2000mm Giant Scale B-24 - Olive Drab

You must Sign-in or Register to post messages in the Hobby Squawk community
Registration is FREE and only takes a few moments

Register now

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FMS 1700mm Warbirds - What's the scoop?

Collapse
X
Collapse
First Prev Next Last
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • FMS 1700mm Warbirds - What's the scoop?

    Howdy everyone. OK. Getting ready to purchase a large warbird, and I'm intrigued by the FMS 1700mm series. But, in reading all of the reviews, I'm getting mixed vibes.

    I have 2 FMS planes (the 1450mm B-51B and the B-25), and although they're ok, I'm not blown away. I'm a little gun shy about pulling the trigger on a $450 plane without having a solid idea of the quality.

    I don't want to do a bunch of mods. That's what I like about Freewing....flies great stock.

    So, give me the straight scoop. How are these planes and would you recommend the 1700mm Corsair, the P-51 and/or the P-47. Really want the truth.

    Give it to me!

    Thanks, guys. Out.

  • #2
    Go flight line 1600 spitfire and don't look back! Better plane better quality for $100 less

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by rifleman_btx View Post
      Go flight line 1600 spitfire and don't look back! Better plane better quality for $100 less
      Absolutely, and the Flightline Tigercat!
      TiredIron Aviation
      Tired Iron Military Vehicles

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by TiredIronGRB View Post

        Absolutely, and the Flightline Tigercat!
        I'll pile on and say YES SIR.
        Warbird Charlie
        HSD Skyraider; FlightLine: OV-10, Sea Fury; FMS 1400: P-40B, P-51, F4U, F6F, T-28, P-40E, 1700 F4U & F7F, FOX glider; Freewing: A-6, P-51; VQ: P-39; Dynam: ME-262, FW-190, Waco; ASM A-26; ESM F7F-3; LX PBJ-1 EFL CZ T-28, C-150

        Comment


        • #5
          I don't own the new Spitfire...yet! But from the video reviews it appears to have ample power that is really exciting, as well as excellent presence in the air. I have the TigerCat but haven't maidened. However, after viewing videos on this one the power seems ample as well, but it's not a speed demon by any means.

          I do own the FMS1700mm P-51, and it is indeed great quality, as long as you don't have too hard of a landing. Sometimes it doesn't even take very much, but I've only had to replace one wheel and strut so far. And I've had it for 3 years now. The only thing I would say is not favorable regarding the FMS 1700mm series is that the power isn't ample enough for them. Replacing the power system with the set up from the FMS Pitts is a much better system. Gives it plenty of power and pull! So, you wouldn't be spending just the $450. You'd be spending closer to $600 (with the upgrades) if you truly want to enjoy them.

          Comment


          • #6
            Great, thanks Rifleman and TiredIron. Now I'll be up all night assembling the TigerCat. I've had it in the box for about 3 months. Just didn't have the time or the space. (Even though I recently put together the A-10). You've both made me want to see the Tiger Cat in action now!!

            Comment


            • #7
              From what I've heard the new FMS Tigercat 1700mm is actually an amazing aircraft. But I have the flightline bearcat and tigercat, and I LOVE them.
              Current Fleet: Flightline Tigercat, Flightline Bearcat, Eflite Corsair, ESM Skyraider, Pilot RC Yak-54 30%:corsair

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Sky Wolf View Post
                Great, thanks Rifleman and TiredIron. Now I'll be up all night assembling the TigerCat. I've had it in the box for about 3 months. Just didn't have the time or the space. (Even though I recently put together the A-10). You've both made me want to see the Tiger Cat in action now!!
                That's what we're here for ;) let that plane breath! Lol

                Comment


                • #9
                  Till now, every FMS warbird has had weak landing gear. At the slightest rough landing, they can pull out. I've got the 1450mm P-51 and the 1700mm Corsair. After extensive re-gluing and reinforcement, I can now say that they are fairly solid. I can't speak for their new Tigercat. I will only believe real world reports. Those preview reviews by professionals don't tell the whole story as they're trying to build up hype and sell product. Landing gear on the latest FMS EDFs are not much better. Until FMS put in the slightly bigger 360kv motors in their 1700mm warbirds, they were barely adequate in the power dept. It's taken quite a bit more money and modding to make my Corsair the way it should have been from the beginning. And at nearly $500.00US per copy, it shouldn't have been this way.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Thanks everyone. That's a lot of what I've been hearing.... the FMS birds are underpowered. That's what I found with my 1450mm P-51. Had to put in the motor from the 1400mm P-40. Now it's satisfactory.

