RE: Axe CP Tail motor
When mine gave up the ghost I bought a replacement and found out there were no threads in the motor casing. Ruined the original screws. Went to hobby shop and found a replacement screw pack for the Blade CP and used a couple of the screws that look like servo mounting screws only much smaller. Have that built in washer look to them. They appeared to be about the size of the Axe tail screws but kind of nickel plated looking. Used a #49 number drill to campher the hole just a touch to make them bite in and screwed them in. Everything is still working. Frustrating though a guy has to go through this for what is supposed to be an entry level helicopter. Thank heavens I've had years of modeling experience and tools up the kazzo.
Posted on: 1/8/2008 12:20 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "Helimax"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6874152

RE: Phoenix Models Extra 300s
Five and three quarters sounds about right. I had one with a Magnum 52 4 stroker and it wasn't a real hotrod vertically but the 4 stroke pulled good and it was a real hoot to fly. Good bang for the buck. I was messing around one day really low and got inverted flat spin and by time I recovered I barely missed the ground but not to worry..........the tree beyond the ground stopped it dead in its tracks! Oops! Hate it when I kill an innocent plane. OS 46 should power it nicely.
Posted on: 1/7/2008 11:29 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6872269

RE: Tell me about the Century Hawk Pro!
Never heard of an O.S. engine making it through Q.C. with something like a ring missing? Are you certain? Is the engine new and unused at this point?
Posted on: 1/5/2008 1:35 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "Century - Predator, Hawk IV, Falcon, Raven"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6858055

RE: Axe CP is junk! (At least my 2 have been.)
I wouldn't go so far as to call it junk, but after flying nitro helis for many years its obvious to me that the small electric helicopters are promoted as instant gratification for someone wanting to try helicopters with next to none of the hard learning curves. First time you dork one of these then you find out that they are a bugger to work on due to the small size. Your going to have to go out and invest in a bunch of tools you might not have in your normal modeling inventory. I too had my tail rotor motor give up the crap after only about 20 minutes. I too went to the lhs and bought a new motor for $24 (yee gads) and took it home and soldered on the wires and all the stuff that someone totally new to the hobby probably would struggle with. Only then did I find that the screw holes that go into the motor can are not tapped. And no.........the motor can is not soft aluminum and NO you can't just simply screw in the phillips screws into this thing and tap new holes. All this crap is totally unrealistic for a newbie and just a pain for an experienced modeler like myself. Sooooooooo, dragging out my number drill bits and using a #49 bit its possible to champher the hole a bit and using some screws off a Blade CP replacement screw package I was able to once again get my tail motor mounted and the heli flying. Way too much screwing around for a product supposedly sold as an introduction to R/C helicopters. I don't have any issues with Tower or Heli-Max. I had to call them and ask them for the channel assignment on the receiver. How much effort does it take to put a diagram on the manuel saying channel one is this servo, channel two is ............. Honestly, for every person who stays the course I'd bet money that 2 or 3 more just toss it and privately admit they got bite in the butt and find something more practical. That said, I'm having fun with mine but I sure couldn't fault anyone that said they bought one and were very dissapointed. Not practical for the beginner to work on and get right. My guess is guys with r/c car experience would be better equiped to deal with this thing than most plane flyers wanting to give it a go. Just my 2 cents.
Posted on: 1/3/2008 3:09 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "Helimax"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6848153

RE: Tell me about the Century Hawk Pro!
Well join in the fun and fly the blades off that thing. Which engine did you get? Without a doubt if you progress with nitro helicopters your going to fly it, wreck it, rebuild it but basically have a heck of a good time. Your going to get to know it inside out and build/rebuild it blindfolded but it will give you a ton of good memories and you'll not get a better machine with more reasonable spares at anywhere close to the price of this. My Raven has been setting for over a year neglected and I finally got inspired the other night to drag it out and get it ready for spring. Still got 24 gallons of fuel that needs to be turned to smoke. LOL Have fun.
Posted on: 1/2/2008 7:37 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "Century - Predator, Hawk IV, Falcon, Raven"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6843986

