|
RE: Is RealFlight 6.0 worth the upgrade purchase?
Upgraded myself and the price was right to be honest but I still voted 'no'. $50 upgrade is easy to justify but I am unimpressed. It's the same old same old. I've had real flight since about version 3 I think. It is an okay simulator but I have never actually been 'impressed' by it. I'm not saying any other sim is better though because RF is the only one I have. Things that irritate me: The upgrade isn't an upgrade - it just installs a new version into another folder and then you have to go through reinstalling all your old flight packs. It doesn't include that many new or interesting planes. The SBach is cool, there are a few more cool planes. It does look better, the graphics are better the performance is better but the product isn't. $50 upgrade - sure I'll do that. New for whatever they are selling it for? No thanks.
Posted on: 11/24/2011 8:52 AM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "RC Flight Simulator Software"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10827078
RE: Sigmfg.com
[quote]ORIGINAL: bobsrc We might update some parts of our kits as time allows. Right now we are working to get the manuals updated to match our improved ARF's that are under construction. We want to remain at the top of the quality end of the supply chain of ARF's and kits and it just takes time to get it right. Have patience as we are doing our best at providing service to the modeling world. Bob Nelson Design Engineer/Cutomer Service Sig Mfg. Co. [/quote] Bob, it's great to hear that Sig will continue on. I've been flying Sig models since the early 80s and every couple of years I build a new Kougar. My favorites are the Kadet (original and the ARF), 4*40/60/120s and the Kougars. On my list of 'kits to build' are a hog and a hog bipe. I actually was taught to fly on an Astro Hog back in '84 by a friend of my Dad's. Please keep these old kits in production! I see them at the field often enough so I am sure there is a market for them given the right marketing. I was really disappointed when Tower stopped carrying Sig and have purchased far less from them since.
Posted on: 9/17/2011 11:15 AM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10721151
RE: U Can Do 3D
Seems like the Saito 100 is the engine for this bird - I was able to talk a buddy out of one for a fair price...once I get the garage cleaned up I'll start building her.
Posted on: 7/18/2011 11:00 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10628046
RE: U-CAN-DO Inverted Saito 100
[:D]
Posted on: 6/23/2011 5:02 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10589132
RE: U-CAN-DO Inverted Saito 100
[image]http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png[/image] As I stated earlier: We will have to agree to disagree. I've read it from Clarence Lee in many magazine articles that he has authored specifically on inverted model engine tuning. The tank height should be around 1/4" above the centerline of the carb. I believe him, I trust him (have for 30 years now) and I will continue to follow his suggestion. Oh, and this too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Law
Posted on: 6/22/2011 6:56 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10587550
RE: U-CAN-DO Inverted Saito 100
[quote]ORIGINAL: opjose [quote]ORIGINAL: submikester Still - it isn't pressure.... [quote]ORIGINAL: submikester The quality of the carb can also impact things.. Still, that OS 70 SII...... no difference. [quote]ORIGINAL: submikester I just don't understand why these plane designers compromise... to hit every possible combination because this is just not very important. [quote]ORIGINAL: submikester
Posted on: 6/21/2011 10:27 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10586188
RE: U-CAN-DO Inverted Saito 100
I believe that those larger engines with larger carbs may be less suseptible to these types of problems than the smaller engines that I normally run. My larges is a 120 4 stroke (I have two). Still - it isn't pressure that is the demon here it is gravity. If you have two containers, one higher than the other and a tube in between them connected within the level of the fluid of the upper container. Gravity will force the fluid out of the top container until it either reaches a level of equality or the fluid level runs below the tube. In out case the higher container is the tank and the lower container is the carb. Now, in some engines - they need a pump to draw and this gravity can actually help things but up in the air when things are sloshing around and moving inverted the lack of pressure in the tank and drawability from the carb will give poor performance results. Take for example an OS 160 2 stroke. I've got a buddy who has one and it just doesn't draw well; I believe the carb is too big allowing atmospheric pressure to be more dominant than internal vacuum pressure