|
RE: Are all RC forum's activity in decline?
How about a redesign? This forum hasn't changed in years. Maybe people are leaving because it looks abandoned. My personal pieve is the super threads. Once a thread become larger than 10 pages it's time to dedicate a sub forum to it. This is bad at both rcu and rcg. It's especially evident in the radios section and the builders area. Then being new you ask a simple question and some grumpy guy rages on you for not reading the 1000+ post thread. I would also suggest better search. It gets difficult to find valuable info. Especially when your wading through the super threads. I think that would help. Also, how about some fresh content? It would drive discussion.
Posted on: 6/19/2012 9:21 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11124699
RE: TF Contender build Q's.
I just wanted to add that I loved thus plane when I was younger. My dad built one with a yellow and blue scheme that was very visible. He put a .60fp in it and it flew great. It made a great third plane for me. The thing had so many flights on it; it's death was from being so fuel soaked. The thing dissentigrated in the air one day. Just ordered one for myself. They are a steal from tower right now. Just trying to decide if I should build it now or my something extra first.
Posted on: 6/14/2012 9:19 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11118742
RE: Monokote....Never Again
[quote]ORIGINAL: airraptor I have been using Monokote since 1979 and started using ultrakote in 2000. I think the problem is that people are lazy and want something easier and faster with good results. Monokote has alsways been a bit tougher to cover with yet if done correctly and thought out I believe it is still the best covering material out there if using a film. Monokote: PLUS 1. very tough 2. long lasting 3. wide rang of colors 4. pulls the wood of with it if trying to remove it. 5. will not pull up when stuck over monokote Minus 1. hard to go around sharp corners with compound curves 2. still thinking Ultrakote: Plus 1. very easy to go around compound curves 2. very good on wing fillets 3. shrinks up very well if made a mistake Minus 1. costs more 2. not as many color choices 3. shrinks to much sometimes and gets thin 4. doesnt pull the wood grain up when removing like monokote 5. will peel up over time on the edges when applied over itself When i choose a covering i pick it because of color not how easy it is to apply, price, or how much it shrinks. Both together have a good selection of colors. And honestly I hope Monokote doesnt go away. how many arfs are really covered with TF monokote? [/quote] I think this sums up all the Ultra vs Mono threads nicely; after you filter out all the bashing. I learned on Monokote, and because I am familiar with it I stick with it. I tried Ultracote on my last model and the differences between the products gave me a big head ache when trying to cover. I am not saying Ultracote is a bad product. I just think the differences in the materials and application get overlooked way too often and not to insult..I wonder if it is the user of the material not film itself. I do find it odd though that the Ultracote crowd tends to be the most vocal about their product. Seems like its been that way since I learned to fly, kinda comforting in a way that it hasn't changed. I guess this is our Ford vs Chevy argument.
Posted on: 4/14/2012 6:12 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11042070
RE: aliphatic resin vs cyanoacrylic
I would have to agree that CA does get brittle with time. I did pick up a bottle of weldbond today. It reminds me of elmers white glue. Seems like neat stuff. I think I am going to make a glue bonds and see how they age in the environmental chambers.
Posted on: 2/14/2012 8:35 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10959466
RE: aliphatic resin vs cyanoacrylic
Those are some pretty tall claims. I have a ton of ace hardware stores near me. I will swing by on the way home from work and pick up a bottle. The customer reviews were pretty high. Is the glue heavy?