RE: Everybody just stop right now..!
Bought an Axe CP to keep myself out of trouble during the winter months. First attempt at an electric anything in R/C. Was unsure from the beginning whether it was going to be a wise move and the jury is still out. Having flown nitro rc planes and helis since 76 the first thing that came to mind was this thing is a bugger to work on. Like an idiot I was out rolling and looping this thing after about 3 break in flights. Was getting about 2 minutes of good flying and about 3 more minutes of marginal hovering around. I was dissapointed to say the least. Bought a Thunder power 1320 lipo and charger for like $90 and now its at least usable for 10 minutes. Bottom line is I find the Axe CP waaaaaaaaaaaaay more trouble to work on, (because of tiny parts) then something like my Hawk Pro's and Raven. Visability is a factor if you get it very far out from yourself. Not having a variable pitch tailrotor just stinks. No way to get the positive tail control of a larger nitro model, or for that matter, a higher end electric heli like a Trex 600. Personally I can't wait for spring so I can get my nitro helis going again. The parts for this tiny, marginal performing electric heli is about the same and in most cases about half again more then the similiar pieces you would use on a Sceadu 30-50 or Hawk Pro/Raven. Seems the initial appeal of these small electric helis is the low buyin costs. From there its a steady outlay of more money to both keep it flying and improving things. After roughly 20 battery cycles through this thing its already getting sloppy on the cyclic controls due to no rod ends and such. The way I see it if you buy one of these you should understand and accept upfront they are what they are and your not going to get a long life out of them like you would with a quality nitro heli. Kinda fun and convenient but at tradeoff.
Posted on: 1/2/2008 1:40 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "Helimax"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6842123

RE: Any Flyers in Pittsburgh
Forgot to give you the number. 412-795-9344.
Posted on: 12/20/2007 5:37 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "RC Helicopter General Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6783628

RE: Any Flyers in Pittsburgh
There is a club out southwest of Pittsburgh off Rt 22 thats heli friendly. Lived back there 2 yrs and no longer live there so the spelling escapes me but its close to Catney field or Katney field. Full size airstripe that supports rc efforts also. Best bet would be to call Betty at J&C Hobbies in Pittsburgh and she could give you directions to the field. Certainly you could get some help from them. I flew out of the other end of the area at a state park but with noise constraint limits and such it wasn't the best. Good luck.
Posted on: 12/20/2007 5:36 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "RC Helicopter General Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6783623

RE: Jacks on the 3n1
Thanks for the info about the wiring. Much appreciated. I'm stuck neck deep in Christmas stuff right now but as soon as that is behind me I'm going to order some lipo batteries and give that a crack. As I stated earlier, I have tons of experience with nitro helis but very little with electric. Always amazes me how a guy can get sucked in like me into trying something new like this tiny electric and find that after a few trips to the hobby store I got as much invested in this thing than a decent 30 nitro heli. My entire purpose was to get something I could mess with in the neighborhood and not irritate the neighbors and that part I enjoy. If I'm really going to pursue this electric avenue, then I think I'm going to look into something like the mini raptor or Align Trex series. I know it will set me back a small fortune but they look more to my expectations.
Posted on: 12/14/2007 12:54 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "Helimax"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6756610

