35% or 37% Avition Model Yak vs Comp-Afk 2.6 Yak

[shogunmst]

Getting ready to purchase a new project and i'm finding it really hard to decide which plane to purchase. I've narrowed it down to the Aviation model 35% , 37% and the Comp-Arf 2.6 Yak.... Maybe some of you guys who have owned these planes can shead a little lite on which one would be better and less of a hastle to put together. Share your pics of your planes too.
Thanks
Shogunmst

[bodywerks]

You are talking about 3 different engine requirements (well, at least two). The 37% will need a 150cc class engine, the compy 2.6 will need a 100cc class engine, and while the 35% is considered a 100cc plane, it is a noticeable bit larger than most of them and a bit heavier. They can be up to the 30 pound range - it will probably hover and pull out, but won't be impressive by any means. It would probably do better with a ZDZ120 or 3W 120. If you can float the dough, my vote is for the 37% Yak. Light, big, relatively cheap, and an awesome flyer. Second bet would be for the 2.6 Yak - it's almost difficult to get them heavier than 27.5 pounds, and even at that weight a good 100cc will yank it around with authority.

[BOATNIK]

I've owned the AM 37.5 yak and the Comp arf 2.6 Yak. As far as precision stuff the
CA Yak is the much better plane, but for 3D stuff the edge goes to the
AM Yak. My CA Yak had a DA on cans and was less than 25lbs., and my
big AM Yak weighed 39lbs. with a DA on mufflers. The bigger Yak really was
a floater. chris

[bryan01601]

Buy whatever one you like. I have had a 35% yak on da-100 and believe me power was no issue. the 2.6 comp arfs are very good planes and in the 355 class I think edges out the AM yak but at a price. The best overall 3d plane out is the 37.5% AM yak (if you can get one) they have been coming in around 37-40 lbs on a da-150. Price diffence between the 2.6 comp arf and the 37.5% will not be that much in the end. what you save on the airframe you will spend on the motor.

[baxternick]

I have owned the 35% yak, and have flown a 2.6 yak a few times. The CA 2.6 seems to track better, and be much more precise. The AM 35% yak was a monster at 3d! I have seen nothing like it. Power was no issue with my 106 on the front of it. This thing had a awesome ability to slow to a crawl in the sky becasue of the huge wing area! My yak weighed in at 29 lbs. We also have the same yak with a da100 on it at the field... He has no problem with power either! So really what you need to decide is do you want a 3d plane that tracks decent, or do you want a plane that is a little bit faster but can do precision with ease?

[Dave A]

I competed in IMAC this year with a CA 2.6 Yak. And I always got beat by the guy with the 35% AM Yak. I did finally get my CA Yak dialed in, but that AM yak flew so slow and precise it "presented" better in the air.

Because of that, I bought a 35% AM Yak. Now ... It is costing me much more to put the AM Yak together because I'm using 9 servos and a power expander because of the draw from so many servos. It dwarfs the CA Yak. In the CA Yak I use only 6 servos, HS5955s, no power expander, but I use a Smart-Fly battery share with two switches and batteries. Easy and works like a charm.

I don't think you can go wrong with either plane.

Dave

[JagerBomb]

My vote goes to the 2.6 CA Yak. I have over 100 flights on mine and it still looks like new. My 3.3 has over 300 hard flights on it and it still looks like new. The 2.6 with a few mods is an incredible 3D machine as well as a great IMAC machine. Setup is also very easy.

Mark

[Tailchaser]

For me there is only one choice, if you get only one, and that would be the 37.5% yak.
Not only is it a 3D monster, I had Garrett Morrison fly mine through the full Unlimited IMAC routine and it was just flawless.
Does that mean we could do it, maybe not, but it showed the plane was more than capable of performing all the required moves, and presented it's self very well.
The 35% yak I own also flys great and it make you fly way beyond your capabilities, which is a real confidence builder in itself.
Now the Comp yak, I don't own one but have flew quite a few and they flew alright but too me just didn't have that in the grove kinda feel, had to be the plane set-up though, because I own comp-arf 330 that I really feel comfortable with.
Bottom line, like they always bigger is better so I would go with the 37.5% yak well built and just plane ol blast in the butt to fly, kinda like getting back into that ol pair of shoes you always liked that were so comfortable.

Chuck

[Kitman]

Marky,

What were your mods?

Kitman

	Quote: Originally Posted by JagerBomb
	My vote goes to the 2.6 CA Yak. I have over 100 flights on mine and it still looks like new. My 3.3 has over 300 hard flights on it and it still looks like new. The 2.6 with a few mods is an incredible 3D machine as well as a great IMAC machine. Setup is also very easy. Mark

[shogunmst]

Well I've done the research and with a little help from your opinions I'm gonna go with the AM YAK.... Gonna place my order hopefully tomorrow.

[torquen]

Bodyworks, have you seen a 35% Am yak fly? If so who's was it? I just built one and it came out a solid 28pounds even with nicad batteries. You could drop this weight even more with the carbon gear and li-ions. There are six of them at my local field. DA 100's and 3w 106's. Every single one of them will out run my 150cc columbo anderson. The Colombo I have been flying for years is not a slouch either. I have won many first place finishes in free and unlim imac with it. So if the 35% yak can out run this plane I dont see where you are saying it "might hover" and "maybe pull out" Everyone at the field the other day was laughing when I told them there was a guy on FG from CO that says this plane is too heavy. Maybe you actually need to fly one. Also unless you have the first couple of batches the planes were getting lighter. Most are in the 28 pound range now. Its also got over 2,200 sq in of wing area.
Look at the pilots that are posting their comments on them. Just about everyone is saying power is not a issue. I would love to bring one up to CO and show you how even at your alt it would not be an issue. Iv flown in CO and really did not find it that big of a deal. I even flew my 42 pound "old" 3w extra and my 43 pound AeroWorks Extra up there.
Garrett Morrison

[Dennis C]

	Quote: Originally Posted by torquen
	Bodyworks, have you seen a 35% Am yak fly? If so who's was it? I just built one and it came out a solid 28pounds even with nicad batteries. You could drop this weight even more with the carbon gear and li-ions. There are six of them at my local field. DA 100's and 3w 106's. Every single one of them will out run my 150cc columbo anderson. The Colombo I have been flying for years is not a slouch either. I have won many first place finishes in free and unlim imac with it. So if the 35% yak can out run this plane I dont see where you are saying it "might hover" and "maybe pull out" Everyone at the field the other day was laughing when I told them there was a guy on FG from CO that says this plane is too heavy. Maybe you actually need to fly one. Also unless you have the first couple of batches the planes were getting lighter. Most are in the 28 pound range now. Its also got over 2,200 sq in of wing area. Look at the pilots that are posting their comments on them. Just about everyone is saying power is not a issue. I would love to bring one up to CO and show you how even at your alt it would not be an issue. Iv flown in CO and really did not find it that big of a deal. I even flew my 42 pound "old" 3w extra and my 43 pound AeroWorks Extra up there. Garrett Morrison

Thank you...this guy has a very negative feedback on just about every plane out there other then Aero-works. but since there in his home town he might be on the payroll