Posted on: 2/12/2012 9:12 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10956306
RE: aliphatic resin vs cyanoacrylic
[quote]ORIGINAL: SeamusG <a href=''http://www.airfieldmodels.com/information_source/construction_materials_for_model_building/adhesives.htm'' target=''_blank''><span style=''font-size: small;''>Adhesives used for Model Building Good rule of thumb. [/quote] That was an excellent resource. I also found a copy of [i]There are No Secrets[/i] by Harry Higley. On Page 10 he gives a very nice chart for various adhesives and their best uses. Both Airfield Models and Harry Higley seem to agree that Aliphatic Resin is the best choice for small interior wood joints. So I think I am going to yield to the advice of experienced builders and give wood glue a shot on my next build. I am not saying CA is a bad glue, but both resources agree that it allows you to make mistakes faster. Which in my limited experience, I can relate to. Also, wood glue is cheep and I can run to any hardware store and pick up some. However, I am thinking about performing an experiment to evaluate the two glue technologies. Everyone talks about the fumes, and cure times of the two glues; however, no one can say how they age under the extreme conditions a model plane under goes. I have seen planes just spontaneously explode in the air, and the common thread is they were older models. I have access to some environmental chambers that constantly cycle from -40 to 85C to simulate environmental conditions on industrial electronics. I am thinking about making half dozen joints with CA, and Wood Glue and let them ride along for a 1000h in the chamber. Maybe its a worthless experiment that really wouldn't tell us anything. Planes do experience a wide range of temperature variations, Especially if you fly in the winter and summer. I am also thinking about a way to test repeated stress. something that can vibrate the joints at 10khz. I am thinking that CA will age better, but don't have a way to prove it. Maybe this data might already be available from the various manufactures. What do you guys think a waste of time?
Posted on: 2/12/2012 4:03 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10955884
aliphatic resin vs cyanoacrylic
I am getting ready to build a Sig Something Extra, which would be my second kit build in the last year. I built a Tiger 2 with CA and was not quite pleased with how it turned out. I made a lot of rookie mistakes. I grew up with my dad using cyanoacrylic glues (Jet, and Zap mainly). Therefore, I have build my models with CA+ just because that is what I know. However, recently I have read a lot about people using aliphatic resin (Elmers Wood Glue, or Tight bond). As i start to pin the Something Extra to the board I am thinking real hard about using tight bond. My main reason is so I have more time to check my joints before the glue dries. I think this would give me a little more time to set things and keep straight. I also read that wood glue is great for gap filling. I dont want to use it as an excuse for making sloppy joints, but I do see it as an added bonus. Any one have any pointers? Are the two glues interchangeable? Should I just stay away and just continue to use a medium CA. I am not really concerned about the fumes of CA that never seemed to bother me. However I definitely wouldn't miss the scaly fingers, from getting sloppy.
Posted on: 2/10/2012 6:00 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10953433
Epoxy Voodoo.....
History: I built a Tiger 2 40 size and have been flying it with much enjoyment. I was enjoying myself a little too much and flew through a small sapling at the end the runway. Caused some minor damage to the leading edge of the wing and dislodged both pieces of wood holding in my wing bolts. Performed the repairs and the following week went up and flew the plane. Was kind to the plane at first, and then as the day wore on I performed some High G snaprolls and landed to see if the repairs to the wingbolts held up. I was fairly satisfied. Cold weather and wind has hit and two weeks later I went to charge the plane and load it up for some Sunday flying. To my surprise I found both sets of wingbolt receptacles(?) and their reinforcing 1/4" triangle stock sitting on the ground. Obviously no flying today! I used 60 minute locktite epoxy purchased from Lowes and was careful to mix the resin and hardener 50/50 through measurement. I sanded the surface of the fuslage and wing bolt holders to make sure to clean away the previous glue joints. I am assuming cold weather has some sort of influence on this as my plane is stored in the garage. The weather has only be in the mid 30s at night and the garage usually stays in the 50s. Needless to say I am quite perplexed. Check out my images.... Oh this was my first build, so the workmanship is a work in progress....
Posted on: 12/11/2011 9:02 AM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10854203
RE: Adding Flaps to the Escapade 40?
The color scheme on that Contender is really wild; I like it. I am sure you have no trouble seeing it.