Axe Cp wiring
I was putting my cp together tonight and realized I'm not smart enough to get all three servos plugged in correctly on the receiver board. Can someone please tell me which servo plugs into which outlet? I"m looking at the receiver with the pins on the very front of the helicopter. I only unplugged the servos to replace the sideframes. I've manged to get cyclic function but no collective action. Humm? Tried every combo I could dream up and nothing. Should have marked them I guess. As a side note, this is my first electric heli after 25 yrs of nitro. Not overly impressed. Everything is too frickin small and hard to handle coupled with marginal quality. I enjoyed goofing around in the front yard and living room but the third flight I thought, "what the heck, lets let this bad boy loose". Flipped it upside down and had I not know how to recover with next to no extra power I would have smucked it right then and there. 3D out of the box??????? Are they kidding? Battery lasts about 3 minutes unless your only hovering. Would baaarely hover inverted it was so anemic. That was fresh battery and all. I'm the first to confess I know next to nothing about these small electrics but do pretty decent with nitro helis and specifically bought this thinking it would be a good first intro to electrics. Gut reaction is its pretty marginal. If someone could point me straight on the wiring sequence I'd be much appreciative. Thanks.
Posted on: 12/10/2007 10:34 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "Helimax"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6741123

RE: Super Skybolt ARF
Just in case anyone is intersted in a bit of history I've built both the Sig Skybolt and the Smith Miniplane. I will tell you that both were fun to build but very demanding and nit picky in their construction. Between cabane construction and the ABS plastic turtledeck on the Skybolt it was enough to make you want to pull your hair out. In the end the Skybolt was hands down the better flyer. Smith Miniplane showed signs of being short coupled and just didn't groove the way the Skybolt did. Skybolt had a OS 61 FSR with Slimline pitts and was purely a delight to fly. Takeoffs and landings were picture perfect and quick but easily controllable for someone comfortable with tailwheel handling. Smith miniplane by contrast was always hunting and searching it seemed to me. I"ve never flown the GP Skybolt but if its similiar in its character to the Sig model then I would be very happy with it. I've got a new Saito 100 that has no home and I feel it would be an excellant match for this new GP Skybolt arf. Any of the Supertigere 75-90 would certainly be winners. Any 4stroke 91-110 should do the trick nicely also. I think you will find this airframe pretty much open for power plant options. My feeling is never add an ounce of weight to the nose of a model if you can use the same space for a few extra cc's. I find this a disturbing trend among arf manufactures like GP. I was really hot to go on a Chipmunk till I found out you had to bolt half a junk yard to the firewall to get it to balance. To me there is just something taboo about adding weight for balance purposes. At least when your talking about a pound and half!
Posted on: 5/23/2006 11:57 AM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=4308687

RE: Just got the Phoenix Super Decathlon
Almost every reference I have heard in regards to this planes handling qualities, point to the fact thats its actually quite scale in its handling. I flew one for about 120 flights before I planted it firmly in the ground goofing off. It can be a bit slow recovering from unusual attitudes and that is consistant with the handling of the real plane which I also used to fly about 20 years ago. When recovering from a stall it was imperative to not use too much elevator control after the initial recovery. Doing so often resulted in the plane wanting to again quickly restall or go into what in full scale flying is referred to as a secondary stall. Killed many an aspiring aerobatic pilot. Problem is if you stall, most pilots want to immediately get it flying again and this hasty attempt is what often leads to the fatal secondary. I was flying my Decathalon with a Magnum 52 four stroker. It handled very nice, was not overpowered but pleasent. I enjoyed snapping it deliberately at low altitude and predictably it met its demise in such an episode. Crap. LOL I will agree with most everyone on here that its one heck of a value for the buck. I replaced it with the Phoenix Models 300 extra and its just as much fun and even $10 less. Same engine but this thing rockets along on the same power. I'm getting the feeling that pretty much all these Phoenix models are good value.
Posted on: 3/27/2006 5:23 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=4090199

RE: Arf Quality
Wow, never dreamed when I started this thread it would create such a stink! I've been flying R/C since 1976 and built many a kit. In the last five years I've switched mainly to arfs because it allows me to sample and enjoy many more models in the same amount of time. Who could disagree though having read the Rare Bear pages that Thunder Tiger put out a real "piece" on the modeling public? Looks so cool and plagued with so many design deficiencies. Yes, I could buy one and fix all the crap thats been posted by many talented builders. NOT THE POINT! Why should you have to? Assembly by the instructions should yield a decent, flyable and moderately safe plane. Maybe more, but certainly nothing less. Just my feelings.
Posted on: 2/7/2006 4:47 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3881355

