[RCSE] 2.4 Gig JR v Futaba ???
I'm just curious as to why all the talk is about the JR 2.4 system? From everything I have read, the Futaba 2.4 is the only one to use true spread spectrum and is a much better system that the JR... Like I said I'm just curios. So flame away :-) Craig
Re: [RCSE] 2.4 Gig JR v Futaba ???
Now if Futaba would just provide the superior sailplane programming the JR 9303 has I would consider switching. JR was the first to bring SS to the market and Futaba has some catch up to do. -- Original message -- From: Craig Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm just curious as to why all the talk is about the JR 2.4 system? From everything I have read, the Futaba 2.4 is the only one to use true spread spectrum and is a much better system that the JR... Like I said I'm just curios. So flame away :-) Craig ---BeginMessage--- I'm just curious as to why all the talk is about the JR 2.4 system? From everything I have read, the Futaba 2.4 is the only one to use true spread spectrum and is a much better system that the JR...Like I said "I'm just curios." So flame away :-)Craig---End Message---
[RCSE] 2.4 Gig JR v Futaba ???
Craig, There are several factors why the JR 9303 2.4 is getting more press than the Futaba. 1) This is a soaring list serve and the 9303 has received much greater acceptance as a 6+ servo sailplane radio than any of the Futaba transmitters. 2) Futaba entered the 2.4 GHz market with a very limited function transmitter which was not of much interest to the 6+ servo sailplane market. They have also come to market much later and much more slowly than Spektrum/JR, so Futaba has a tiny installed base compared to the others. Many Futaba users, like myself, have purchased Spektrum modules for our Futaba Radios. That is the same technology that JR uses. 3) Spektrum/JR, XPS and Futaba all use Spread Spectrum of one form or another, but only Futaba uses continuous frequency hopping. I will let the wizards argue which is better, but they all seem to work, so to most users, the difference does not matter much. This is like PPM vs. PCM, both are 72 MHz FM. Which is better vs. which is most popular. They both work. 4) There is a lot more hands on experience in the user community with Spektrum/JR than with XPS or Futaba. 5) Spektrum/JR offers the widest range of receiver choices. For many people, this is very important. Here are a few other links that may be of interest: 2.4 GHz - A Broad Market Review - in the Radios forum of RC Groups. http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=715589goto=newpost 2.4 Satisfaction Poll http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6240077 Ed Anderson Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 12:46:39 -0800 (PST) From: Craig Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm just curious as to why all the talk is about the JR 2.4 system? From everything I have read, the Futaba 2.4 is the only one to use true spread spectrum and is a much better system that the JR... Like I said I'm just curios. So flame away :-) Craig RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] 2.4 Gig JR v Futaba ???
Ed Anderson wrote: Craig, There are several factors why the JR 9303 2.4 is getting more press than the Futaba. 1) This is a soaring list serve and the 9303 has received much greater acceptance as a 6+ servo sailplane radio than any of the Futaba transmitters. True enough. Unfortunately not enough of the 14MZ radios are being used in soaring (big in aerobatics and helis) to realize what an incredible radio it is for soaring. Assign any function to any stick, switch, slider, etc. Including mixes, trims, whatever. Whatever you can think of you can do. Same holds true for the less expensive 12Z and 12FG. Up to 9 flight conditions per model. Each condition allows you to change EVERYTHING except where the functions are assigned and the channel. Anything else can be changed. Throws, mixes, etc. The Futaba 12 to 14 series radios are truly powerful and flexible radios. Honestly I cannot imagine having to mess with anything less now. Kind of like once I got a microwave I could not imagine how I got along without one.!! 2) Futaba entered the 2.4 GHz market with a very limited function transmitter which was not of much interest to the 6+ servo sailplane market. They have also come to market much later and much more slowly than Spektrum/JR, so Futaba has a tiny installed base compared to the others. Many Futaba users, like myself, have purchased Spektrum modules for our Futaba Radios. That is the same technology that JR uses. True for airplanes. Futaba has been in the car/boat world for sometime and has pretty god market penetration there. 3) Spektrum/JR, XPS and Futaba all use Spread Spectrum of one form or another, but only Futaba uses continuous frequency hopping. I will let the wizards argue which is better, but they all seem to work, so to most users, the difference does not matter much. This is like PPM vs. PCM, both are 72 MHz FM. Which is better vs. which is most popular. They both work. In a sense I agree. It can become a very academic argument. Personally, I like the continuous hopping scheme over the other types of implementation. 4) There is a lot more hands on experience in the user community with Spektrum/JR than with XPS or Futaba. SS I agree. But radios in general not so much. At many large contest Airtronics still rules the roost with Futaba and JR splitting the remainder. Plus it can be very regional as well. 5) Spektrum/JR offers the widest range of receiver choices. For many people, this is very important. In SS this is true. However, given how tiny these things are I can't see that as an issue. At least for me. Even the 14 channel RX is smaller than most 4 channel 72 RXs!! RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] 2.4 Gig JR v Futaba ???
