Shop our Airplanes Products Drone Products Sales
Thread Tools
Sep 17, 2008, 05:53 AM
Redneck Injuneer
bill34207's Avatar
Mine arrived yesterday and it is a good looking bird. Fast assembly too. Took about 3 hours and that was using 30 min epoxy to attach the wings. Also wound up adding a little nose weight since I took some light glass cloth and lined the inside of the flimsy nose cone.
I still need to pull the fan and try to balance the impeller as it rattles pretty bad about 1/4 thru 1/2 throttle.

With stock battery mine balances about 5" back from wing leading edge. The assembly gude shows 1650mm back (6-3/8") and this wing only has a 16" root chord. Has anybody tried this one with the cg back that far? I usually go for about 1/3 of the root if there is no spec available and feel a lot safer at where it is now for the maiden flight.
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Sep 17, 2008, 07:45 AM
Rush
I havent flown it with the CG that far back. i run 4"-5" from the leading edge at the root so far and it flies fine this way for me.

Originally, using the stock setup, with the 4S 2200 lipo pushed into the back, i found her tail heavy and she'd stand on her tail on a take off, stalling badly.

I now have a HET 6904, 2w-20 in her and with FP 4250's, and 3700's, CG has run a bit forward of the 5". But still very flyable with the more powerful HET systems and it flies fast.

I gave up on the stock fan... no point balancing it to me. Put in a Wemo or a HET kit as they drop straight in and it will fly a lot better.

I had to replace the stock servos as well. they will not hold up at the speeds a HET fan can produce with good packs.

Good Luck on the maiden...

Regards

Rob
Sep 17, 2008, 08:14 AM
Got Monica?
CH47FE's Avatar
i dont mean to be a picky bastage but i like my planes as real looking as possible. Historically the F4 was a good bird for what it was designed for, high altitude bomber intercept, but as a dog fighter it had a few shortcommings. Anyways back to looking realistic. The canopy on this thing is ALL jacked up, its far to big, the nose just looks 'Ugh'...ill be waiting for a better looking version..just my .02 OTOH maybe the pic just sucks...can you post a pic of yours?
Last edited by CH47FE; Sep 17, 2008 at 08:20 AM.
Sep 17, 2008, 08:36 AM
Rush
i found the basic foam kit to be quite good. I'm not to sure if its as scale compared to a real one. but it flies very well on an upgraded power system and good electronics. and it looks like an f4 at least.

I've seen the EDO model F4. Nice model but smaller than the FMS one and doenst fly any better from what i saw when in stock config.

a few pics of the F4. after a few esc cut offs in the air, i decided to rebuild and repaint. I located the tsunami amp in the duct way, replaced all the stock servos, glassed it with 3/4 oz. modelling cloth and repainted.

HET unit and ESC in the duct


FMS F4, glassed and painted in VF 114 colors
Sep 17, 2008, 08:43 AM
"Aircraftus Fragmentum"
kydawg1's Avatar
AWESOME JOB!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by bunggorb
i found the basic foam kit to be quite good. I'm not to sure if its as scale compared to a real one. but it flies very well on an upgraded power system and good electronics. and it looks like an f4 at least.

I've seen the EDO model F4. Nice model but smaller than the FMS one and doenst fly any better from what i saw when in stock config.

a few pics of the F4. after a few esc cut offs in the air, i decided to rebuild and repaint. I located the tsunami amp in the duct way, replaced all the stock servos, glassed it with 3/4 oz. modelling cloth and repainted.

HET unit and ESC in the duct


FMS F4, glassed and painted in VF 114 colors
Sep 17, 2008, 09:47 AM
Wood flight decks, guns only!
VF84Sluggo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunggorb
...but it flies very well on an upgraded power system and good electronics.
Like what?

Here we go again with another $200+, more like $250+, chunk of styrofoam that needs big $$$ pumped into it to get acceptable performance
Sep 17, 2008, 09:48 AM
Registered User
PerlAddict's Avatar
Da-yum! Now THAT is a sharp looking F-4! I wish I had any skills at glass or painting, because that is much more along the lines of what I'd like my F-4 to look like when I get it.