Posted on: 9/6/2011 4:20 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10704698
RE: Aerofly 5.5 vs Realflight 5.5 vs Phoenix v3.0
That is great feedback. I have been leaning heavily to AeroFly 5.5. I have a great computer and should have no problem running the program with the graphics maxed out. My concern is the support. It seems that the sim is used mainly by our European friends and thus the models reflect that market. Additionally it seems hard to find a demo for it. BTW thanks to the moderator for moving the discussion.
Posted on: 8/27/2011 11:27 AM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "RC Flight Simulator Software"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10689479
Aerofly 5.5 vs Realflight 5.5 vs Phoenix v3.0
In the market for a simulator. My interests are primarily powered Airplanes. I have read a lot of this vs That threads, but noticed that there hasn't been a comparison since the new Aerofly 5.5 and Phoenix V3.0 released. Not to mention there has been a new expansion pack for Real Flight. I would like to start a gentleman's discussion on the pro's and cons of each and mainly focus on the updates since the new releases. I am interested in finding out about: 1. Physics; where there any improvements 2. Development of Custom Models. Can it models be tweaked or can you build your own from the ground up 3. community support ; Who develops new models the most, and what product has the most vibrant community? 4. How the latest updates have improved the sim of choice. Thing I do seem to observe is that your are going to find a lot of Great Planes models on Real Flight and Hanger 9 and parkzone on Phoenix. It makes sense based on who distributes what product, but there doesnt seem to be a lot of cross pollination. thoughts?
Posted on: 8/24/2011 5:02 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "RC Flight Simulator Software"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10685674
RE: CG tiger II build
[quote]ORIGINAL: crash bandicoute i was going to try to tint the canopy of mine, but i can't find anything big enough to do the job, other than a 5 gallon home depot bucket. the original canopy that came with the kit had a pretty big crease on the top side of it, so i called to get another one shipped for replacement. but the original, i tried that clear tint spray paint stuff from model masters, what a joke. it looked like crap, so i took a sanding 3M sponge to the inside of it to get rid of the paint and painted the inside of it with black epoxy appliance paint. that one will be used for the maiden. the new one, i'm contemplating using the rit dye, but i'm not sure if i can get enough boiling water into the bucket quick enough to get the job done. i'll be using a cooking pot (not sure if it's 2 or 4 quart) for boiling the water, and dumping it in a little at a time, til it's full. i'm sure if all the pots are boiling when i poor them in, by the time i get to the last, it should still be hot enough to do. my trim scheme is going to be trans green with flat black trim, and maybe some silver on the bottom for contrast. so i don't know if want to do the black tinted canopy, or get some green dye. i think the black may look better, but how many green canopies have you seen? are you going to mix vinegar in the water as well? i read somewhere that it helps it along. this will be my first canopy dying experience and i don't want to screw it up. know whatta' mean? i've been looking for a threa about this process, but keep finding run-offs. there was a really good one. good luck with it and post a couple of pics of her. [/quote] Just to offer my 2 Cents. I just tried to dye a Tiger canopy with Rit and it did not work. The Plastic doesn't take the dye at all. You are going to need to use a Lexan based paint. I ruined my canopy by turning the heat up on the water and melted it.
Posted on: 8/18/2011 7:27 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10676863
RE: Covering techniques
[quote]ORIGINAL: SeamusG Higley has a nice edge trimming tool - gives you a very nice, consistent 1/8'' overlap. It looks a bit like a block plane with vertical slots near the leading edge. There's a single-edged razor blade bolted to the top. The distance between the bottom and the blade gives you the width of the overlap. [/quote] A quick google search has revealed that Harry Higley has retired. He is selling off his stock and unfortunately his trimming tool is no where to be found. What is a noob to do?
Posted on: 8/2/2011 6:10 AM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10650986
RE: Covering techniques
[quote]ORIGINAL: SeamusG Ultracote changes its ''cuttable'' character. If you use a low temp trim iron to tack and seal an edge, it is very easy to cut. However, if you turn up the heat (270 or so) then the adhesive gets involved and makes it like chewing shoe leather. For a top quality edge it's best to use a new blade or frequently stropping the edge to keep it from ''laying over'' and appearing dull. Don't use a blade that has been used to cut material during the contruction phase of the build! [/quote] That lines up with my observations. I was using ultracote, so when I tried to follow up and trim the excess; the glue would interfere with the cut exactly as you said. I have an adjustable trim iron. I will turn the heat down and see to produces better results.
