VQ Models

[Dean Hunter]

Dear All. Has anybody any experience of "VQ" models? What do they fly like? Quality of build and covering (sticky back plastic)?

Regards

D

[cymaz]

I had a Hornet trainer years ago. Heavy model compared to an Arising Star. Flew well and the covering stayed on.

[Don Fry]

I had a MIG piston fighter. Poor fittings, the elevator clevis slid straight off the pushrods thread. Undercarriage mounts poorer than most. Flew OK.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Dean Hunter]

Many thanks for the replies - very helpful.

[KiwiKid]

Some additional comments here Dean:

**LINK**

[Jon H]

I agree with the other comments. Built like a brick out house, fly well, not very scale, hardware poor, fit of parts poor, covering nasty.

[Chris Freeman 3]

I have the Rare Bear and my son has a large porter. Very nice airframes and fly very well. Covering appears to be good but not easy to repair. Spare covering is supplied but many of the airframes have printed detail that is not on the spare covering. The fittings are not as the same standard as other ARF's. Our aircraft had more detail than the equivilent Seagull kits.

[Andy Meade]

I have a VQ SBD that I fly off the slope. A nice model, their covering is weird in that it seems to be pre-printed self adhesive vinyl, which is the first time I've come across such stuff.

Hardware in the kit was fair to middling, wood seemed to be cut well and everything went together with the minimum of fuss. Would buy another VQ kit for sure.

Flying wise, she's a real treat.  Stable and solid in (non scale) aeros, no nasty vices.

Edited By Andy Meade on 16/05/2019 11:48:19

[David P Williams]

I have the smaller of the two Douglas Dauntlesses that they do, bought in a Hobbyking sale, powered by an SC70fs. Flies fine. The sticky-backed plastic covering is wierd and the flap/dive brake linkage arrangement is useless. General construction OK apart from the usual ARTF weak points especially undercarriage mounts. The pre-fitted electric retracts rip out or bend on even the greasiest of my landings.

[Capt Kremen]

I have the VQ 'Piper TriPacer'.

Concur with others, the covering can be the Achilles Heal of these models, it being printed. Though they do provide small sheets of 'spare' covering for 'patching'. Also, as others have said, the fittings such as clevis, spinners, wheels are at best average, at worst poor quality. Some parts need fettling to fit or complete replacement. The 'TriPacer' makes a nice model, (eventually!), and flies well for a scale type. (There's a particularly good French(?) video on the Tube showing the model in action). The instruction manual leaves much to be fathomed out for yourself too. They are OK if you've built a model or three, want a fairly quick fix/build, and are prepared to 'work' on the poor areas!

[J D 8]

Sometimes think it would be good if one could get ready to cover airframes so you could do your own thing with the finish markings ect.

[Andy Meade]

In fact, VQ have just done that with their new B24

[Don Fry]

Or even get a saw out, some glue, and use decent materials.

[cymaz]

It’s normal for most ARTFs to have hardware that’s poor. Case in point, my Wot4 XL....threw it all away.

[Paul Marsh]

I have a few, a 105 inch DH beaver and these two, a SBD Dauntless - flies perfectly, as does the P39.

[Dean Hunter]

Many useful comments. Thanks

[Colin Leighfield]

I’ve got the Macchi C205 Veltro. Although not dead scale, it looks the part and flies very well with an ASP 70FS.

[brokenenglish]

I've had 4 VQ planes and I've been extremely satisfied. It's true that conventional heat-shrink material would cover better, but then you wouldn't get camouflage, etc. without some kind of manual painting operation, which would probably have a significant effect on the cost.