PDA

View Full Version : Slow poke VS. Dazzler


emaxximan
Sep 13, 2003, 11:46 PM
What plane would be better for general flying not 3D just general fun flying. And wich one would be easier to fly.

Oh yeah I mean the slow poke ARF sport 40
and the dazzler arf

If both had a 46 fx

Thanks

Paul Susbauer
Sep 14, 2003, 02:19 AM
Dazzler.. They are two completely different types of planes... The Dazzler is a sport aerobatic plane, almost a fun fly...the Slowpoke is mainly for lazy putt putt flying.

--Paul

t_predator90
Sep 14, 2003, 07:16 AM
I agree with Paul. The slow poke is just for lazy (and in my mind boring) flying..... Go for the Dazzler

mpj220
Sep 14, 2003, 08:02 AM
I am not a big fan of the Dazzler. It does fly OK and looks awesome. I don't care for the covering. It is the "sticky back" type. On a sunny day, it wrinkles and flops in the breeze. An iron doesn't even tighten it up.
Another thing that I did not like was that the wing was glued to the fuse. It makes transport much more difficult.
I put one together for another club member and flew it to trim out and such. Flying was much more sport like than 3D.
If you don't mind a profile, a Morris Knife ARF would give much better performance. It you want a fuse, the UCD 46, Modeltech Magic Extra, Global Freestyle all fly well. I think the Modeltech would be the lightest of the bunch. Though I haven't seen the UCD 46 yet. I have owned the other 2.
You could always go the high wing funfly route. Fun Air 40 or Magic 3D.

Just a few thoughts,
Mark

emaxximan
Sep 14, 2003, 12:30 PM
I don't really like the 60 inch wingspan on the slowpoke. But it looks cool and I wanna know can it do some aerobatics if so what kinds? Is an avistar as aerobatic as a dazzler if it would have a 46 FX.

t_predator90
Sep 14, 2003, 01:17 PM
The slowpoke can JUST pull through a loop..... No, the avistar and the Dazzler are totally different things.... The avistar is like a slightly more airobaticly capable trainer... While the Dazzler is a funfly plane, and it is much more agile than the avistar

therotund1
Sep 15, 2003, 12:49 AM
While I have not flown a Dazzler or the Slow Poke, I have extensively flown an Avistar with a 46FX on it. They ARE three different types of planes. This doesn't mean the Avistar is boring. I could even hover my Avistar for about 30 seconds before I couldn't keep up with it. Inverted, wide open and 3 feet off the deck will get your heart going too. I would recommend removing the dihedral from the wing and getting rid of the rubber bands. I've seen evidence of the wing stretching off the fuselage even with 14 rubber bands on it! Besides, the look on everybody's faces when you do something a trainer isn't supposed to do is too cool! I miss my Avistar and have almost decided to get another. No, I didn't crash it, I'm now training the son of the friend I sold it to with an LA (YUCK) back on it...

I think you'll have fun either way though....

Dave,
physics? we don't need no stinking physics!

RonHill
Sep 15, 2003, 09:06 AM
The Dazzler flew OK...

I didn't like the one piece plane part or it.

It was very hard t fit into my car.

Mine had peoplems with fluttering. Which ended with the right Horizontal stab going bye-bye.

With the .46 it didn't really like vertical flight, but as a general sport plane it was ok.

I learned the hard way to manage the speed.

I would not get another one. I just got a UCD.46, and while it is waiting on an Engine I have seen two others fly and I really like what I see.

I have heard good things about the magic Extra and flew a Majic.

Right now I think UCD gets my vote.

novabillss
Sep 17, 2003, 10:07 AM
I have owned both Slow Poke and Dazzler. With the Slow Poke aerobatice are deffinately limited, but it makes a great first low wing plane. I actually learned to fly with it. The Dazzler was my second planr and I agree it is more sportish then 3D. I was also very unimpressed with the construction of the plane. The first time I started the motor the front of the fuse cracked at the wing.
Check out the Magic or even New Phoenix Models 3D arf from Tower both are relatively inexpensive (around $105).

Good luck

kombat kid
Dec 11, 2004, 12:24 AM
I also hated the dazzler covering! it wrincled, ripped, easily punctured, etc. So i am recovering it right now! :D I like this covering pattern better than the original! im not done yet but almost. im gonna put a 46 engine on it!

novabillss
Dec 11, 2004, 08:29 AM
That looks really good

kombat kid
Dec 11, 2004, 05:31 PM
Thanks, its my first covering on a plane. Ive seen lots of magic fun flyers at my field and they are 3d machines, and pretty durrable too!!

kyle

gwinhh
Dec 11, 2004, 06:21 PM
Don't get the Slowpoke. It's heavy, slow, barely rolls with full throw. If you were close enough I'd sell mine!!
howell

Opie818
Dec 11, 2004, 11:22 PM
Put a 46 fx on it and the slow poke is the best sunday flyer youll ever have, mine had alot of throw and can easily perform inverted flight, and snap rolls with high rates. I loved mine but i lost control of mine(i think my aileron servo stripped) close to the ground and the airplane gods took my sacrifice! opie

Opie818
Dec 11, 2004, 11:24 PM
I dont know what you guys had on your slow poke but JUST pulling through a loop was not anything like mine!!! Opie

f2racer
Dec 13, 2004, 03:21 AM
The Dazzler will be a significantly better aerobat, but build the kit. As others have already mentioned, the ARF is covered with sub-standard sticky-backed "shelf-paper" and weighs too much (probably in the 5lb range, the kit can be built in the 4lb range).

That being said, neither model is really built for 3D. I've got the Dazzler's cousin the Uproar (same model without the turtledeck) and I've enlarged the elevator (1/2") and rudder (1"). It can hover, but not nearly as well as my profile models (Topcap and Sudokhoi) or Magics that I've seen at the field.

Another model to consider for general "fun-flying" would be the TT Lazy Tiger P-51 (http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXAVN4&P=7). I've seen a couple of these and they also fly very well.

Bob E.
Dec 13, 2004, 04:00 PM
Aren't there 2 versions of the SlowPoke? The regular one and the Sport one? Maybe that is the disparity in the comments above?

Opie818
Dec 13, 2004, 04:32 PM
Yes your right i had the sport with the 46 fx. Thats a good point Bob E.
Opie

escipion
Jan 19, 2005, 02:32 PM
A friend of mine put a Saito 72 on the Slow Poke, it extended the capabilities of the plane, but it is not intended or designed to fly that way, even the name say it SLOW Poke, you should better try the Dazzler.
One question, Have you ever thought about the Sig's Something Extra?, it is really a great plane.