within the system. A pump fixes this. The quality of the carb can also impact things - I tend to buy used (though I have bought the occasional new when times are good) OS engines. I like their quality and longevity. I also buy Magnums because of their overal value. Good running engines with good life and parts that are easy to come by. Plus - global is pretty local to me and I have a good relationship with some folks there. The OS carbs are leaps and bounds higher quality in my eyes than the Magnum carbs and their engines tend to run better to boot. I have an OS 70 and a Magnum 70 4 stroke. Carbs are different, probably a lot of other differences too but they both perform well enough. The OS however is a power house - has almost as much power as a 91 - in fact I get nearly the same RPM with a 14x6 MAS prop as I do on my 91s. Still, that OS 70 SII does not like to have a fuel tank that is too high. There are a lot of different factors that can impact engine reliability and performance from design of the engine, tank placement, needle adjustments (duh!), fuel, plugs, etc... With so many things that can be wrong - I just don't understand why these plane designers compromise and put tanks in positions that are higher than the level of the carb? Regardless of your individual results you can't argue with 'best practice' and I think we can agree that 'best practice' is to put the tank on the level of the carb. In the Venus (my ongoing example) the tank center line is a a full inch above the center line of the carb. If you take a look at all of those beginner books that describe these sorts of things they tell you where the tank should be. Yet these guys insist that tank placement is not that important. I've ranted and raved about this till my keyboard is blue in the keys but I guess the point I am trying to make is that I don't understand why they do it 'wrong' to begin with when it is so easy to provide a better product and do it 'right'. Your mileage may vary.
Posted on: 6/20/2011 10:43 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10584574
RE: U-CAN-DO Inverted Saito 100
No it doesn't. I'm not inexperienced (I'm not perfect either but don't tell my wife I said that). In fact, my standard fuel tank setup is a simple - two line setup. One for the fuel feed and fill and one for the vent. So my engine cannot be flooded by me fueling it up since it is completely disconnected during that event. I use OS F plugs, sometimes I use on board glow and that can help but it is usually only a mask to the problem so if the tank is still too high you will still likely end up with either an idle that is too high or too rich and unreliable. I run inverted engines all the time; I wish I could spend some time with these folks at GP and actually what they are doing because I have only been consistently successful by putting the tank in the right place or going to a pumped/regulated engine. I actually don't own any of these at the moment (I have a regulator I have used in a drawer and have sold the engines I had with these features but not because of them). So - my message is simple: Put the tank in the right place and things will work better more consistently. Engineer it right from the start - not wrong as most of their products are in this area.
Posted on: 6/20/2011 1:01 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10583900
RE: U-CAN-DO Inverted Saito 100
[quote]ORIGINAL: Rocketman_ See picture below. 1. UCD 60 (in foreground) is powered by an inverted OS.91, 2-stroke. 2. UCD 46 (in middle) originally powered by an inverted Saito .72, 4-stroke. Now it has a Saito .82. 3. UCD 60 (in background) is powered by an inverted Saito 1.00, 4-stroke. All four engines can be properly adjusted to give trouble-free operation with the fuel tanks in the stock location. And, as many people have already said, use your kill switch on your transmitter to fully close your carb before turning off your receiver between flights. Many times the engines will restart for the next flight by quickly snapping the spinner backwards against compression with your finger tips. No pumps or regulators needed. I guess some of us just have incredibly good luck, or something. [:D] [/quote] Rocketman, I can't explain your luck and I see my problems too often at the field to imagine it is anything else. I'll lean back on my Venus - my first one had a few different engines in it and had a previous owner. He had put an inverted OS 46 installed as the instructions called out. He could never get it to run reliably at idle to be able to safely taxi it from the pits to the runway for take off. The airplane transferred to me and I put a tired old OS 46 SF (ringed) engine that was actually an amalgam of two different 46s. It ran beautifully in my Stick, upright prior to that. In the Venus it was just like the original owners - bad idle that when leaned out too