Brand new Cox Icon 3-channel FM Radio Transmitters for $6.95!

shell shock wrote:ill relay this to some of my friends. ive been helping them get into rc planes. this might help them.

Kim wrote:Most of my stuff is STILL on 72Mhz, and will be for some time. I've had the Sinbad WAY up high, where the main threat was my losing sight of it. The radio has never faltered.

The transmitter's case is shaped to fit your hand, and is an excellent first time set. You'll probably still be using it after you've gotten into the high-dollar sets.

Cox International wrote:Microflightdude,

Yes, a stick for vertical and horizontal axis and a slider at the back for throttle.

Nitro,

I took one of the Cox servos apart when we first got them and they are of a surprisingly good quality. However, i would not use them on anything bigger than 1/2A. They are tiny and only have so much torque.

Bernie
www.coxinternational.ca

Kim wrote:Yes, like any tiny servo, you'll want to limit their stress and use them in small planes (AND even then, be sure to check them after an "All-Points-Touch-Down"...AKA cartwheel landing).

But also remember that they can be used in applications in any size plane as a throttle servo, or to activate switches for lights and landing gear and such. I intend to extend the leads on one that I'm mounting up next to the Cox .15 on the powerpod of my 3 meter Bird of Time to give it throttle control.

Cox International wrote:Really? What's the item #?

Bernie

Cox International wrote:Really? What's the item #?

Bernie

Cox International wrote:

I took one of the Cox servos apart when we first got them and they are of a surprisingly good quality. However, i would not use them on anything bigger than 1/2A. They are tiny and only have so much torque.

andrew wrote:

Cox International wrote:

I took one of the Cox servos apart when we first got them and they are of a surprisingly good quality. However, i would not use them on anything bigger than 1/2A. They are tiny and only have so much torque.

I've always viewed with some interest the decision process folks use when selecting components to use in their planes.

Many years ago, when I was new to this hobby, radio failure was a common and all too frequent occurrance and a lot of bench time was spent tuning and working on the electronics. Today, our Tx/Rx combos are rock solid and seldom are the cause of crashes --- unless the Rx has been thru several impacts.

We search for good engines, quality coverings, adhesives, dopes, batteries, etc. But, when it comes to servos, many of us seem to be price driven. Certainly, being weight conscious is important and Bernie mentioned torque as a consideration. For most of us flying smaller planes, if the linkages are free, there is no binding in the pushrod path and the hinges are free, servo torque in not really a limiting factor. We simply don't fly fast enough for our control surfaces to generate much resistance; it takes surprisingly little movement to get the plane to turn.

While pricing and weight is very appealing with the ultra-micro servos, I don't like the tiny ones for a single reason: The gear trains simply do not have sufficient strength to hold up under continued vibration, hanger rash and the occasional all-points-landing. Given that I've spent both dollars and hours (when scratch building) in a plane, my inclination is to use a heavier (and more expensive) servo. Most all of the other airborne components are low failure items; given that's the case, I don't want to have a single point of failure tied to a questionable servo. Generally, lose a servo, lose the plane.

The 6g to 9g servos are OK for foamys, but for my built-ups, I really prefer the 11 to 14g servos with either Karbonite or metal geartrains.

BTW, the stall torque listed in nitroairplane's add is incorrect for oz/in. 1.2 kg/cm is actually around 16.7 oz/in, not the 42.3 oz/in listed.

nitroairplane wrote:
I started in this hobby a long time back with FF models and even bow tend to build my rc models just like my ff models; floaty and slow and sometimes trimmed to do a circuit of the field.
Most of the planes are just ones that are more aside than control so just need to be gently nudged around and not forced.
So I use the lightest gear I think I can get away with and (touch wood)
Have never had any servo failures and the only radio failures were bot even the radios fault but mine for not recharging the battery.

andrew wrote:

nitroairplane wrote:
I started in this hobby a long time back with FF models and even bow tend to build my rc models just like my ff models; floaty and slow and sometimes trimmed to do a circuit of the field.
Most of the planes are just ones that are more aside than control so just need to be gently nudged around and not forced.
So I use the lightest gear I think I can get away with and (touch wood)
Have never had any servo failures and the only radio failures were bot even the radios fault but mine for not recharging the battery.

I certainly can't fault that logic. There's a set of plans for a 40" span FF that I've been eyeing lately. If I widened the fuselage slightly, I could get a radio in it -- and would consider using the smaller servos. Flying would be just get to altitude, then putz around in the glide back. Realistically, the electrics have done much to remove the vibration damage the tiny servos are susceptible to.


Thats why ebenezers are good
In the area where I live, we don't have enough open space without trees to fly true FF without the good chance of losing or having a plane damaged, so adding R/E makes it feasible. However, I'm still more comfortable with a beefier gear trains in the faster planes.

andrew

Kim wrote:Yeah, an item I forgot to mention was the type of customer support I've gotten from Cox International. While it won't bring back a crashed plane, your overall treatment of your customers still, at least for me, is THE turning point.

AND...my Little Traveler I (Minnie Mambo) is STILL happily cruising around, guided by your little servos, in it's 3rd year of life !