• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

A Rant over MotionRC

Konrad

Posting Elsewhere
#1
Not sure this is the best place to post this. But as most of MotionRC's sales are Warbirds here goes.

Do NOT patronize MotionRC if you can at all avoid it!

MotionRC is only interested in selling you their junk. (Really nothing new for corporate America).
It isn’t so much that the products themselves are junk it is rather that the support is wholly inadequate from MotionRC. Support, as in documentation and MotionRC’s concern and efforts to correct these deficiencies is lacking. (This is a critical laps of concern for safety!)
The omission and misinformation they provide has as of now actually helped with their sales. In that it is a major driver in parts and replacements sales.

Here is an excerpt from MotionRC from one of my discussion with MotionRC regarding mis-information in a manual.

Konrad,

The Freewing Mirage has been sold in it's current state by many retailers for a few years now and Freewing has not had any data to suggest the recommended setup is inaccurate for an initial starting point. The throws and CG are all recommended starting points and can be adjusted to suit ones personal style after a few test flights as such it is just a recommended starting point. After selling literally hundreds of this plane we also have no data to suggest otherwise as each persons feel and experience will vary initially. We will forward the details of your findings to Freewing for their examination however at this point we will not be posting any changes until we hear from them. Once again data and customer feedback at this time show the initial settings to be adequate for a successful initial flight. Thanks for looking to MotionRC.

Best Regards,

Wayne


I caught them in this BOLD FACE lie by asking for a copy of their data base (they don’t keep one). I also pointed to their own sales video where the pilot was screaming turn down the elevator rates to 45% and use 45 expo.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IW1-jPucWBY


It isn’t just I that have issues with the data as stated in the Freewing/MotionRC* manuals. Here is another data point about way too much throw. (These throws are not safe for test flights unless you are a modeling GOD).
https://www.hobbysquawk.com/forum/r...cal-freewing-edf-aileron-rate-recommendations

It appears that most of the critical issues with the Freewing product I bring to light are as a result of improper documentation, very poor manuals!
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthre...-Mirage-2000C-5-80mm-EDF-(A-tiger-by-the-tail!)
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?34790-F-5-Tiger-II-(Freewing-F-5-mods-and-set-up)
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthread.php?34845-Freewing-Me-262-(what-is-old-is-new)

It isn’t just the EDF products, but safety with prop planes also low on their priority.
http://forum.flitetest.com/showthre...for-component-props-Freewing-Flight-line-FMS)

As you move from the fan-fold and DTFB models to heavier more advanced models I strongly recommend that you avoid MotionRC. Their idea of customer support is just selling or replacing the same junk you bought. There is no desire to improve the product with accurate technical documentation.

We as consumers need to put an end to this. Don’t buy from MotionRC!

All the best,
Konrad

* As Freewing has given MotionRC exclusive marketing rights to North America I am forced to tie both firms together when discussing the unethical business practice of each.
 
Last edited:
#3
Sorry about the issue you are having.
I have purchased the Freewing Spacewalker and the Eagle A3l stabilizer from them along with various other things and the only complaint is that the landing gear is crap on the Spacewalker but i just built my own LG to accommodate the grass runway our club has and all is well. I got the plane for $76.00 on black Friday sale and all I needed was my Rx and battery. So a few bucks for better LG is not a big deal to me.
 
#4
Don't listen to this guy, he's a know instigator and has been banned from most RC forums (some several times).
It's true. Same rant, many different times now. I've been a Motion customer since day one, and they've had great customer service time and time again. There are the occasional issues with their products, as with any manufacturer, but they've always gone the extra mile to get things set right.
 
Last edited:

Konrad

Posting Elsewhere
#5
Don't listen to this guy, he's a know instigator and has been banned from most RC forums (some several times).
Known instigator?

Just bringing the issue with products and services to the forefront of the discussion. Corporation spend a lot of money trying to suppress these issue. I spent far too much time trying to bring these issue to light.

So yes I'm an instigator!!!

Now I hope I haven't treated anybody, other than management, with any disrespect. If I have I apologize, that never has been my intent. I just wanted the short coming of products to be aired. Now unlike most instigator or trouble makers I try to offer workarounds to the issue I find. It is far too easy, especially on the internet, to say something is junk and runaway.