                    I'm okay with the build quality. Not as good as the Flightline, but good. The plane looks great. But, when we get to $450 for a 1700mm plane, I want to be sure I won't regret the purchase.

                    I have the silver Flightline P-38, and it's very good. Although I have had the landing gear pop out a few times. Also had a gear that didn't want to drop once, so I had to do a 2 wheel landing. The plan was never the same after that. I ended up buying the green one and have had good luck. So, all planes in that price range will have little issues.

                    One of my friends has the Flightline Tigercat, and to be honest, I'm not crazy about the looks of that plane. The P-38 looks much better. They have the same power system, so I don't see a reason to buy another one that doesn't look that great.

                    I'm really thinking about the 1700mm Corsair or the P-47. If Flightline had more of the 1600mm series, like a Corsair, a P-47 or Mustang, I'd definitely go for it. Just not passionate about the Spitfire. Now, a Hurricane, that's a different story. Or, a P-61? That would be very cool. Definitely would pull the trigger on any of those.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I have not owned neither FMS or Flightline planes as of yet. But I have been looking into both for various models that have interested me. One aspect I always take into consideration is the maintenance cost like the cost of parts. By comparison FMS parts do cost a bit more than Flightline. Plus you can count on Motion RC to support for their Flightline line of planes for a long time.

                      In terms of the looks of a plane I tend to focus more on the performance first then the looks. I fly a lot of combat flight simulators and I have come to appreciate warbirds more for their capabilities than looks. From by experience with the F7F Tigercat its one of the best twin engine planes I have flown in War Thunder. And I'll go into battle any time in a P-47 than in P-51.
                      If you have a descent PC I recommend downloading War Thunder. Its free to play and it features a slew of warbird from late WWI to the Korean era. I have found it a great way to learn more about all these planes and have some fun while your at it.

                      www.warthunder.com

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Evoman View Post
                        I have not owned neither FMS or Flightline planes as of yet. But I have been looking into both for various models that have interested me. One aspect I always take into consideration is the maintenance cost like the cost of parts. By comparison FMS parts do cost a bit more than Flightline. Plus you can count on Motion RC to support for their Flightline line of planes for a long time.

                        In terms of the looks of a plane I tend to focus more on the performance first then the looks. I fly a lot of combat flight simulators and I have come to appreciate warbirds more for their capabilities than looks. From by experience with the F7F Tigercat its one of the best twin engine planes I have flown in War Thunder. And I'll go into battle any time in a P-47 than in P-51.
                        If you have a descent PC I recommend downloading War Thunder. Its free to play and it features a slew of warbird from late WWI to the Korean era. I have found it a great way to learn more about all these planes and have some fun while your at it.

                        www.warthunder.com
                        The one time I tried to download this sim, it didn't work on my computer. In fact, it froze it up and I had to recover from a previous version to get my computer back. I think it may have even planted a bug in my computer. And it's only "free" to a certain level and that level doesn't appear to be very high. Then the credit card has to come out. I guess I don't have a "decent" computer. So no, never again. Besides, what you experience on a sim doesn't translate into the real rc model. They can program features and characteristics (and "performance") into a simulated plane as they wish.
                        I'm glad you're having fun playing with the sim. For me, I'll "play" with the actual model.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I purchased both the FMS 1700 Corsair and P51 at the same time from MRC. Both were all latest models and from a new container recently received. NOT so happy with them. The Corsair had servo issues and just seems like its a project plane, it sat around for about 2 weeks till I could finish it out of the box. Although MRC was kind enough to give me a hand with replacement parts, its FMS quality that is the issue.

