To nail it down 100%, I have to say that I hesitate to buy any other Robbe Plane, after this one, as I just did not trust this company much after such experience.

I hope they did not spend too much money on it... but they were wise enough to stop the production already.

Originally posted by easytiger
That's not true. There are some GREAT mags out there. A small, partial list:
RC Jet International - never read it.
RC Scale International - never read it.
Flying Models - are you kidding me??!! what a joke! use to be good with some sailplane stuff, but come on!
RCM&E - ?
Stunt News - ?
...man, there is a bunch of em.
I think the prime complaints are about Model Airplane News, yes?
Like you, I would never take a magazine review and base my decision on that. Nor would I take a WEBSITE reveiw and base totally on THAT, either.

yes and Model Airplane News takes the icing on the cake.

Originally posted by easytiger
I mean, THAT review tells me nothing. Did you hand launch it properly? What did it weigh? What did the manufacturer say the weight should be? Did you add a pound of paint? Was the folding propeller included in the kit? The motor? Is that the recommended combination? Are you telling me that the Robbe Spitfire does not fly? Because I remember reading a reveiw in one of the British Magazines, one that is pretty straight, from what I have seen, that said it flies fine.
Are you saying that Robbe spent a small fortune on foam injection molding tooling on an unflyable plane?

easy buddy. at least we have people like Patrick that provide reviews AND great flying videos. It takes time to do all the work he has done and I am sure he doesn't get paid for it. I bet manufacturers are not sending him planes to review for free.

Thanks Patrick. Keep up the good work.

Originally posted by bwaltz
easy buddy. at least we have people like Patrick that provide reviews AND great flying videos. It takes time to do all the work he has done and I am sure he doesn't get paid for it. I bet manufacturers are not sending him planes to review for free.

Thanks Patrick. Keep up the good work.

That's true. I think we need to stick together, since we apparently can't trust the R/C media reviews. Any info from "real" people is better than false info from the media. However, it all comes down to the consumer doing his best to utilize all available information; sorting out the "garbage" to arrive at an informed decision. E-zone definitely helps in this process!

I don't know about the R/C medias. I still read reviews, as much as possible, as I always learn something from them + it is just nice to read and see pictures.

As far as their reviews, I usually like them, but I also filter, while reading + corolate it, before buying anything, with the Ezone.


As to go back to the thread title "Why don't you see reviews of really bad products". I think it is maybe because there is actually not many "really bad products".


Everything has its + and -, and I can't even think of 1 case, of a really bad product. Then, if people decide to focus on the positive sides, why not ? It prooves a good attitude and up to us to feel the hints, between the lines.

ABout 5 years ago, I was approached to do a "Review" of a Piper Super Cub kit from an mfr that was at that time I believe in Tenn or Kentucky, now in Fla( You figure it out).
I built it as per the plans and instructions. I had a few minor problems when building it, but I figured them out.When finished I went out to try to fly it as set up, as according the instructions. It was a piece or junk. It had scale "Dihedral", meaning a flat wing.Even with a coordinated turn, it wouldn't turn .It wouldn't climb.I tried several props,several gear drives too, even though they weren't recommended. This plane plain stunk. I even spoke with the "Designer", that suggested I did something wrong. Uh-huh,.......well, I suggested some design changes to make it fly easier, or even to fly, but I got resentment instead....
I contacted the magazine, told them my problems, and was told that the mfr was a major advertiser. Well, I want cred, so I REFUSED OUTRIGHT to write a review for the mag on it. I offered to return the junk to the magazine, but they didn't want it. You know what? I was never contacted to do another review for that mag again......but I still have my credibility!
Mark

Originally posted by bwaltz
yes and Model Airplane News takes the icing on the cake.

You said a mouthfull! MAN has gone down the tubes. I think they will turn around in a few years when they hire some new and better staff, they usually do. But right now, I did not even renew my subscription, and I'm a real magazine junkie.
But I would not paint all magazines with the same brush.
Here's another good one, RC Jet Power.

Originally posted by B717 Furloughee
That's true. I think we need to stick together, since we apparently can't trust the R/C media reviews. Any info from "real" people is better than false info from the media. However, it all comes down to the consumer doing his best to utilize all available information; sorting out the "garbage" to arrive at an informed decision. E-zone definitely helps in this process!

Very well said!

Originally posted by Patrick Plawner
There is almost nothing unflyable....