I also hope I haven't belittled anyone views that are contrary to mine. I may question your position and engage in a discussion even a heated one. But it is done out of respect for your position. I truly seek to understand your view point.

As for as being "banned" that is true as it is easier to suppress the "troublemaker" or "instigators" than it is to address the real issue with the product and services. I also don't hold management of forum or corporations in high esteem. As a result I tend to question "management". This makes them uncomfortable. So the easy way out for most is to ban me and label me as combative and argumentative*.

I have to admit it, I wear those labels with pride.

As to MotionRC/Hobby Squawk you will find no posting of mine (Konrad, KJD or Aspirin) that were in violation of the posted code of ethics or in violation of any recognized standard of etiquette. My banning was because I question just about all managements activities. I do this because I care for this hobby, and that we all get the most for our dollar.

Now I need to be fair that most of the time Management publicly had a well crafted responses to my concerns.
https://www.hobbysquawk.com/forum/m...k/31718-the-commercialization-of-hobby-squawk

In the above excerpt (first post) from Wayne of MotionRC they also often made down right dangerous response to real concern about safety.

Now it is true I'm not on the forums to play nice or make friends. I'm here to learn and help others get the most from this fine hobby. Often in my learning I ask uncomfortable question. Many fools take that as an assault on their knowledge. But true men of wisdom understand that questioning is a sincere form of respect.

So I ask you in what I've posted here do you have an issue with? I've tried to document my issues with MotionRC/Freewing. I have a lot more! Can you come to another logical conclusion other than the one I have with the information I have posted?

* Those were the words used by the owner of Hobby Squawk when he banned me after I asked for examples of where I had violated any etiquette (I asked for a code of conduct, we later got one) or showed a pattern of disrespect to him, or the truth.

Argumentative-using or characterized by systematic reasoning.
"the highest standards of argumentative rigor"

All the best,
Konrad
 
Last edited:

Konrad

Posting Elsewhere
#6
It's true. Same rant, many different times now. I've been a Motion customer since day one, and they've had great customer service time and time again. There are the occasional issues with their products, as with any manufacturer, but they've always gone the extra mile to get things set right.
It isn't that there are or aren't issues with the product. The mark of great customer service is how they address the ROOT CAUSE of the issue.

Giving away a replacement servo for free when you find a failed one is not addressing the root cause. I demand that the corporation work to improve the failure rate of the product. Often time this means spending money for engineering that they don't have. I understand the financial constraints on this kind of continuos quality improvement.

But to say that there in no documented issue with the manuals or the data given, is down right unethical and potentially lethal!

By the way my last banning form Hobby Squawk was because I was asking point blank how MotionRC defines "Customer Service". Alpha knew where this was going and rather than address the short coming of his organization he fond it expedient to shoot the messenger!

So yes, it is the same old thing, firms ripping us off and relying on the apologists* to cover up for the sins of the corporation!

We as consumers need to demand more from our providers of goods and services!

I have to ask you, that with the information I've posted is my conclusion really so unfounded? I've given them 3 to 4 years to address most of what I posted yet they choose to stonewall any action to correct the root cause of my and many others complaints, poor documentation!

All the best,
Konrad

* Apologist : a person who defends or supports something (such as a religion, cause, or organization) that is being criticized or attacked by other people
 
Last edited:

Konrad

Posting Elsewhere
#7
Sorry about the issue you are having.
I have purchased the Freewing Spacewalker and the Eagle A3l stabilizer from them along with various other things and the only complaint is that the landing gear is crap on the Spacewalker but i just built my own LG to accommodate the grass runway our club has and all is well. I got the plane for $76.00 on black Friday sale and all I needed was my Rx and battery. So a few bucks for better LG is not a big deal to me.
Really, I haven't had too many issue with the products myself. I have a lot of experience with these things and I've been able to see most of the pitfalls. I've even benefited from the problems others have had with the products.