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Now if Futaba would just provide the superior sailplane programming the JR 9303 has I would consider switching. As a long time Futaba user but also a guy who keeps looking at the JR9303 and wondering; Should I switch? I'd be interested in hearing what you can do with the 9303 that you can't do with a Futaba 9Csuper transmitter. This is a serious question, not an attempt to start an argument. I think Futaba has gotten a reputation for limited programming ability due to the earlier versions of their transmitters which weren't as capable as the 9Csuper and also because hardly anybody knew how to use the capability that did exist. A list of 9303 capabilities that you think can't be done on a Futaba 9Csuper would be interesting. You may convince me that I need a 9303 and I may convince you that a Futaba 9Csuper is more capable than you think. I've never had any Futaba transmitter above the 9Csuper so maybe other can tell me what those high end Futaba transmitters can do that a 9Csuper can't. Phil RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] 2.4 Gig JR v Futaba ???
The Profi 4000 has all of the 14MZ functions that count (sorry- no audio) plus' several more that most sailplane guys will never use but are there for the really technical applications. Not very popular because of the style but it is fantastic if you use a tray or strap. Programming is really logical and quite easy once you understand it and is is a lot less expensive than the 14. Too bad Hitec will not support them much longer but we all hope they will come out with a radio as complete to replace it someday. My two have been bullet proof for about six years. Jack On Dec 4, 2007 5:53 PM, Bill's Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ed Anderson wrote: Craig, There are several factors why the JR 9303 2.4 is getting more press than the Futaba. 1) This is a soaring list serve and the 9303 has received much greater acceptance as a 6+ servo sailplane radio than any of the Futaba transmitters. True enough. Unfortunately not enough of the 14MZ radios are being used in soaring (big in aerobatics and helis) to realize what an incredible radio it is for soaring. Assign any function to any stick, switch, slider, etc. Including mixes, trims, whatever. Whatever you can think of you can do. Same holds true for the less expensive 12Z and 12FG. Up to 9 flight conditions per model. Each condition allows you to change EVERYTHING except where the functions are assigned and the channel. Anything else can be changed. Throws, mixes, etc. The Futaba 12 to 14 series radios are truly powerful and flexible radios. Honestly I cannot imagine having to mess with anything less now. Kind of like once I got a microwave I could not imagine how I got along without one.!! 2) Futaba entered the 2.4 GHz market with a very limited function transmitter which was not of much interest to the 6+ servo sailplane market. They have also come to market much later and much more slowly than Spektrum/JR, so Futaba has a tiny installed base compared to the others. Many Futaba users, like myself, have purchased Spektrum modules for our Futaba Radios. That is the same technology that JR uses. True for airplanes. Futaba has been in the car/boat world for sometime and has pretty god market penetration there. 3) Spektrum/JR, XPS and Futaba all use Spread Spectrum of one form or another, but only Futaba uses continuous frequency hopping. I will let the wizards argue which is better, but they all seem to work, so to most users, the difference does not matter much. This is like PPM vs. PCM, both are 72 MHz FM. Which is better vs. which is most popular. They both work. In a sense I agree. It can become a very academic argument. Personally, I like the continuous hopping scheme over the other types of implementation. 4) There is a lot more hands on experience in the user community with Spektrum/JR than with XPS or Futaba. SS I agree. But radios in general not so much. At many large contest Airtronics still rules the roost with Futaba and JR splitting the remainder. Plus it can be very regional as well. 5) Spektrum/JR offers the widest range of receiver choices. For many people, this is very important. In SS this is true. However, given how tiny these things are I can't see that as an issue. At least for me. Even the 14 channel RX is smaller than most 4 channel 72 RXs!! RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format -- Jack Iafret Home and Hobbies
Re: [RCSE] 2.4 Gig JR v Futaba ???
