Tiger 50 or Century Hawk or ?

[larryseng]

Hi, I have got the Helicopter BUG bad. I am trying to decide which one to get. I like the hawk and now seen the tiger 50 and they are both in the price range. Any help on this would be great. Any thing else I should look at . I just want to get something to learn to hly with do not plan on doing aerobatics. Thanks for any help on this Larry

[DebianDog]

Well the Tiger 50 is phasing out. They are going to the Pantara. I would pick up a Hawk or a Raptor 50 myself.

[DavidH]

The Raptor line will be easier to obtain parts. Just about every hobby shop I go into that deals in helis. They have a good supply of TT/Raptor parts.

David

[Jermo]

http://www.helifreak.com/viewtopic.php?t=36880

[Pinecone]

Align 600 Nitro, coming next month.

That or a Raptor 50. LOTS of info and help available, and lots of parts sources, well supported by the manufacturer.

Over the past year or so Century has had problems with parts supplies due to a move to a new plant. Maybe fixed, may not be. Others aren't as well represented by as many shops.

[rsalazar]

If we are comparing the Hawk Pro and the Tiger 50

Check out the Tiger's manual at:
http://www.audacitymodels.com/T50manual/index.html

Check out the Hawk's manual at:
http://www.centuryhelicopter.com/su...%20book_web.pdf

Maybe seeing the manuals may help in your decision.

The Hawk is an ARF and the Tiger is a kit.

Both ships are quite docile in their stock configuration and both would work well for a novice. I do not know what it would cost to get Hawk into a 3D capable configuration but I do know it would cost about $30 to get a Tiger into a 3D flying ship.

50 size ship will out perform a 30 size ship any day of the week.

The Hawk Pro uses an aluminum stacked frame design which is very fragile. A crash results in lots of bent aluminum and an absolute requirement for a complete tear down to inspect for bent parts. This is very time consuming and it is a laborious process.

I enjoy fiddling with helis, but in my experience I find repairing a stacked frame heli gets rather old after about the second crash! The MX450SX is an example of an electric with aluminum frame stack. I like the TRex 450, and I like the Tiger 50, among other.

Audacity Models has a new version of the Tiger 50 - the Tiger 50 MkII.

The Hawk Pro uses a two-stage "layshaft" design for transfering power plus a gear with internal teeth, which seem to strip easily. This is vs. the single stage used in the Tiger 50 (just like what's used in high end designs like XCells, Bergen, Synergy, etc.).

By the way, in case you don't know it, the Hawk is a derivative of the ancient Lion Model Company Helicat ca. 1990. When Lion went bankrupt Century bought the rights and the molds.

The stout plastic side frames construction of the Tiger 50 MkII, the parts count is greatly reduce and strength is greatly enhanced, plus robustnest - as demonstrated in a crash - is vastly superior. Granted, we all design models to fly not crash, but crashing is a fact of life.

Versus the Tiger 50, the Hawk Pro side frame design is pretty weak - as plenty of folks will attest - the Tiger's side frames hardly ever break!

Further to this - the main shaft bearings in the Tiger 50 Mk II are 40% wider than those in the Hawk Pro, and the Tiger's clutch is humongous by comparison. Furthermore, the main rotor head is equipped with a 6mm spindle shaft vs. a 5mm spindle shaft (though again you can buy an upgrade).

The grips feature dual ball bearings and a thrust bearings (each main rotor blade grip) plus it comes with urethane dampers as standard equipment so you "can" 3D straight out of the box! Add to that the tail rotor system, which with the one-piece grips also feature triple bearings (just like the main rotor system), i.e. dual ball bearings and a thrust bearing in each grip - and while this is a standard feature on the Tiger 50 MKII, it's a pricey option on the Hawk Pro.

The Tiger 50 has 28° of collective pitch range against 20° for the Hawk Pro.

The tail pitch drive of the Tiger 50 is like that of the Pantera and shares a dual engagement instead of a single point of engagement so it never cocks at overcenter. The servos are mounted in the sideframes and are more survivable in a crash. And don't forget, the modern CCPM provides a better collective "pop" than an old fashioned mechanical sytem plus there's far less to wear.

After all, realistically your time is really worth something, the 50-class engine delivers vastly superior performance, the 50-class heli autorotates better, loop, roll, etc

I am comparing the Tiger 50 with the Hawk Pro.

Some of the members of this forum have given you good advice.

So if you are going to pick one, pick the size 50. Go with a 50, you will out grow the size 30 really fast.

Do your homework.

Jermo has a great video. Watch his video.

[BarracudaHockey]

If you are getting a 50 I'd go with either the Raptor or Hirobo EVO 50

[Pinecone]

There is also the Align 600 Nitro coming out. Align parts support will be very nice.

[Jermo]

I don't care what anyone claims. Plastic frames don't hold up as well as metal. Plastic strips out more easily, cracks more easily, and gives too much which affects the flight characteristics.

I started with a T-Rex 450 XL (plastic frame). I now fly a 450 SE with carbon fiber frames. I don't see going back to plastic ever. If the T-Rex 500 is plastic framed I'll not get one (and I really want the T500)

[DebianDog]

G10 is not the same crappy plastic that the Trex 450 is made out of ;)

[EricW]

I even prefer some industrial blends of plastics over steel / aluminium.
but they are not used in many heli's afaik $$ :)
The MiniTitan frame feels pretty indestructible and very stiff (very nice mouldingjob), and reports after crashes almost never mention the frame had to be replaced.
It's a mix of good engineering, rounded forms, good wall-thickness etc. just a proper stress-free design and material.
Once you use flat frame pieces with screw or bolt connections like most of the T-rex designs, than it's better to use a fibre reinforced material (carbon or glass)or a good allu.mix (airplane quality).

When your not planning to fly heavy 3D, a plastic frame (of a well known manufacturer) will do just as well IMO.
The MiniTitan is a good example you can do extreme 3D with a plastic frame, but that has also a lot to do with the design/material and it's small size.

Eric