Kudos to you for a bang-up job, man!
Sep 17, 2008, 09:57 AM
Rush
Thanks guys... setup is HET 6904, 2W-20, 72Amp esc. 6xHXT 9g servos and an AR6100.

yea.. its a $200 foamie, but no choice in the matter... i wanted the plane hehe... it looks good to me.... in reality, i havnt found a foamie that didnt need to be upgraded.... but much like others, i too would like it if you could just get the foamie kit instead of all that useless electronic stuff that comes with it.... and just put in what you want.

we're trying to do that with the F16
Sep 17, 2008, 10:14 AM
Wood flight decks, guns only!
VF84Sluggo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunggorb
yea.. its a $200 foamie, but no choice in the matter...
Halfway to $300, really, on the special "introductory price"...more if you miss out on this good deal. But I do agree about having no choice, unless you just say "No"
Sep 17, 2008, 02:00 PM
Got Monica?
CH47FE's Avatar
What he said....It looks sharp man, nice job. In your pics the nose looks longer which balances it all out after all. Nice job...
Sep 17, 2008, 03:01 PM
Wood flight decks, guns only!
VF84Sluggo's Avatar
Ok, now that I've slammed the cost...doing some obligatory griping, sorry...if you could have either this HL 70mm F-4, or the HL 70mm F-16, which would you pick? Which one performs better?

Right now, I'm leaning to the F-16 because of the working rudder. Also, does it have a thrust advantage over the F-4 since the exhaust does not split into two nozzles? Or does the non-scale nose strut in front of the F-16 negate this, or even hurt more?

I realize this is not purely on-topic here, but wouldn't be either on the F-16 thread...so, please bear with me.

Thanks,
Sluggo
Last edited by VF84Sluggo; Sep 18, 2008 at 07:02 AM.
Sep 17, 2008, 04:23 PM
Registered User
F4 airframe only for $98 plus shipping


http://shop.eflypower.com/shop/views.asp?hw_id=1709
Sep 17, 2008, 04:29 PM
Registered User
PerlAddict's Avatar
Awesome! Thanks for that link. =D
Sep 17, 2008, 07:24 PM
Redneck Injuneer
bill34207's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunggorb
I havent flown it with the CG that far back. i run 4"-5" from the leading edge at the root so far and it flies fine this way for me.

Originally, using the stock setup, with the 4S 2200 lipo pushed into the back, i found her tail heavy and she'd stand on her tail on a take off, stalling badly.

I now have a HET 6904, 2w-20 in her and with FP 4250's, and 3700's, CG has run a bit forward of the 5". But still very flyable with the more powerful HET systems and it flies fast.

I gave up on the stock fan... no point balancing it to me. Put in a Wemo or a HET kit as they drop straight in and it will fly a lot better.

I had to replace the stock servos as well. they will not hold up at the speeds a HET fan can produce with good packs.

Good Luck on the maiden...

Regards

Rob
I plan to leave the cg where it is for now at 5". Tried my luck with balancing the fan this evening and may be dropping a 6904 and 3w in this one sometimes soon. Not looking for the radical speed (and associated amp draw & larger batteries needed) of a 2w-20, but don't care much for the fan. Reminds me of something you'd find in a GWS kit and even after balancing, it still rattles pretty bad. I've got a good 6904 laying on a shelf here now but no motor for it. I'd be temped to try the stock motor & housing if it had a 3.17 mm shaft so I could put the 6904 impeller on it.
Guess I'll try my luck with it "as is" this weekend and if it flies decent will spring for a 3w to drop in it. I like the looks of the airframe though. Wish fly-fly would hurry up with the 90mm version I've heard hints of.
Sep 17, 2008, 07:33 PM
Redneck Injuneer
bill34207's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by VF84Sluggo
Ok, now that I've slammed the cost...if you could have either this HL 70mm F-4, or the HL 70mm F-16, which would you pick? Which one performs better?

Right now, I'm leaning to the F-16 because of the working rudder. Also, does it have a thrust advantage over the F-4 since the exhaust does not split into two nozzles? Or does the non-scale nose strut in front of the F-16 negate this, or even hurt more?

I realize this is not purely on-topic here, but wouldn't be either on the F-16 thread...so, please bear with me.

Thanks,
Sluggo
I eyeballed the F-16 a bit too. Got turned off by it having elevators instead of stabilators though. (Not to mention that I have three 16's already) Going totally off topic here with a suggestion for ya. Grab a HP F-16 (airframe only kit $64.95) then drop a 6904 and 3w in it. Mine has been clocked with a radar gun at 122 on this setup.


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AERC F-4 Phantom Building and flying thread! pilatus turbo Electric Ducted Fan Jet Talk 709 Jan 16, 2008 10:40 PM
AERC F-4 Phantom Building and flying thread! pilatus turbo Electric Ducted Fan Jet Talk 0 Nov 14, 2002 12:44 AM
FS: Factory New AERC F-4 Phantom Taking Pre-Orders Now gbagley Aircraft - Electric - Airplanes (FS/W) 9 Oct 16, 2002 08:50 PM
Great Planes F-4 Phantom greenshirtrwg Fuel Plane Talk 0 Jun 05, 2002 10:25 AM
F-4 Phantom II - First look... Daren Electric Ducted Fan Jet Talk 139 Mar 18, 2002 12:27 PM