What I have, is a deep concern for what is right. To allow a firm, any firm, to get away with misinformation is unconscionable and goes against my very make up. And to see a firm dealing with impunity and such disregard to the safety and wellbeing of the participants of this fine hobby makes my blood boil.

To be clear I've tried to have a conversation with MotionRC through their customer support organization. But when it come to addressing pointed issue within their organization and product line they are deaf!

Again It pains me to reiterate what I said earlier "DON'T PATRONIZE MOTIONRC" if you can at all avoid it!

All the best,
Konrad
 
Last edited:

FlyingMonkey

Stuck in Sunny FL
Staff member
Admin
#8
I hate to say this, but... this thread is probably some of the better advertising FOR MotionRC.

You keep mentioning their name, so people are going to the web site to see what you're talking about.

You've posted several threads that give the corrected information from the buyers, if not the retailer.

You admit that the products aren't bad, but the literature is not accurate, which anyone who has ordered Chinese products know going in, and have learned to look up the forums to see what other people found as the correct settings for CG, throws, etc.

You point out that MotionRC replaces the damaged parts, which sounds like pretty good customer service to me.

Even as a sole distributer for a product, trying to get the manufacturer to change something like the manual is probably pretty challenging.


That said, you've made your argument, apparently many times on this forum. Which is odd, since it's a company you don't want people to buy from, yet it seems as if you're made more than a couple purchases from them.


From a "moderator" point of view, I'm not one to squash someone's grievances against a vendor, especially if it will help potential buyers become aware of risks they may not be aware of. But I will not tolerate antagonistic comments towards other community members. Forum users can disagree, but be civil, keep the name calling out of it.
 

Hai-Lee

Old and Bold RC PILOT
Mentor
#9
Sadly this thread is apparently one-sided. When mentioning safety of RC model aircraft operation you failed to mention that the greatest danger is from inexperienced pilots with more money and EGO than they can handle and they buy models totally unsuited to their ability. (I know as I have done the exact same thing a number times myself).

Having crashed a new, and expensive, purchase they start seeking someone else to accept responsibility for THEIR actions and the supplier or manufacturer become the target for their anger at their own incompetence. As a responsible RC user you should and MUST accept sole responsibility for everything you attempt to put into the air. I NEVER accept the setup recommendations from a manufacturer as gospel but rather as a starting point, and adjust my settings based upon my own experience and capability.

If you do not have a proper idea of how to TEST PILOT a new aircraft then find someone who can teach you or get someone else to test fly your planes for you.

Consider the number of false claims each distributor and manufacturer must answer from those who chose something beyond their capabilities and if each claim was answered with either replacement or refund then you would see that there would be no manufacturers remaining in business in a very short time.

As I hope to become a model manufacturer I can tell you the warranty implications and liabilities can be daunting which is why it IS and MUST be assumed that the purchaser has a degree of competency and has assessed the suitability of the purchase to his requirements and ability.

If you find distributors or manufacturers a little difficult to deal with just remember the myriad of pilot incompetence false claims they must answer almost daily. I even recently saw a claim for warranty where the user had obviously connected the battery reverse and set fire to the plane. The user had a long history of expensive model purchase and so the distributor replaced the plane free of charge and the manufacturer refused the warranty claim. (The distributor wore the loss, which he could not really afford, in the interest of future sales).

Have fun and accept responsibility for your own actions!
 

Konrad

Posting Elsewhere
#10
From a "moderator" point of view, I'm not one to squash someone's grievances against a vendor, especially if it will help potential buyers become aware of risks they may not be aware of. But I will not tolerate antagonistic comments towards other community members. Forum users can disagree, but be civil, keep the name calling out of it.
FlyingMonkey, Thank you.

Have I or any of the other contributor resorted to name calling? I may use some terms that are not the most flattering to describe the management of MotionRC. But I'm not a ware that I've or anybody else has actually called any Flite-Test member a derogatory name, and surely not one banned by the FCC. If so please let me know and I'll correct the transgression.

As to helping MotionRC sales that is fine by me. I just want all to know the limitations of the product. That way all can be happy in their purchase.

