I've always considered kit R/Cs to be **THE** true R/C, but with the proliferation of mass-produced, styrofoam-encased ready-to-run R/Cs, I am finding it very hard to justify the price difference between the two. Especially since I do not generally race my R/Cs (so not a hardcore, "I-need-to-swap-motors-and-try-this-new-one").

Any thoughts?

If you are talking about cars, I'm not sure about how that market has changed. The airplane (and even mini helo) market is very heavy with RTR and BNF products. Foam abounds.

I always did want to build an R/C car from a kit, dating back to the first time I saw the Team Associated RC-10 in the mid 1980s. Never did, though. By the time I bought a "real" R/C car, it was a Parma on road 1:12th that someone else had already built. Tamiya has reintroduced a few of their late 80s and early 90s kits over the past couple years, but I just don't have the time or space. And even then, the cost is looking at over $300 for just a backyard clod-hopper.

If I do anything R/C in the future, I'd like to build up an airplane the old way. Stick and tissue. I've built a static display model years ago that way and enjoyed it.

EDIT: Parma? Maybe the body. I think it may have been a BoLink chassis. It's been a darn long time.

For aircraft there is a wide amount of difference between kit, ARF and RTF packages.

The Kits tend towards being high end, and since you assemble it yourself, you know there won't be any screw ups. You can be confident in the quality of glue, the manner of application, the structural integrity of each piece etc... With ARF and RTF packages the ARFs tend to be a little better, but you have no way of ensuring the plane was built right. I used to work for an ARF company (Kondor Model Products: www.kmp.ca) and while we specialized in high end ARF's we still sometimes had people in the factory doing stupid things. Now... KMP stands behind its products and will replace damaged or poorly put together parts. We've even had entire shipments of ARFs where we've notified the customer of a defect brought to our attention and had the factory replace the parts quickly and ship them to the customer. But you get the occaisonal cock-up that you wouldn't believe. For example, the wing rib that had been broken in the factory and glued back together (some factory worker didn't want to get a new 2 cent piece of balsa for fear of being fired or something) and mounted in a wing. KMP works closely with its factories to prevent that, but these things do happen. If you have a box of wood, however, its up to you to put it together (that said, if you break it, you're screwed).

P.S. if you're building from a kit, use Solartex as a covering. It looks great and paint adheres amazingly.

Yep, talking about cars, but would apply to boats/airplanes/helos as well.

I used to have an old Tamiya Grasshopper that my dad built, when I was 18, I saved up and bought a Tamiya Dirt Thrasher. Loads of fun just building it, and fun running it, and even more fun taking it apart to "tweak" it.

There's a noticeable difference between car kits and plane kits.

Plane kits require crafting; sanding, gluing, and careful measurement. They also require a lot of time, work space, and practice. You're using exacto knives, sanding bars, various glues, heat irons, and hand drills.

Car kits are assembled and screwed together. It's a more straight forward process. You're using a screwdriver and/or hex wrench set. FWIW, helicopters tend to follow a similar method of assembly, it's just that the tuning and tweaking is far more critical.

Another way to compare Helis and fixed wing:
Fixed wing: requires skill in building, less so in flying*
Heli: Requires skill and practice in flying, less so in assembling.


*That's not to say there isn't any skill required in flying RC planes, it's just an easier process to learn than Helis.

Yet another way to describe the difference between heli and fixed wing - if you crash a fixed wing you talk about how many hours it will take to repair, if you crash a helo it's how much $$ to repair!

I've got ARF's, RTF, and kit planes. The kit planes seem to hold up a little better, probably because they are built a little tougher. I also have full plans for them, and if I need to repair anything I've got the plans to do so. ARF (at least the ones I have) don't come with plans, so repairs are a bit more seat of the pants. Kits are also more customizable - not just looks, but some guys will bash the kits up a bit to make them a bit more interesting to build. Of course you can strip and recover an ARF, but you are essentially buying twice as much covering as you really need.

I've got one RTF foamie (Parkzone Corsair). It flies great, it's a nice little park job, but if there's any appreciable wind it stays grounded - it's too light and jittery in anything above 8-10 mph.

Sorry but a blanket statement like this can turn what would be a nice flying model into an overweight pos! It all comes down to the particular model!

With regard to aircraft, building from kits does not have to be a high end costly option. Depending on what type of aircraft you are interested in
Companys like manzano laser works, and aerodromerc have short and full kits for very reasonable prices, that when build with running gear from the likes of
HobbyKing can be built and flown for less than the usual generic piece of foam crap from the likes of parkzone!

Cheers
Craig

While I agree there is nothing more satisfying than building a kit and taking it to the field to fly (ok, it's also a bit nervewracking!), foam planes are a viable and practical solution for some. Small flying field, looking for a plane suitable for indoor flying, no time/skills/desire for kit building, no wish to fuss and bother with fuel mess? A foamie fits the bill. I'm happy with my Parkzone, and the customer service has been outstanding as well.

Sorry, didn't mean to come across as an anti foam snob, I was just trying to make the point that kits should not be seen as highend, or out of reach, choose the appropriate kit to start out with and they go together a lot easier than some may think, and you learn more I building 1 traditional kit that you may gain from assembling a dozen rtf types, all depends on what you want out of the hobby I suppose. Btw I am eyeing off FMS's new 109f that is due some time soon, nothing wring with foam at all

Craig