RE: Phoenix Models Super Decathlon ???
I really enjoyed mine for the few months I owned it. Had a Magnum 52 four stroker on it and it flew quite scale like. Not overpowered and a bit of a handfull at moments. Required lots of rudder and aileron coordination to make it fly really scale like. For me this was a plus since I like such a model to be very scale like. I never used any weight to balance. Only receiver and battery as far foward as I could get them. By the time the tank was almost empty you could get some incredible snaps that almost brought the plane to a stop in midair. Actually it was such a snap that ended my Decathalons flying. OOps. Would not hesitate to buy another. Very good quality for the money and always got good comments from the fellow flyers. Only thing I would change on it if I get another is the strut attachment on the wings. Nylon links just don't hold up to the vibration and wear and tear. Other then that its a sweetie.
Posted on: 2/7/2006 3:56 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3881168

RE: Swash Plate for Hawk
Just get the swash that fits stock on the Raven 50. Its set for 120degree mixing.
Posted on: 12/28/2005 4:03 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "Century - Predator, Hawk IV, Falcon, Raven"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3701329

RE: Arf Quality
My comments regarding the Rare Bear and the Seawind I think can be regarded as "fact" unless you can somehow make an arguement that all those individuals on the forum sites got together and formed a conspiracy to bash these two arfs I mentioned. My intention was and still is to point out that Thunder Tiger and Great Planes both should be ashamed to rush to market with products that are not in keeping with customers expectations. Now being in the retail environment myself, I know first hand that people can have high expectations. Wanting a plane that the tail dosen't fall off is not wanting too much! Wanting an amphibious seaplane with retracts that work in both worlds may be a hard thing to provide from a technical standpoint. Its not to much to expect that Great Planes would make obvious in there advertising that this product does NOT provide this experience. At any price. I have had several Great Planes products and was very satisifed. If I'd bought this thing and found out some $700 later it was not amphiboius in the trustest sense of the word. I would be very dissappointed. Thats just me. And by the way, I also have a Kange Laser 2000 and its one kick butt airplane. First rate all the way! If all manufacturers had the sense of fairness in their dealings with there customers that Kange has, we would have nothing ever to gripe about.
Posted on: 12/28/2005 1:48 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3700866

RE: Lancair Wing Failure
Thanks there Crashmaster. I really enjoyed the plane in the air but straightening the nose gear on even the softest of arrivals was getting old. By the way. Have other guys been using the HItec 85 servos on aileron in place of the full size servos? They looked so dinky to me when I went that route and I was slightly concerned about there gear strength but figured what the heck. The servo is rated at 42 oz and I don't believe its using anywhere near its capacity on those ailerons. As long as nothing flutters! Fingers crossed. Again, thanks, and I will check out that Sierra gear place.
Posted on: 12/21/2005 7:25 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3678856

Arf Quality
Well, I just had a super boring day indoors with cold weather and all. I made it a reading day and decided to check out some of the forum reports on planes that really interested me. I got into the Rare Bear forum and read all 48 pages. Whew! What a drag to see so many problems with a plane that literally hundreds of modelers were drooling over in anticipation of club racing and general sport flying. Later in the day I tackled the Seawind forum. I have to tell you I've never been so depressed in my modeling life as to hear the horror stories encountered by these two plane groups. I want a Seawind as bad as any plane I've dreamed about in years. Just all the broken parts and cracked this and that, the cracked gelcoat, the loose formers, etc. What bothered me just as much were the comments from some about how we should not complain about these matters since the average modeler couldn't build these birds for this amount of money. GEEZ, are people not allowed in this day and age to expect a product that works, dosen't need rebuilt, rehashed, moded, new hardware? Would people feel just as good about going down to the BestBuy and getting a new digital camera and finding out it dosen't really work without different batteries and you had to reassemble it, but oh well, the price was better then I could have built one myself? I would be the first to admit, I'd be years building a fiberglass fusalage like the Seawind. Is that really the point? For me the point is things are not being supplied as represented. The fact that the retracts don't work in the water and are only usable on land is a total fib on the part of Great Planes. Kinda a matter of, "well we never clearly told anyone this thing is not REALLY an amphibian, but we're content to let you believe this." I have had very good luck over the years with arfs for the most part but I feel were starting to see a trend here with more and more manufacturers rushing to see who can beat out who with the new "SuperNitroMasher 500" and too hell with quality control. Anyone else gettin tired of being the test market? Obviously, the suppliers who cater to their customers needs will win out over time. Most every problem that was reported in those two forums could have been prevented had the manufacturer institued proper quality control measures. Classic case of "we don't have time to do it right, but we got time to do it again". Just my thoughts, disagree if you want, but they were free. LOL
Posted on: 12/21/2005 6:12 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3678623