                          As for the P51... Right now its sitting on the side of my work bench. The tail rudder is going to require some sanding as the fit is too tight. The right wing is too long at the connecting edge, therefore I cant connect and screw them together properly. Its going to require some cutting. Another thing to note is that they weren't initially designed for some of these bigger batteries we have now, so you'll have to figure that part out as well. Again, not an issue with MRC Obviously, its FMS and what seems to be a lack of love for these bigger birds. I purchased the FMS 1500 Razorback because I've always loved that bird but honestly, its the last FMS plane Im buying. I've put in so much money in replacement parts that its not even funny... Hopefully MRC and Flightline will have this plane rebuilt with their quality and scale which is at the moment, unbeatable.

                          FMS currently = Great looking airplanes w/unreliable electronics.

                          The recent MRC/Freewing/FlightLine series of airplanes are simply several steps up above the rest at the moment. The quality, the R&D for not only the airplane but the build itself is amazing. If you were to take apart one of these airplanes and look at the frame you can definitely see that there was some planning put into it. Download the manual for the latest 1600mm Spitfire and you'll see what Im talking about.

                          As Pilot Ryan said "Its nice to have guys that fly, designing these planes. Isn't it fellas?"

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by xviper2 View Post
                            The one time I tried to download this sim, it didn't work on my computer. In fact, it froze it up and I had to recover from a previous version to get my computer back. I think it may have even planted a bug in my computer. And it's only "free" to a certain level and that level doesn't appear to be very high. Then the credit card has to come out. I guess I don't have a "decent" computer. So no, never again. Besides, what you experience on a sim doesn't translate into the real rc model. They can program features and characteristics (and "performance") into a simulated plane as they wish.
                            I'm glad you're having fun playing with the sim. For me, I'll "play" with the actual model.
                            The only issues I am aware of with War Thunder is that it will not run on a PC that has had a Windows10 upgrade from Win 7 or 8. But it will run perfectly on a clean install of Win 10. There is also an issue with older PC's with built in graphics processors. I myself had that issue when I tried installing WT on an older PC I had repaired. The built in graphics processor was not compatible with the video drivers required to run the game.

                            I do agree that the flight models in WT are generally not that accurate however I have found the Hellcat in WT does come pretty close to how my Dynam Hellcat flies.
                            For the best in PC simulation there is only DCS World for military aircraft and X-Plane 11 for Civilian aircraft. The variety of airplanes are fewer in these compared to WT because they take longer to develop because they simulate every working system along with its complex flight models. They typically can take 2-3 years to develop for just one aircraft and are sold separately at $60 each when released. However these sims do require a fairly new computer with a good graphics processor. War Thunder may not be the best accurate simulator but it still is the best entry level sim with a plethora of available aircraft that keeps growing with every major update. Also any player can easily get into it and have fun. Where with the other sims you have to actually learn to operate them in the in game training courses to be able to fly them.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              As mentioned the weakness of most Electric RC Warbirds is their retracts.

                              I am hopeful that both of the new releases from Flightline, the new 1600 Spitfire and the new FMS 1700 FMS Tigercat's new set of tricycle retracts will both be robust enough to handle the rougher grass fields that so many of us fly from. Early feedback certainly indicates that they work well, will just have to wait and see how long and how strong they really are.

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                Originally posted by DonRhone View Post
                                As mentioned the weakness of most Electric RC Warbirds is their retracts.

                                I am hopeful that both of the new releases from Flightline, the new 1600 Spitfire and the new FMS 1700 FMS Tigercat's new set of tricycle retracts will both be robust enough to handle the rougher grass fields that so many of us fly from. Early feedback certainly indicates that they work well, will just have to wait and see how long and how strong they really are.
                                I will not believe "early feedback" when it involves testing of prototypes by factory representatives or those who may benefit in some way from their liaison with said factory. They are like those who review cars on TV car shows. We rarely hear the real truth on a review of a new model because these car show producers fear a bad review may curtail future samples from the manufacturer. It's not until the next model year or two that they tell us how the deficiencies have now been "fixed".
                                Model aircraft reviews of "samples" are particularly one sided since these "testers" are trying to sell product for the company by painting a stellar image of the product. No blame being placed, just saying that's the way it is. Nevertheless, they are still interesting and is a good unveiling of coming products. It is the first private owners' reports that hold the most weight and value. I do agree that "hope" runs eternal.
                                At our flying fields, we have seen product that are less than what was initially stated. It is immediately apparent that euphemisms were used in abundance in those reviews. We can go back to them and clearly see that what was NOT said was far more important and relevant. And let's not forget the "groupies and fanbois" who jump on the bandwagon and think that what was said is the absolute truth. Then they go out and spread the information as if it was gospel. We spend an enormous amount of money on these things these days. I prefer to be a cautious consumer.