much impacted the engines ability to transition properly. If I richened it up it would end up loading up and dying or again - transitioning badly. I tried a side mounted engine and things were much better - nearly perfect. What changes with a side mount in this case? The carb height and the fact that fuel is no longer pooling on the plug. Eventually I bought a brand new OS 70 surpass II and I put it in my stick to break it in. standard operating procedure for me. In the stick it was a perfect engine - upright with the tank well below the carb. In the Venus with the tank well above it was crap. It basically didn't idle - if I leaned it out of course it idled too fast and unreliably. If I richened it up it would flood - there was no reliable in between and it is a classic problem. Some people are lucky - you my friend are one of those folks. The day I moved that tank down the entire experience with that plane changed. Now I don't even try - if the tank is not in the right place in the design of the plane when it enters my garage - before it leaves it is. Like I said - you are lucky. I'm sure you're luck extends far past that of model engines. I'm certain that when you walk in to a bar women are drawn to you and you're drink is ready. I'm sure that once you get to the bar the 'most interesting man in the world' gets up from his stool and says 'I was saving it for you.' I am not that lucky (except for the women - they dig me - my problem seems to be engines). [:D]
Posted on: 6/18/2011 11:12 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10581275
RE: Sepulveda Basin
Here is the latest eNews from the club: Valley Flyers RC eNews Thursday, June 16, 2011 AHEAD THIS MONTH: Burgdorf Q500 Races; Indoor Olympics Your Valley Flyers has a LOT going on... through the rest of June and into July. That starts with the Tribute to Fred Burgdorf Q500 Race on the June 24-26 weekend. The following Tuesday, June 28th, we have the next edition of the increasingly popular Indoor Olympics micro-fly night at our meeting at the Encino Community Center. Then we fly into July with the FREE Valley Flyers Members Fun Fly & Swap Meet on Sun Jul 10 (which is combined, this year, with the Valley Circle Burners "Teach and Fly") followed by the summer session of LA Jets over three days, starting Fri Jul 22. Some details now on our next two events... and first, we turn to a dispatch by Bob Smith on the Burgdorf racing event: TRIBUTE TO FRED BURGDORF Q500 RACE - FRIDAY, SATURDAY AND SUNDAY JUNE 24-25-26 The last Q500 race hosted by the Valley Flyers in 2011 is scheduled for June 24-26. It’s entitled “Tribute to Fred Burgdorf Q500 Race�. It’s ‘one’ race over a two day period event. Fred Burgdorf passed away September 1st, 2010 and was considered a ‘friend’ to the Valley Flyer racing community. Over the last decade, Fred helped sponsor our club financially for a number of races and particularly the FAI trials, held at the basin. (The FAI Trials are conducted in each country that participates in the F3D pylon racing class to decide who will represent their country). Just as a side note, the FAI races will be conducted this year. They will be held in Bundaberg Australia and representing the USA are the following racers, listed by trial finishing order; Randy Bridge (1st place), Travis Flynn (2nd place), Gary Freeman Jr. (third place), and Ray Brown (alternate). Travis will be the CD for the Burgdorf Tribute race. Back to the Burgdorf race. So what’s in for me you say? (1) Free BBQ eats for race officials, (2) entry into the Valley Flyer annual year end prize drawing (officiating at races earns more entry tickets than a typical fun fly, due the effort required) and (3) a shot at $100 in cash for winning the end of the Burgdorf event officials drawing! June 24th is a half day of practice and requires just a little support from the ‘event’ regulars to help get it started. However, the Saturday and Sunday weekend needs a lot of support from the membership. Starting at 9 a.m. sharp, we need help in the way of lap timers/counters, pylon #1 judging (4 officials required), pylon #2 and #3 judging (one judge at each station). We need more resources than actually listed to allow for breaks and to cover the two day event! So if you are available later in the day, that’s OK! We already have a team for the concession stand. If you can commit to half a day or more, Saturday and/or Sunday, please email me at flynbs@socal.rr.com or call me at 661-298-2614. Thanks in advance for your club support! Best Regards, Bob Smith As for the Indoor Olympics at our Tue Jun 28 meeting... here's the word on some changes and a new challenge from Mike Lipsey: INDOOR MICRO OLYMPICS - TUESDAY, JUNE 28 The event will include Coaxial heli racing and obstacle course work (with a BRAND NEW Obstacle!) Micro airplane racing (Embers and Vapors in their own classes depending on what