Posted on: 8/2/2011 5:38 AM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10650947
RE: Covering techniques
Practice makes perfect. I am tempted to try and build some practice structures that I can cover and re-cover. Just blow through a roll of my plastic film of choice and make a weekend out of it.
Posted on: 8/1/2011 7:59 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10650478
RE: Covering techniques
thanks Huck, that was a good place to start. I myself am covering my first model and to be honest it did not come out as well as I would like. Any other tips. Like things to watch out for if your are using Ultracote vs Monocote vs Coverite? I know i had a devil of a time just getting a straight cut when trimming my excess. The blade kept wanting to grab the material and tear. As a result i got a jagged line and not a smooth cut. I am thinking the blade dulls faster than I was expecting. Any tips on trimming edges? I kept grabbing balsa and taking chunks out too. I'd like to get more proficient with covering so when I build my Something Extra it looks professional and not ..... like I did it [;)]
Posted on: 8/1/2011 2:01 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10649817
RE: 2.4 - Why Are They Failing?
I will add my 2 cents to this thread. My concern with 2.4 Ghz technology is not the implementations, but the many other devices that crowd the spectrum. You have cellphones, laptops, gps, zigbee devices, tv's, ect ... that use some sort of 2.4 Ghz technology to transfer data either through wifi or bluetooth. These devices use the same spectrum as the radios. So you show up on a busy day to the field you will have half a dozen radios controlling models in the air and the 50 or so devices sitting in people's cars and pockets chirping in the same space. 2.4 Ghz radios use the same unlicensed band as general consumer devices. It makes me rather skid-dish. Now, interference is rare, with all the frequency hopping and spread spectrum technology, but it is possible. Additionally, if some individual fires up a old "leaky" microwave, the RF is going to spew all over the spectrum. 2.4 Ghz is not perfect and has the exact same issues of 72 Mhz. All the frequency hopping and spread spectrum does, is help you better manage the channels. It does not give you a concrete answer to interference. I much rather keep a lookout for "rogue" parkflyers than have a no cellphone policy at the field. I think the best thing for the hobby would be a 72 Mhz system with all the spread spectrum and frequency hoping. It would limit interference from the outside world, and utilize the spectrum the FCC has granted us. Additionally, it would help improve some of the perceived issues of the current state of 72 Mhz. It would be a best of both worlds solution. But , truly, I think we are quick to blame radio interference for other malfunctions with the radio. i would almost love to see fields setup a spectrum analyzer and do a airwave sweep. to help eliminate this and get to the root cause of some problems. Also, some of you are correct, as you get higher up, you will be more susceptible to other radio traffic and you will pick up other peoples chatter. This includes more exposure to the unlicensed 2.4 spectrum from direct and reflected interference. Its the same logic of raising the antenna to get more tv stations.
Posted on: 1/9/2011 10:46 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "RC Radios, Transmitters, Receivers, Servos, gyros"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10251974
RE: Comming Back after 10 Year hietus, 72 Mhz vs 2.4Ghz?
Everyone, Thanks for your input. I went through and verified that the 7UAP I have is still a narrow band transmitter and perfectly legal. Additionally, My father floated me some of his PCM 1024 receivers that he wasnt using since he moved to 2.4 GHz. The 7UAP provides plenty of model memory to get me started, again, and my abundance of S148, S3003, S9201 and S3004 mean I will have plenty of options for a few planes. I am thinking of Kit building a Goldberg Tiger 2, it seems to have a similar airfoil as the the old Falcon 56 MKii the difference being the Tiger 2 is a low wing plane. It should be a fairly docile plane to re-tune my skills on, but not a trainer that will bore me pretty quickly. However, as many have suggested, I will probably make the move to 2.4 as things wear out, or I run into some limitation that I need a newer radio to perform. For the time being, I will use what I have.