Phil Barnes wrote: I've never had any Futaba transmitter above the 9Csuper so maybe other can tell me what those high end Futaba transmitters can do that a 9Csuper can't. These rcgroups threads might be useful. I have not read them. Differences in 9C and 9303? JR 9303 vs Futaba 9c Jon RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] 2.4 Gig JR v Futaba ???
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I've never had any Futaba transmitter above the 9Csuper so maybe other can tell me what those high end Futaba transmitters can do that a 9Csuper can't. Phil May be a little more progemas but you get more little holes in the receiver that you can plug more servos into! I got the 12FG for a scale gliders that has more function(channels) than the 9C can give me. Brian -- Brian Chan, An Electric Airplane Junkie @ San Mateo.Ca.USA RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] 2.4 Gig JR v Futaba ???
The 14 is in a completely different league than the 4000. Off hand several features, sythesized, shift selectable. memory card, computer upgradeable, channel expanders, etc Sailplane capability are probably similar except the 14 is 2048 capable and will soon have the 2.4 module and receivers out. The biggest difference is the ease of programming. I had a 4000 and finally gave up. Plus I didn't like the tray deal. You can pretty much program a competition sailplane without the manual. There are only a couple of small items that fall into the head scratching category and they aren't bad. For those that finally make the step into the 12 or 14 and realize the power and ease of this system there is no looking back. Hell, even Bubba got one a dem. Darwin N. Barrie Chandler AZ - Original Message - From: Jack Iafret To: Bill's Email Cc: Soaring@airage.com Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 4:13 PM Subject: Re: [RCSE] 2.4 Gig JR v Futaba ??? The Profi 4000 has all of the 14MZ functions that count (sorry- no audio) plus' several more that most sailplane guys will never use but are there for the really technical applications. Not very popular because of the style but it is fantastic if you use a tray or strap. Programming is really logical and quite easy once you understand it and is is a lot less expensive than the 14. Too bad Hitec will not support them much longer but we all hope they will come out with a radio as complete to replace it someday. My two have been bullet proof for about six years. Jack On Dec 4, 2007 5:53 PM, Bill's Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ed Anderson wrote: Craig, There are several factors why the JR 9303 2.4 is getting more press than the Futaba. 1) This is a soaring list serve and the 9303 has received much greater acceptance as a 6+ servo sailplane radio than any of the Futaba transmitters. True enough. Unfortunately not enough of the 14MZ radios are being used in soaring (big in aerobatics and helis) to realize what an incredible radio it is for soaring. Assign any function to any stick, switch, slider, etc. Including mixes, trims, whatever. Whatever you can think of you can do. Same holds true for the less expensive 12Z and 12FG. Up to 9 flight conditions per model. Each condition allows you to change EVERYTHING except where the functions are assigned and the channel. Anything else can be changed. Throws, mixes, etc. The Futaba 12 to 14 series radios are truly powerful and flexible radios. Honestly I cannot imagine having to mess with anything less now. Kind of like once I got a microwave I could not imagine how I got along without one.!! 2) Futaba entered the 2.4 GHz market with a very limited function transmitter which was not of much interest to the 6+ servo sailplane market. They have also come to market much later and much more slowly than Spektrum/JR, so Futaba has a tiny installed base compared to the others. Many Futaba users, like myself, have purchased Spektrum modules for our Futaba Radios. That is the same technology that JR uses. True for airplanes. Futaba has been in the car/boat world for sometime and has pretty god market penetration there. 3) Spektrum/JR, XPS and Futaba all use Spread Spectrum of one form or another, but only Futaba uses continuous frequency hopping. I will let the wizards argue which is better, but they all seem to work, so to most users, the difference does not matter much. This is like PPM vs. PCM, both are 72 MHz FM. Which is better vs. which is most popular. They both work. In a sense I agree. It can become a very academic argument. Personally, I like the continuous hopping scheme over the other types of implementation. 4) There is a lot more hands on experience in the user community with Spektrum/JR than with XPS or Futaba. SS I agree. But radios in general not so much. At many large contest Airtronics still rules the roost with Futaba and JR splitting the remainder. Plus it can be very regional as well. 5) Spektrum/JR offers the widest range of receiver choices. For many people, this is very important. In SS this is true. However, given how tiny these things are I can't see that as an issue. At least for me. Even the 14 channel RX is smaller than most 4 channel 72 RXs!! RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format -- Jack Iafret Home and Hobbies
Re: [RCSE] 2.4 Gig JR v Futaba ???