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  By listening to the feedback regarding new rc planesI am talking about the remarks made by those who actually buy and fly the models.

                                  I agree that in all likelihood the feedback from the early "Reviewers" released to the public is to be taken lightly.

                                  As there is usually a business relationship between the two, and most do not want to upset thier clients.

                                  While I do watch the various reviews of the new planes by the professional reviewers I take stock mainly from those who have spent their own dollars on the rc planes and have been flying them.

                                  However, I certainly have benefited from a few of the build videos found on You Tube where the reviewers, RC Informer for one, have gone into detail to show how to assemble some plane components in such a way as to avoid future problems. The build reviews on three planes stand out, one was the build video of the FMS P-38, the Freewing AT-6 and the Freewing Mosquito airplanes. Those videos in particular addressed problems in assembly of the planes. The advice given and shown made for relatively easy builds. Motion RC has also made a few videos as well showing how to avoid problems during assembly.

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    I have the 1700mm p51. I bought mine from motion rc alittle over a month ago. It had packing damage from factory typical of what I've seen posted over a couple years, corner of flaps crunched, some dents in foam from packing and wing gap. Wing gap was easy, filed alittle off carbon rod that goes into the wing. Dents, well, tried various techniques like hot water, heat gun etc., but they didn't work well, got some dents part way out. Heat gun cause small alligator effect. I ended up just sanding, filling and touch up paint, came out well, not noticeable any way. Had the seam on top of front fuselage come with 6" gap, ended up filling it with glue and light spackle and touched it up. Spent a Lot of time getting it presentable.
                                    I've had no problems with electronics, retractable landing gear is a joke, has some good parts, but the screws in the plastic suck, don't get threadlocker anywhere near these, they disintegrate, luckily, it was one screw area, that I was able to use epoxy on. Breath on the foam and you get hanger rash, in all seriousness, it's very Easy to get hanger rash.
                                    other than the headaches, I like the size and detail. With the money, not really, it's a $300 airplane in my book. If quality control was there from fms, a different foam and upgraded retracts, then it would be worth the price.
                                    other than that, I'll keep it, re do it this winter as a blue nose, may add some fiber cloth to it.

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      Yep, I crashed my frankie on its maiden, tip stalled. Broke fuselage in half, messed up both wings and landing gear as they were down. I replaced landing gear, glued fuselage back together and fixed the wings. All set up again, just have to do cg.

                                      Here is my six shooter, blue is not exact, but it's my favorite color.

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        I have or have had the 1700mm P-51,P-47, and Corsair. The P-51 hands down is the best one. The P-47 is next with the Corsair last. The Corsair has landing gear issues for sure. But, almost every 60 size (1700mm) plane that has twist an turn gear does. The P-51 is fairly solid with the retracts, other than some damn switch that tends to fail. The P-47 is the same on the mains. The tail gear n the 47 needs to be modified where the steering pin is at. Other wise the pin jumps out and you end up with a tail thats bouncing and has no control. The P-51 you can prop mod the spinner and you get a lot more pop. You can also purchase the FMS 5060 KV360 motor that goes in the FMS Pitts Biplane and swap it out with the stock motor. That is pretty close to equivalent to the prop mod. Its the only easy solution to increase the sub par power from the stock config in the Corsair and P-47. Overall I think you get a really good plane with the P-51. I think you get a good plane with the 47. The Corsair is way to wing heavy, you have to mix the flaps and elevator, which is not a big deal, but is a little weird to have to do with a Corsair. You have to add weight to the nose of the Corsair, because battery alone will not get it right. So, in my opinion the Corsair probably needs some design tweeks. I would call it over priced as is.

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X