Posted on: 1/4/2011 4:41 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10239787
RE: Comming Back after 10 Year hietus, 72 Mhz vs 2.4Ghz?
[quote]ORIGINAL: JohnBuckner First it all depends on the age of you 72 equipment while yes it may still work however if it is pre 1991 and wide band it is illegal and actually dangerous to use around modern narrowband equipment. [/quote] Great Point. I never thought about that. I have a Futaba 7UAP, I believe it is still a narrow band radio however. Any way I can find out? [quote] Also your comment on using higher power for various models for longer range is beyond the purview of model aircraft and Model aircraft flown out of visual site is contrary to the AMA safety code and as such will not be allowed at the designated field of an AMA chartered club. John [/quote] Your point is very valid, Something I forgot about. However I was more thinking of Vertical Distance from the transmitter, and not so much as lateral distance.
Posted on: 12/23/2010 7:44 AM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10213721
RE: Comming Back after 10 Year hietus, 72 Mhz vs 2.4Ghz?
Guys, Thanks so much for the answers. As I get my feet wet again, I will just stick with my current gear. It makes a cheep way back into the hobby. I can see how contests would be a problem with managing a frequency matrix. If I ever get back into pattern flying, then I will most definitely consider it. I definitely get the feeling its the wave of the future. Kinda sad to see the eventual loss of our radio spectrum. I also read how some of these 2.4 radios can work with these bind n fly park fliers. Seems like a nice feature to me. Thought about getting one of those tiny little coaxial bladed eflight helicopters, for off-season and rainy weekend indoor fun. Last question, and this may be poking the hornets nest a little. I see a new company (to me), Spektrum. 1. I have read they are owned by Jr? 2. Or are they owned by the same company that owns both JR and Spektrum 3. Or are they the same? New face of JR? Anyone have any history on where they came from, and if they are any good? I saw a Hanger 9 RTF trainer kit with a 5 channel Spektrum radio and realized I knew nothing about them. there color schema made me think of re-branded Hitec. Also, I was browsing a Hobby shop and the sales man was pretty high on them, Do they have good servos or do people just buy the radio and grab their favorite servo of choice and use them with their TX and RX's? Keep it civil, I dont want to be responsible for starting a Futaba / Jr flame war. [;)] Thanks for help! Steven
Posted on: 12/22/2010 8:51 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10213122
Comming Back after 10 Year hietus, 72 Mhz vs 2.4Ghz?
Long story short, i am returning to the hobby after graduating college and getting married. I now have space for the first time since I left home 10 years ago to get back into RC airplanes. One of the big things I noticed was how 2.4 Ghz Spread Spectrum / Frequency hopping radios have taken the hobby by storm. I have older 72 Mhz gear that still works just fine as it was carefully mothballed in storage. My questions: 1. Is there a technical reason people have moved to 2.4 Ghz? 2. Are Fields not doing any frequency management anymore? 3. Urban Sprawl causing to much interference on AMA fields? 4. Or has pointless marketing deluded the masses that 2.4 Ghz is somehow better? 5. Is 2.4 Ghz just cheaper? miniaturizing the size of receivers and ect.. 6. Or is it the sudden boom in electrics? (another topic for another time - what happen to the nitro planes?) 7. Just manufactures slowly pushing the hobby a certain direction? Call me sentimental, but I would think the older 72 Mhz would be better. 1. You have dedicated licensed space that protects from interference from consumer devices. 2. Because it is a licensed transmitter, you can operate at higher powers and get better range. (especially for UAV, and FPV flying). 3. Typically AMA fields are away from population centers and you dont have to worry about interference in general, because nothing should be on 72 Mhz anyways. 4. Most FM/PCM radios have synthesized transmitter models allowing you to easily change the frequency so you can fly with a buddy. (it is annoying to do ). 5. With all the 2.4 Ghz devices I would fear there would be more of a possibility of interference from a crowded unlicensed spectrum. "IE someone fires up that microwave and Jams the entire 2.4 Ghz band. More likely all the cellphones, ipods, laptops, and ect... fighting to use the same space. Perceived real advantages of 2.4 Ghz 1. Appears cheaper, because you are leveraging the economies of scale from other 2.4 GHz devices, such as Zigbee radios, wifi, and bluetooth. 