RE: Just got the Phoenix Super Decathlon
The 13 inch prop should be no problem. I used an apc 12x8 on mine and had plenty of ground clearance. One thing you will find with this bird is it has one hell of a stout gear leg setup. If you bend this gear your probably going to be replacing something alot more expensive that its attached to. I agree with a previous poster that the strut ends need to be replaced with a connector thats a bit more durable. The nylon ones are pretty delicate. They work but you should keep some spares on hand. I used all the stock hardware and the only two items that I truely wore out were the strut ends and the tailwheel wire snapped off after after maybe 150 landings. I just bent up a new one out of wire and was going again in 10 minutes. Great flyer for the money.
Posted on: 12/21/2005 3:53 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3678133

RE: Which Decathlon?
I owned the Phoneix Decathalon with a Magnum 52 4c and it was a really good scale type flyer. Definitely a two stick plane. Loves coordinated rudder with the ailerons. Really not even close to being overpowered with the recommended engine size. I loved mine and did some crazy stuff with it and that eventually lead to its demise. Would do some really awsome snap rolls and almost come to a dead stop when entering a snap on a 30-45 degree upline. Looked really cool. Didn't look so cool when it when staight in! Oh geez, I will just have to buy another one soon. Its definitely not a trainer type plane but, if your experienced with tail draggers, you'll most likely find success with it. Exceptional quality for the money. I couldn't begin to kit build such a plane for double the money. If I buy another I think I'll go up to a 65-72 size engine for a touch more ooomph!
Posted on: 12/21/2005 3:40 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3678080

RE: Hobbico Twinstar downthrust?
I've flown my Twinstar over 130 flights with LA 40's and all I can say is that Hobbico got this thing completely right from a handling standpoint. Its a blast to fly and lands like a trainer. I really have flown the covering off this baby. Literally! I've lost most of the trim off the tail and the side of the fusalage. Just so much oil coming off the upswept mufflers blowing back on the tail. I was going to recover, but honestly I think its faster and easier to just buy a fresh airframe for next year and sell this to some one who wants to screw around with it. It's still sound other then the cosmetics.
Posted on: 12/19/2005 5:11 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3670905

RE: Lancair Wing Failure
I don't have time to read all the discussion about the Lancair but I'm having one heck of a time with my nose gear bending on almost every flight no matter how softly I set this thing down. Its such a drag that I have not flown it since about August. Mine is rather light in the sense its only got a Supertigre 61 and the Top Flite in cowl set up. Seems like the wire is just way too soft. I have straightened out my nose gear no less then 4 times in a dozen flights and its just pathetic. Love the overall flight characteristics. I fly it fast, but smooth. Those long wings just look like their begging to be snapped off with clutzy elevator inputs. LOL Using the HItec 85 servos on the ailerons and so far so good. Looks better then all that plastic cover crap. Basically its such a cool airplane; if I could fix this nose gear thing I would really love it.
Posted on: 12/19/2005 4:47 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3670838

