ARFs sizes

[Azhar]

I am in the decision of bringing in some ARFs into the market in the near future but I am keeping the details to myself for now. I am just doing a poll to see what sizes are the most popular if I were to do an intro. Your response will be greatly appreciated.

[sweetpea]

50 and 100cc sizes are most likely the most popular as they fit more budgets.

[Azhar]

Thanks Sam. I will be collecting data via this poll and make the decision.

[zoomer260]

I'm gonna say 30% or 35%.

The 50cc (30%) class will always be the most popular. Makes me wonder why the the top kit cutters start at 35% ? Maybe for them the cost of cutting a kit say 25% or 30% is not enough less than a 35% to try and market something that costs too much. Profit margin must remain the same between them all.

I personally like 33% size planes. But I have been trying to find the cost effective plane between a 33% and a 35% and the engine choices for 33% size is very limited.

I have found that I can actually put together a 35% plane with suitable equiptment cheaper. Some who insist on a DA or 3W engine may not agree with this.

Since I have no problem with a DLE 111 or even a couple other imported engines in that class this is what I would use even in a 33% plane because there is no suitable 80cc class import. For me the onboard radio system would be the same with either.

Add that to the fact that the "combo" deals offered with this engine do not include 33% planes there you have it. Cheaper to go 35%.

My 2 pennies.

[sweetpea]

From the companies I've talked with the price of a Kit 50cc is about the same as an ARF 50cc so with that profit margin it makes sense to appeal to the easier ARF market.

[bodywerks]

One reason 50cc is not optimal for me is that the power is too limited for how big the latest "50cc" planes are. I know there are tons of guys just loving their 17 and 18 pound planes with a 50 on it but it's just not enough for me - sorry.
Lightweight(25-26.5lb) 100cc planes are where it's at.

[infinitemass]

Don`t forget us quarter scale orphans! With all these 30-40cc engines out there.

[Efishensea]

100cc - best bang for the buck!

[leepord geko]

Depends how you set up your plane and what type's of planes you want to be selling, 50cc size is probably the most optimal considering you can put one together for a $1500-$3000 dollars the 35% (100cc) usually are double that depending on your setup again, I would say the minimal for a 100cc is about $3000 where I live, so the 50cc planes based on price and transportability are the most economical in my opinion.

[crazyjoe]

100cc because I dont like single cylinder engines. The 33% market never made sense to me when the cost increase to go 100cc is minimal, for a better flying more reliable set up. As far as the 50cc goes I'm with Bodyworks.

[zoomer260]

	Quote: Originally Posted by bodywerks
	One reason 50cc is not optimal for me is that the power is too limited for how big the latest "50cc" planes are. I know there are tons of guys just loving their 17 and 18 pound planes with a 50 on it but it's just not enough for me - sorry. Lightweight(25-26.5lb) 100cc planes are where it's at.

You just touched on a pet peeve of mine. Some of the crowd that goes on and on about "weight" of this engine versus that one. Even the weight of a servo for cryin' out loud has ZERO problem with an 18lb "50cc" plane. They put all the latest "gizmos" in them that (for me) are not needed and then say they chose this batt because it is lighter than that batt. But then have to run regulators. Power expanders ??????? I don't get it. Not when they are the same "weight watcher" people.

All the people that went on about how high the wing loading on a H9 260 (the small one) was with a 50cc engine. Jeez, gimme a break !

Don't get me wrong I am not a weight freak. And if a gizmo makes ya feel all warm and fuzzy inside go for it. Enjoy it. But please don't mention how heavy batt "A" is over batt "B" when ya have to install another gizmo to use it.

[2walla]

Depends on what the airframes you are looking at bringing in too. I think it is probably easier to do a 100cc and make some bucks on it and still have a decent product at a decent weight.

[leepord geko]

I haven't got much time on a 100cc plane because I can't really afford one, they defiantly present better I flew a carf yak 55 with I think a 3W 106, and was that plane draggy it flew heavy because it had so much drag. Going to the weight I understand the effort taken to save weight, but its the people who remove you know the wheel pants to save 1oz, but batteries if you run 4 li-ion's at 3.3oz vs 4 nimh at 7oz each that adds up eventually.

[Azhar]

The airframes will be a the generation of aerobatic models. Let's put it this way, it will not be of the draggy kind

[FlyinTiger]

Just out of curiosity...what are the current importers of ARFs doing that you don't agree with or want to improve upon?

If someone is going to buy yours over another "brand" out there then there has to be something different and attractive about your planes. I thought we had seen it all in the aerobatic ARF world...guess not!

Looking forward to another step in the way of innovation.