folks bring). Thanks! In case you've never attended the Micro Olympics... [link=https://picasaweb.google.com/bob.tarlau/ValleyFlyersMicroOlympics]click here for a link to photos I took at the May event[/link]... and you'll get an idea of the fun. =O= Runway Repair Contributions Still Needed We're still looking for donations to help cover the cost of repairs to our main runway which suffered from the floods of March. The cost will be just over $9,000. VF President Chuck Thompson thanks everyone who has already contributed. For those able to help, checks should be made out to: Valley Flyers Foundation PO Box 2055 North Hills, CA 91393 Cheers & Happy Landings, Bob Public Relations Director San Fernando Valley R/C Flyers Academy of Model Aeronautics - Charter Club #152 www.valleyflyers.com
Posted on: 6/18/2011 1:56 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10580671
RE: Sepulveda Basin
I was out a bit today - saw a Habu 32 but didn't see if fly. Disappointing but I only had a bit of time to spend.
Posted on: 6/18/2011 1:53 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10580664
RE: U-CAN-DO Inverted Saito 100
This is a problem that I have been railing on in ARFs from Great Planes for YEARS. Seriously. I have a UCS60 in the box that I will be starting on probably sunday night. I'm trying to wrangle off a Saito 100 from a buddy... The way they design the tank placement in these is a recipe for this problem yet in the instructions it is never mentioned. I have a VEnus and a Venus 2 and they both had this problem with their inverted engines. I have excellent running engines - they run FANTASTIC, like sewing machines when the tank is placed properly. When the tank is too high they run rich (DUH!). A regulator can help but that's another $40 to correct a DESIGN FLAW in the tank placement in the aircraft. Finally in my Venus I had had enough and decided to fix it right. I cut out the muffler notch they build into these airplanes and ripped out the tank shelf they put in these airplanes and lowered my tank the proper height. The result? I have a Venus with an OS 70 SII that ticks over at around 2000 rpm with a 14x6 MAS prop (yeah that's a little big for the engine but she seems to dig it). I haven't yet done the same thing to the Venus 2 but it will get done to her - she's in the garage for repairs and that's on the list. BEFORE the UCD even get OUT of the Garage I will do this to it if I have to just to get the tank in the right place. It just seems stupid to me for them to keep building airplanes this way and frankly I see problems with it at the field from other flyers every time I am out there and care enough to pay attention to the world around me. I'm not the only one - you're not the only one - I don't know how they even get their testing done unless they just have a box of CLINE or IB regulators laying around. Maybe they only test with their pumped engines...
Posted on: 6/17/2011 9:45 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10579803
RE: Magnum Engines?
Hey Ed - do you have a Magnum 120RFS? I have one new in the box and am wondering how they perform. I have a UCD 60 that I have to choose between the 120 and a 91RFS. I'm leaning heavily toward the 91 just because of the warnings from GP and the weight of the 120 but... [:D]
Posted on: 6/17/2011 9:31 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "Glow Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10579792
RE: u-can-do 60
I've got one of these coming to me via my lovely and wonderful wife to makes sure I have most Sunday mornings available to fly... I have two engines I could use. So far I'm only up to about page 30 on the reading... The two engines I have are a Magnum 91RFS (4 stroke) and a Magnum 120RFS (also a 4 stroke). The 120 is new in the box - never been run. The 91 (I have like 4 of these babies) runs like a champ, I usually pull a 14x6 on it for my sport planes. I read in the beginning of this thread that the 91 4 stroke was a good match. This engine has proven to run as well as an OS 91 SII (seriously scientific comparison - details can be provided). The 120, well - If a 91FX is a good match then the 120 4 stroke should be a decent match though it is probably about 4 oz heavier. So which engine? Further on the servos - the recommended are basically standard servos. Will that be cool? I will put a heavy duty on the rudder. I think I'll start off with the standards and then upgrade it to some Hitec 5485s (pending further review) or the Spectrum standard digital (which looks like a nice servo actually). I do not think this bird really needs some digitals but I have a new DX8 and I want to run it at the lower refresh rate (11ms) and you need digital to do that. It will be interesting to see the difference between the performance with digital and without. Wish me luck! I will probably start on it in a couple of weeks...