And I don't know how much Robbe invested to build this plane, but this is indeed, actually the WORSE plane I ever flew.

When I say "flew", this is exagerated.

Stock, it flyes like a rock, and you are assured that very soon, one of the landings will endup either in a tip stall, either with some broken foam, and even better, with a broken prop, as the prop touched the ground (unless you use folding...)

Yes, this is, this was as it is not sold anymore, a VERY BAD plane.


Not stock, using stronger motors... ??? Then I don't know.

Your review does not really tell enough to tell me if I want to buy this airplane or not. Maybe you had a bad battery pack, or maybe the motor was not broken in, or maybe you put too much paint on...at any rate, there is not enough info there for me to make an informed decision. I have to balance your review versus the one I saw in another mag, flight shots and all.

Originally posted by Patrick Plawner
I don't know about the R/C medias. I still read reviews, as much as possible, as I always learn something from them + it is just nice to read and see pictures.

As far as their reviews, I usually like them, but I also filter, while reading + corolate it, before buying anything, with the Ezone.


As to go back to the thread title "Why don't you see reviews of really bad products". I think it is maybe because there is actually not many "really bad products".


Everything has its + and -, and I can't even think of 1 case, of a really bad product. Then, if people decide to focus on the positive sides, why not ? It prooves a good attitude and up to us to feel the hints, between the lines.

True also. There are NOT many bad products out there nowadays! MOST stuff is good! This is the Golden Age of modelling, right now.

Originally posted by mrittinger
ABout 5 years ago, I was approached to do a "Review" of a Piper Super Cub kit from an mfr that was at that time I believe in Tenn or Kentucky, now in Fla( You figure it out).
I built it as per the plans and instructions. I had a few minor problems when building it, but I figured them out.When finished I went out to try to fly it as set up, as according the instructions. It was a piece or junk. It had scale "Dihedral", meaning a flat wing.Even with a coordinated turn, it wouldn't turn .It wouldn't climb.I tried several props,several gear drives too, even though they weren't recommended. This plane plain stunk. I even spoke with the "Designer", that suggested I did something wrong. Uh-huh,.......well, I suggested some design changes to make it fly easier, or even to fly, but I got resentment instead....
I contacted the magazine, told them my problems, and was told that the mfr was a major advertiser. Well, I want cred, so I REFUSED OUTRIGHT to write a review for the mag on it. I offered to return the junk to the magazine, but they didn't want it. You know what? I was never contacted to do another review for that mag again......but I still have my credibility!
Mark

I think that's what happens with most items that do not get favorable reviews. They just don't get published!
If this thing had a flat wing and no ailerons, there was definitely a problem there...

Originally posted by bwaltz
Quiet Flyer, the best, compared to the other dish rags.

IMO Quiet Flyer isn't without it's problems. They could stand to improve on editing and layout. Also, and I hate to say this, a lot of the article's writing could be improved. I'm not talking about the content, but structure and style. Intro, points, conclusion, many short sentences, and just general flow could be improved upon.

Their content excellent though.

I hate writing essays with a passion and I'd be the last person you would expect to complain about this sort of thing, but hey that's my unbiased review of the mag. ::runs for cover::

Patrick, went to the web site and really enjoyed the movies. There were a couple of hand launches that made me cringe a little. Some people do not have a good delivery.

But the launch of the Spitfire looked OK. However after that it looked like a model does when it has about 2 times the recommended throw along with a trim setting that was really off in roll and pitch coupled with an aft CG.

I had one like that once - an ARF aerobatic electric. It lasted two flights. I just didn't have enough time in the air to get each problem ironed out.

I forgot, throw in a stall condition every 5 seconds or so.

The Cub had ailerons, and still it was virtually unflyable. Just garbage. It was never published.
Keep in mind that magazines are not in the business of promoting RC, but in the business of making money. I understand business, but, there does need to be some credibility to the articles. I feel confident that when a mag runs my stuff, the modeler is getting an honest opinion, one that results in a decent flying ship. One cannot promise anything though, as the builders skill level means a lot in anything meant to fly.

Mark

Well, I don't get it! How can a super cub fly badly?
The Robbe Spitfire looked tailheavy from the video, you are right.

Why is it out of production? From what I understand, foam molds wear out, and need to be remade after so many thousands of kits...it may have nothing to do with the flying at all.