2. A lot of miniaturization has occurred as a result, allowing you to put the electronics anywhere in the model, and not have to run the long antenna out the back. 3. You dont have to worry about "interfering with another modeler" 4. Damn whip antenna doesn't get in your way or bent. You dont crash a model because you forgot to pull it up! 5. Because there is more inter-channel bandwidth, it looks like there are telemetry models piggybacking on the spectrum in addition to the control signals. 6. Seems like park fliers and mini helicopters are getting real popular, causing a backyard modeling revolution. preventative source of interference? I never lost a model because of radio interference. Most fellow modelers that claimed too, it was the result of user/pilot error and not anything to do with the radio. Things like batteries going dead, antennas not pulled up, and some dummy turning his radio on without the pin. However, I know a lot of things have changed in the last 10 years, and I just want some honest perspective. I done a lot of research, but cant really nail down the " reason " to switch at this point. Has interference become a bigger issue in the last 10 years, or is it a case of manufactures slowly pushing people that way? I could start a similar post on LiPo electrics, but one thing at a time.
Posted on: 12/22/2010 4:11 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10212558
RE: Solutions for AMA's membership decline
I would suggest, look for new ways to expand the hobby. There is a growing interest in FPV, UAV's, quadcopters, and autonomous flight. It would bring in a different demographic that could prove very fruitful. It would also legitimize some of the activities and give them some representation and supervision to keep them from getting in trouble. Lot of smart engineers and young kids are playing with these Aurdino boards. It could also give way to a foothold into the schools as the application of science and technology will be sought after. Sorry I am new here, Use to be a AMA member, Looking to get back into the hobby. However after getting my Engineering degree my interest to come back was sparked by some developments outside of the normal RC community. I was hoping that some of these UAV activities were noticed and that AMA had guidelines for operation. Apparently, AMA hasn't changed at all since i left for College 10 years ago.
Posted on: 12/11/2010 9:14 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10191494
RE: Idiots in New York, RC plane buzzing Statue of Liberty & Brooklyn Bridge
I can appreciate, the point of view of many that fear the consequences of this stunt. However, were many see a problem, I see a great opportunity. There is a developing interest by younger groups into the FPV and UAV flying. While, I believe we should correctly point out that their flying without authorization was irresponsible, the interest generated should be harnessed to accept these groups and represent them. Singling out these interests will do nothing but contract the hobby in the long term. To be fair, I haven't flown a plane in years since I went to college. However, these guys reminded me of the great fun I had, and now I am shopping for my " 2nd " trainer. I understand the fear in the community from the pending FAA regulations, but I feel we should push the envelope of the capabilities that technology can offer to the hobby. With sufficient interest, it will strengthen the hobby, bring in new members, and start a Renaissance. Then the regulations would be written to control the activity, but not prevent it.
Posted on: 12/11/2010 9:03 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10191473
Looking for an online retailer
Now that i have graduated college and have a place of my own i have decided to get back into the world of RC Cars and planes alike. However . . . . its been about 5 years since i have looked for anything. So i was wondering what the reputable online retailers were. I know there is Tower Hobbies, but has anything else surfaced since then? I also noticed that the online selection at tower hobbies appears thinner than the catalog itself. Any ways i digress... Who do you buy stuff from besides your local hobby shop? Thanks everyone!
Posted on: 2/27/2007 1:12 PM by Author "GruntboyX"
in the forum "Off Topic Forum - Cars, Trucks, Buggies and more"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5483548
|
