how things have changed !
|rob smith 2||13/11/2015 07:14:41|
|28 forum posts|
I've been out of RC for a long time and my how things have changed.
I'm after a basic setup 4 channel and my needs wont increase so can anyone recommend a basic setup that wont break the bank ?
can you use 2.4G for surface craft ?
sorry for what may be daft questions but the 2.4G is a new one on me.
|rob smith 2||13/11/2015 08:01:38|
|28 forum posts|
Found another thread about this so now a little more informed. Thanks
|Dodgy Geezer||13/11/2015 09:28:14|
|818 forum posts|
It might be interesting to note the changes which people have noticed since the 80/90s in the boat modelling field. (Possible topic for Model Boat article?). Here's a starter for 10...
- Fewer Model shops around - so much more postal purchasing
- The rise of China and internet shopping
- I/C motors fall out of favour - brushless electric motors arrive
- Battery technology continues to improve, with the arrival of Lipos
- Glue and materials technology changes - carbon fibre and foam board, but good quality traditional balsa/ply becomes harder to source...
- Seems to be less scratch building - ready-made kit is more common, particularly fast boats!
- 2.4Ghz technology is booming - VERY cheap and full of functions, BUT these are mainly aimed at helicopters/drones and of little use to boaters. Submariners get hit as 2.4Ghz doesn't work for them...
- On-model cameras, autonomous control and visual feedback to the operator are now readily available, though not cheaply (yet!).
- Few youngsters joining the hobby - and fewer venues available for it...
That ought to bring some commentators out of the woodwork...!
|Malcolm Frary||13/11/2015 10:34:50|
|893 forum posts||
I got a Saturn set as my entry into 2.4GHz. 4 proportional channels and one on a switch, and it was priced so as not to break the bank. The extra receivers are not the cheapest, BUT when you look at the cost of a cheap 27MHz RX then add the cost of a pair of crystals, it looks a lot better.
Yes, they work on surface craft. You do need to be careful where you mount the aerial on the RX as it will be very short and they are very line of sight.
|Dodgy Geezer||13/11/2015 12:43:46|
|818 forum posts|
I got a RadioLink as my entry into 2.4Ghz. Rock -bottom prices from GiantCod tempted me - I think it was around £20 for a combo, with spare receivers at £7.
Amazingly, they are CHEAPER now! You can get a 4-channel from Hobby King for £17, and a 6-channel for £18. I see new receivers on ebay for £3. These are cheaper than a transmitter strap used to be...
|Dave Milbourn||13/11/2015 14:11:45|
4004 forum posts
I've handled several of those stupidly cheap radios and I wouldn't put one in any model which I wasn't prepared to lose or damage. They are cheap because they are made to go into toys which by their nature don't last for very long, and they are stupidly cheap because they use poor-quality or even reject-grade components; are badly assembled by low-paid workers and have no Quality Control.
I was talking to a guy very recently who insists on buying the very cheapest speed controllers he can find, direct from China. He buys them in tens. When I asked him why, he told me that that - of the ten - only four would work at all and of those four only one would continue to work. When that one finally goes bang he buys another ten. At four pounds each that means he pays £40 for one poor-quality ESC which is pretty much bound to go wrong sooner or later. Utter lunacy.
Only by cutting every corner possible can electronic equipment be made for that price. As I wrote somewhere once, if you pay a lot then you might not get everything that you expect, but if you pay peanuts then you'll most likely get everything you deserve. I've stated publicly that I wouldn't pay any less than £80 for a Tx/Rx 4-5 channel combo; I've seen nothing to change my opinion.
|Dodgy Geezer||13/11/2015 15:36:36|
|818 forum posts|
Well, Radiolink also do £100+ radios which have quite a following stateside - so they must be able to do some things right...
The RadioLink T4Us are not intended to be toy radios - you can pick up toy transmitters on ebay for less than £10 - but they do have cheap trim, cheap switches, and the internal soldering is worth checking out before switching on. I've got three - they all work fine, but I did resolder the pot connection wires on one because, though working, one wire was only half soldered on.
I've got a variety of cheap escs (including the infamous blue heatsink one) and not had a dud one yet. But I do run them WELL below any claimed amperage on my small model boats - 2 or 3 amps at most for a claimed '50A' unit.
I can only go on my experience, which is that the quality control is low and they should never be run up to the maximum capability claimed, but, taking that into account, they can provide a functional cheap service. My oldest T4U has now had 5 slope soaring seasons and works fine to out-of-sight range. I suspect that the cheap price is also due to having little or no research costs, and making use of cheap mass-produced mobile phone or wireless computer parts rather than custom circuits.
The one area I might agree more fully with you is servos. These, of course, are items which wear, and I have had one or two miniature ones where the pot goes jittery after a couple of day's use - as likely to be down to poor assembly or dirt as much as cheap components. But the great advantage of boat building is that there's always a use for a servo motor and gear train..
Getting back to the original point, even discounting CCSs (Cheap Chinese Systems!), I would still say that a modern Radio Control is cheaper and more functional than the radios of the 1980s...
Edited By Dodgy Geezer on 13/11/2015 15:37:31
Edited By Dodgy Geezer on 13/11/2015 15:38:12
|Peter Fitness||13/11/2015 21:39:48|
508 forum posts
I would definitely not use the cheap Chinese radios in aircraft, where a malfunction can be disastrous, however I am quite comfortable using them in boats. I have three of the cheap 2.4 ghz radios and have not yet had a problem with any of them, after up to four years of regular use. I completely understand Dave M's position on this, and I have a great deal of respect for his expertise in these matters, but I take the view that the worst that could happen to my slow model boats is that they cease to respond mid-lake. Should that happen which - touch wood - it hasn't so far, then it would be time to launch the rescue boat. I would also not use them in fast electrics where a malfunction could cause damage to other boats.
|Martin Field 1||13/11/2015 22:27:06|
|564 forum posts|
I bought a £45 Spektrum DX5e Tx. last year and an Orange £8 Rx, both of which have a pretty good name. Having eschewed model flying, I'm sure these will be fine for model boats, including yachts.
|Dave Milbourn||13/11/2015 23:21:38|
4004 forum posts
If you have a stupid-cheap Chinese radio which works for you then fine - it works for you. By the same token there are a lot of people who happily drive round in cars which are mechanically unsound and offer little protection in the event of a crash. As long as you're prepared for the possible consequences of buying the cheapest XYZ on the market then that's OK by me. Suit yourselves, chaps, and good luck to you.
I've seen and heard nothing to change my opinion, but it's only my opinion.
Please login to post a reply.
Want the latest issue of Model Boats? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!
Make sure you never miss out on the latest news, product reviews and competitions with our free RSS feed
We welcome well written contributions from Website members on almost any aspect of Model Boating with a particular emphasis on practical hints, tips, experience and builds.
In order to maintain a consistent standard and format, all suggestions should first be sent to me by Personal Message for approval in principle. Only a very limited amount of time is available for editing contributions into a suitable format for placing on the website so it is important that the material is well presented, lucid and free from obvious spelling errors. I think it goes without saying that contributions should be illustrated by appropriate photos. I shall be happy to give advice on this.
The Member Contribution area offers space for short informative mini articles which would not normally find a place in Model Boats magazine. It is an opportunity for Website Members to freely share their expertise and experience but I am afraid that virtue is its own reward as there is no budget to offer more material recompense!
I look forward to receiving your suggestions.
Colin Bishop - Website Editor