nitro is somewhat easy with .40, .60, 1.2 and such.
Are there equivalents?
Far from being an expert it is something to do with the motor size. I had
heard, at least with the small can motors they are measured by the shaft
size. As I said, this is what I heard and I could be completely wrong.
Comparing types of same sized motors you have can motors (ferrite magnets
and brushes), cobalt (stronger magnets still using brushes) and brushless
motors which are controlled electronically. The power increases in that
order. So does the dollar amount.