RE: phoinex extra 300s w/ 90 engine any comments?
Flew one all summer on a Magnum 52 four stroke. Unless your managing your throttle well I believe your going to be wayyyyyyyy over powered and very nose heavy. This thing has a pretty long nose on it. I have no weight installed with this 52. Could still stand to have the battery moved aft a touch at that.
Posted on: 12/19/2005 4:18 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3670724

RE: Quick save
Absolutely! Not going to set around all day waiting for locktight to cure. Its like watching it rain. [:D] I view locktight as being the "long term" solution to keeping things together. In the short run its got to be snugged up good in the first place. If a screw immediately falls out after an install, you got far worse problems then what locktight was meant to cure.
Posted on: 11/21/2005 5:23 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "Century - Predator, Hawk IV, Falcon, Raven"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3574511

RE: Blade Types-Wood, C.F., Fiberglass????????
Seems so much is made of the idea that somehow wood blades are not safe? I think that is just so much hype and crap. For the great majority of flying the wood blades are mostly capable and the emphasis has to be on the fact they are (cheap). Carbon blades are smoother, more efficient, more rigid and therefore quiet. I for one like the carbon blades because I'm lazy and don't want to screw around with balancing and fussing with wood blades. Not because they are not safe. After a person gets beyond tipping over and wrecking their helicopter on a regular basis, its just more satisfying to fly the nicer blades. Hey, this is America. If wood blades were so unsafe, the lawyers would already own this hobby also. Don't believe all the hype. Buy the better blades because of performance, not because your scared of wood blades.
Posted on: 11/12/2005 5:30 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "Thunder Tiger - Raptor 30, 50, 60, 90"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3546052

Quick save
Averted disaster again yesterday. On my fourth flight of the day I was alone at the flying field and standing in the middle of the field which is something you normally can't do. I was shooting autos from various different angles. Deliberately flying over and near obstacles, (trees, field house, perimeter fence, etc). Its fun to see if you can properly judge where your going to touch down in relation to different perspectives. Well on my fifth or sixth auto the unplanned happened. I had just picked up and flown out to about 150' altitude and turned down wind in prep for setting up the next auto. The engine started to rev and then grab and rev and grab. I instinctively thought I had a gear letting go. Flipped the hold and down I come and settle in nice and soft. Flipped the hold off and give it some juice and nothing. Just the engine revving up. Shut it down and took it back to the work table. Took about 10 seconds to find the trouble. Gears were fine but it spit the grub screw out of the pinion gear and the counter shaft was just spinning happily but no rotor. A 10 cent set screw almost cost a helicopter. If you fly enough these little things will eventually get you it seems? I'm pretty careful about checking these things, especially after a rebuild. But it happens and a person has to be ready at a moments notice to deal with these unplanned failures. Being able to do consistent autos has proven over the years to be the single biggest heli saver for me. Sooner or later everyone will have a flameout or a mechanical glitch and coming down in some type of controlled crash is better than just piling it in. In any case I was glad to just put in a new locktighted screw and I was up and going in 15 min or less. Don't ya just love this hobby? LOL
Posted on: 11/12/2005 2:55 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "Century - Predator, Hawk IV, Falcon, Raven"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3545724

RE: TOKI 40 engine is a POS.
My Toki just completed a shortened 196th flight when I split S-ed out of a reverse cuban eight and the ground was approximately 2 feet higher then I remembered it being. [&o] When I find myself in situations like this and waiting for parts, I use the spare time to go over everything and moniter things like the engine for wear. Upon inspection with the back cover off I found what I would term I mid life connecting rod. My subjective definition is that when you roll the crank back and forth you can see the oil squish on the crank journal. Its obviously not as tight as it once was. Now back to your situation. I don't know how you can blanket say these engines are a POS. I don't know how many posts I"ve read over the last three years of OS's spitting out rear bearings faster then you can say "hover". I would say from my experience though that there is nothing else on the market that builds this much power, smoothly I might add, for anywhere near the money. I got mine in combo with the mechanics for $299 on my Hawk Pro and I feel its good value. When winter kills my flying I'm putting in a new rod and wristpin and I'm going to be out a whole $20. Sorry for your bad luck in dealing with Century on this matter. I've had my share of hair pulling moments with them also, but I don't honestly think these engines are a "bad deal" for the dollar spent. Maybe some other users can pass along their durability impressions also. I think when your approaching 200 flights like I am using 30% wildcat, thats a hell of a lot of flying and having fun for cheap! Replace it and go have fun. Lifes too short to smoke a fuse over a $100 engine. [:D]
Posted on: 11/2/2005 3:16 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "Century - Predator, Hawk IV, Falcon, Raven"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3514858