Posted on: 6/8/2011 10:07 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10564313
RE: Sepulveda Basin
Leroy's a great guy. I don't know him well personally but at the field he always has a big smile. We chat almost every time we are at the field at the same time.
Posted on: 5/12/2011 5:47 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10516574
RE: Sepulveda Basin
[quote]ORIGINAL: rare_bear mike, a few of the cracks out on the runwar are large enough to rip off some of the smaller landing gear... especially if the crack is running the length of the runway where it is of greater possibility for a tire to get wedged in and hence, sheared off. as far as repaving, there's a tradeoff between how long to wait for dry-out and the sense of urgency. if it is better to wait for a long dry out period, then it might be good if a bunch of volunteers came out and filled the cracks with asphalt as a temporary band-aid??? at least we are out of the storm track for now: http://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?CityName=Van+Nuys&state=CA&site=LOX&textField1=34.1867&textField2=-118.448&e=0 [/quote] I agree completely. I think that the cracks should receive some form of a band aid - I'm not a paving engineer of any kind so I could be totally off base on my assertions as well. I just don't want to see bad work done that ends up costing the club/foundation more down the road. I would rather see it done well once than badly multiple times.
Posted on: 3/28/2011 11:26 AM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10428222
RE: Sepulveda Basin
last two
Posted on: 3/27/2011 5:09 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10426776
RE: Sepulveda Basin
Here are some pictures I took this afternoon. It seems most of the mud is cleaned up. The runway is use but there are some pretty significant cracks in the pit area as well as the runway. My own opinion is that the runway cracks should not impact it terribly. There is a serious couple of cracks in the pit area around where the taxiways converge. One near the upper end frequency pins is a cavern. The heli area is still be worked on and when I spoke to Benny he said they were planning on more work tomorrow. I don't know exactly what the plans are for fixing the cracks but something does need to be done at the very least in the pit area. Still - I think the ground needs to be allowed to dry prior to any real work being done. Any outlay of funds of that magnitude would probably need a board vote and the board meeting is in two weeks.
Posted on: 3/27/2011 5:07 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10426772
RE: Sepulveda Basin
[quote]ORIGINAL: MikeRuth Just in case you didn't read this link...http://www.valleyflyers.com/newsletters/2011/799-march-special-edition/download.html The field is [b]closed[/b] this weekend for cleanup. Only people going in are the ones working to clean up. Mike R [/quote] I made an update to the newsletter which caused the link to change, this is the new link: http://www.valleyflyers.com/newsletters/2011/800-march-special-edition/download.html
Posted on: 3/26/2011 11:52 AM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10424128
RE: Sepulveda Basin
I had hoped to provide more information but here is what I have. http://www.valleyflyers.com/newsletters/2011/800-march-special-edition/download.html
Posted on: 3/26/2011 11:51 AM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10423214
RE: Sepulveda Basin
I am working to complete a special edition newsletter tomorrow and I will post it on the VF website (and link here) with some pictures from the aftermath. I'm trying to get as much information as I can but I haven't been up there since Tuesday myself (I live about 30 miles south and of course I work during the week).