The 14 is in a completely different league than the 4000. Off hand several features, sythesized, shift selectable. memory card, computer upgradeable, channel expanders, etc Sailplane capability are probably similar except the 14 is 2048 capable and will soon have the 2.4 module and receivers out. The biggest difference is the ease of programming. I had a 4000 and finally gave up. Plus I didn't like the tray deal. You can pretty much program a competition sailplane without the manual. There are only a couple of small items that fall into the head scratching category and they aren't bad. For those that finally make the step into the 12 or 14 and realize the power and ease of this system there is no looking back. Hell, even Bubba got one a dem. Darwin N. Barrie Chandler AZ - Original Message - From: Jack Iafret To: Bill's Email Cc: Soaring@airage.com Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 4:13 PM Subject: Re: [RCSE] 2.4 Gig JR v Futaba ??? The Profi 4000 has all of the 14MZ functions that count (sorry- no audio) plus' several more that most sailplane guys will never use but are there for the really technical applications. Not very popular because of the style but it is fantastic if you use a tray or strap. Programming is really logical and quite easy once you understand it and is is a lot less expensive than the 14. Too bad Hitec will not support them much longer but we all hope they will come out with a radio as complete to replace it someday. My two have been bullet proof for about six years. Jack On Dec 4, 2007 5:53 PM, Bill's Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ed Anderson wrote: Craig, There are several factors why the JR 9303 2.4 is getting more press than the Futaba. 1) This is a soaring list serve and the 9303 has received much greater acceptance as a 6+ servo sailplane radio than any of the Futaba transmitters. True enough. Unfortunately not enough of the 14MZ radios are being used in soaring (big in aerobatics and helis) to realize what an incredible radio it is for soaring. Assign any function to any stick, switch, slider, etc. Including mixes, trims, whatever. Whatever you can think of you can do. Same holds true for the less expensive 12Z and 12FG. Up to 9 flight conditions per model. Each condition allows you to change EVERYTHING except where the functions are assigned and the channel. Anything else can be changed. Throws, mixes, etc. The Futaba 12 to 14 series radios are truly powerful and flexible radios. Honestly I cannot imagine having to mess with anything less now. Kind of like once I got a microwave I could not imagine how I got along without one.!! 2) Futaba entered the 2.4 GHz market with a very limited function transmitter which was not of much interest to the 6+ servo sailplane market. They have also come to market much later and much more slowly than Spektrum/JR, so Futaba has a tiny installed base compared to the others. Many Futaba users, like myself, have purchased Spektrum modules for our Futaba Radios. That is the same technology that JR uses. True for airplanes. Futaba has been in the car/boat world for sometime and has pretty god market penetration there. 3) Spektrum/JR, XPS and Futaba all use Spread Spectrum of one form or another, but only Futaba uses continuous frequency hopping. I will let the wizards argue which is better, but they all seem to work, so to most users, the difference does not matter much. This is like PPM vs. PCM, both are 72 MHz FM. Which is better vs. which is most popular. They both work. In a sense I agree. It can become a very academic argument. Personally, I like the continuous hopping scheme over the other types of implementation. 4) There is a lot more hands on experience in the user community with Spektrum/JR than with XPS or Futaba. SS I agree. But radios in general not so much. At many large contest Airtronics still rules the roost with Futaba and JR splitting the remainder. Plus it can be very regional as well. 5) Spektrum/JR offers the widest range of receiver choices. For many people, this is very important. In SS this is true. However, given how tiny these things are I can't see that as an issue. At least for me. Even the 14 channel RX is smaller than most 4 channel 72 RXs!! RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format -- Jack Iafret Home and Hobbies