RE: twin for .40 engines?
Hard to beat the Twinstar for a first twin project. I got one with 40 LA's and it scoots out real decent. Flys easy and quick. Spend most time around 1/3-1/2 throttle and get about 8-9 min flights on the stock tanks. Best part in your new to twins is it slows down and lands like a good trainer. Main gear first and then nose gear. Mine has over 140 flights on it this year and the cover trim is getting a touch ragged, but what the heck for $119.
Posted on: 9/19/2005 6:34 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "Twin & Multi Engine RC Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3373737

RE: Tell me about the Century Hawk Pro!
The Hawk Pro is really a good flying helicopter. And I won't even say, "for the money". It would be still good if it cost $299.00. I have had NO issues with this bird and I just finished off my 6th gallon of fuel. Only thing I changed was swash guide, and red (hard) dampers and glass blades. Of the three the blades were the best return on investment. So much lighter then the woodies that the hard dampers might not even be needed. Just lots less mass. With woodies, your really going to want the hard dampers if your doing anything in forward flight. I Know you said your just starting but its good to remember these things for down the road when you get into acro and foward flight. When I first built or assembled as the case may be, I completely checked over the preassemebled parts. Especially the torque tube attachment to the in, output shafts. Everything was in order but I relocktighted them anyways and never an issue from day one. My honest opinion of this thing is I can do anything with it I could do with a kick butt 60-90 sized heli. Its very stable and yet quick on the cyclic. If I had to describe the whole heli in only one word it would be SMOOTH! I'm getting ready to get a Raven with a Hyper 50 and I think I'll be in hogs heaven. I believe that having learned and flown for years on 60-70 sized machines thats a pretty good testament to how I feel about this thing. I can fly my pro 12 flights on a gallon. My OS 70 powered heli gets 5 flights to a gallon. Since I've been through 8 cases of fuel this year with my planks and helis it does add up. If you can have just as much fun and get over twice the flying time why not? Power to weight ratio is better then my 70 sized machine. I hate to use names cause everyone thinks your bad mouthing their heli. Flying and comparing is believing though. Buy it, fly it, break it, fix it and have a blast.
Posted on: 9/10/2005 12:55 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "Century - Predator, Hawk IV, Falcon, Raven"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3346300

RE: Century Hawk Pro Setup
Take your radio and set the throttle collective lever to exactly half or mid stick. Set the rod length to the length specified in the instructions and attach it to the collective arm. Make certain the servo arm is straight up and down or perpendicular to the collective arm. When you put the pitch gauge on your looking for zero pitch at half throttle. If your getting a range of + or - 9 degrees your in the ball park. If your getting more or less then you need to select a different arm hole on the servo arm. In short just try to mechanically set the pitch in this range with no electronic mixing applied at this time. If your truly a beginner then you can use your pitch trimmers to give you a curve with a bottom set about -4or5 and a positive pitch of around +9. I know it seems complicated but if you mechanically get it close you will not have to spend a month of Sundays screwing around with your transmitter trimmers and knobs. Get in the air. make it simple and get flying time. After you gain some footing all the electronic trimming and the options you have for making the machine better will become self evident. Hope this helps?
Posted on: 8/10/2005 6:15 PM by Author "NIpilot" in the forum "Century - Predator, Hawk IV, Falcon, Raven"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3250137