Posted on: 3/24/2011 11:12 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10421240
RE: Global Skylane 45-60 build
[quote]ORIGINAL: aedwards I've actually got the same plane I bought from someone in a semi-completed state. I have the manual but I don't have the plans. I need the plans to reference for placement and mounting so I can do final assembly. Could you help out a fellow builder and send/post some picutres of the plans so I can put my model together? Thanks! Adam [/quote] Wow man, I'm not quite sure how to make a copy of the plans. They are pretty large...
Posted on: 3/23/2011 8:20 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10418992
RE: Great Planes Stinger II .46 ARF announced!
Well, that's mildly exciting - I always wanted a stinger but they were gone before I was ready to commit. I also knew of the shortcomings of a Lanier product. GP does have good products even if I have been mostly underwhelmed by what they have been doing these last few years. This one could be good and if they do a 60 sized I'll be even happier. I've got a 4 stroke 91 that needs a home, for this one I would probably put a 70 in it - depending on the actual measurements.
Posted on: 3/23/2011 8:15 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10418984
RE: Sepulveda Basin
Anyone notice all the dead bees on the ground today at the basin?
Posted on: 1/1/2011 3:27 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10232539
RE: Sepulveda Basin
I have been out to the field 3 times this week and I'm hoping for 2 more before I have to go back to work. It's been pretty good - a little windy on Sunday but it didn't stop me. Today was quite nice too. I'm hoping that Thursday morning will be good - supposed to be a front coming in tonight I think. Otherwise, Saturday and Sunday are a possibility. For the first time I used the charging stations the club has setup and it was great - it charged up my 3300 mah 4S Habu battery. I can't seem to charge that from my wimpy 10amp 12v field box battery.
Posted on: 12/29/2010 9:34 AM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10224055
RE: Sepulveda Basin
That Mustang isn't my airplane but I think I walked by when you may have been having that conversation with the guy if it was yesterday. I had my 2 year old with me. These pictures are from Saturday I think and that one of the Mustang my 6 year old took. I don't know why the images are posting so large - that's never happened to me before and I always have my camera set on 6mp. The first picture posts normally but then the rest post full size. If you click on them they do the normal zoom to screen size. It's strange.
Posted on: 12/29/2010 8:00 AM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10224903
RE: PICK UP Only,, NO Shipping??
Well, if that's the case - I would have shipped them. Things in boxes I have no trouble shipping generally speaking.
Posted on: 12/28/2010 10:14 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10224306
RE: Sepulveda Basin
um...their picture uploader needs some work I think...
Posted on: 12/28/2010 7:39 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10224069
RE: My KINGDOM for some RC-10B2 rear wheels
Okay, I actually used a pair of needle nose pliers and pried the old tires off and they almost came off - mostly. It was a pain but not as much of a pain as trying to find new rims... There aren't any on eBay that I Was able to see. So now I'm rolling with some new tires that are spot CA'd on instead of CA'd with a full bead (Previous owner did that - not me).
Posted on: 12/28/2010 7:31 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "RC Car General Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10224050
RE: PICK UP Only,, NO Shipping??
Done it myself quite a few times. Craig's list does not have the audience that this place and the other site do. I always specify 'local pickup only' or I state the shipping is $4000. People always ask if I can ship anyway. I will respond back to them with the text from the ad... I don't ship because I don't feel like dealing with it. Typically these are airplanes that are 40-60 sized ARFs that are still in production. Shipping one of them built would end up costing the buyer more than if they were to just order it from Tower. However, if you want it and are local and by and large I am usually able to find someone who is - come and get it. Heck, if you're close enough I'll even meet you half way. That is much easier than dealing with an airplane that was broken in shipping. When shipped, until it reaches the buyer's door unharmed it is my responsibility. If it gets damaged - I eat it. It likely isn't worth insuring and I have to send the buyer back their money. So, I do local pickup only and usually meet someone else nearby who is interested in the same thing I am. Sometimes - they even become a new flying buddy. Local pickup only is a very good thing to have and I appreciate it very much. [:D]
Posted on: 12/28/2010 5:42 PM by Author "submikester"
in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10223850
| 