If you as a customer are happy with just the replacement of faulty product, and you are willing to risk doing property damage with low reliability product. Then you are in align with what MotionRC calls customer service. I for one do NOT think this is customer service, and have said why (thanks in part to your forum).

Now the product is BAD I think the manuals are part of the product. And no the issue isn't with the products being from China and the associated translation issues. The problem, as I see it, is that MotionRC is blatantly turning a blind eye to the technical and safety issue with the products they sell solely for the profit margin.

Getting the OEM to change the manual would be simple for MotionRC, just hold off on placing any orders until the gross quality issue are addressed.

But the telling point is that they MotionRC fails to add an addendum to their own sales page addressing quality and control issues with a product they sell. This has nothing to do with the business arrangement with the OEM. It has to do with concern for their customer's safety and enjoyment!

So think of the life you might save and DO NOT PATRONIZE MOTIONRC if you have any other option, or they change their practice of omitting known safety issues from the sales page or blog.

I hope you and other are going to sites and pages I link to.

All the best,
Konrad
 
Last edited:

Konrad

Posting Elsewhere
#11
Sadly this thread is apparently one-sided. When mentioning safety of RC model aircraft operation you failed to mention that the greatest danger is from inexperienced pilots with more money and EGO than they can handle and they buy models totally unsuited to their ability. (I know as I have done the exact same thing a number times myself).

Having crashed a new, and expensive, purchase they start seeking someone else to accept responsibility for THEIR actions and the supplier or manufacturer become the target for their anger at their own incompetence. As a responsible RC user you should and MUST accept sole responsibility for everything you attempt to put into the air. I NEVER accept the setup recommendations from a manufacturer as gospel but rather as a starting point, and adjust my settings based upon my own experience and capability.

If you do not have a proper idea of how to TEST PILOT a new aircraft then find someone who can teach you or get someone else to test fly your planes for you.

Consider the number of false claims each distributor and manufacturer must answer from those who chose something beyond their capabilities and if each claim was answered with either replacement or refund then you would see that there would be no manufacturers remaining in business in a very short time.

As I hope to become a model manufacturer I can tell you the warranty implications and liabilities can be daunting which is why it IS and MUST be assumed that the purchaser has a degree of competency and has assessed the suitability of the purchase to his requirements and ability.

If you find distributors or manufacturers a little difficult to deal with just remember the myriad of pilot incompetence false claims they must answer almost daily. I even recently saw a claim for warranty where the user had obviously connected the battery reverse and set fire to the plane. The user had a long history of expensive model purchase and so the distributor replaced the plane free of charge and the manufacturer refused the warranty claim. (The distributor wore the loss, which he could not really afford, in the interest of future sales).

Have fun and accept responsibility for your own actions!
As you mention "YOU" I assume you are directing this comment to me (Konrad). While I agree whole heartily that we have the final responsibility as to determining the airworthiness of the product and the limitations of our own flying ability it does not exonerate the OEM or the distributor for supplying us with the proper documentation. I haven't mentioned that we are not even given the performance spec for the servos. So none of use can honestly say that the product we fly from MotionRC if using the stock as supplied servos is safe. I recall something about being unsafe at any speed.

To be clear "I" have NOT suffered any hardship with the Products. This is because I'm often well aware of the products short comings. In my product post I try to go into detail that I think will help the membership of Flite-Test get the most from the purchase of the product I critique (lesson learned from the school of hard knocks). With these critiques I as a consciences hobbyist I'm bring the gross short coming of the product and services offered by MotionRC to light. Are there a myriad of other issue that should be brought to light and discussed. No doubt, but I only have so much time and my experience and knowledge is limited.

I encourage you to start a topic on what you know as gross short comings of safety, be it with the modeler or the vendors to this fine hobby. I alone am not able to cover all the known issues.

All the best,
Konrad
 
Last edited:

Konrad

Posting Elsewhere
#12
Hai-Lee,
Am I obligated to offer a balance view on any subject? Here in America the corporations are not. So I've been making only my case. I see no reasonable reason to have to defend what I see as MotionRC's unethical business practices

All the best,
Konrad
 

Hai-Lee

Old and Bold RC PILOT
Mentor
#13
No problems Konrad!

My post was not directly aimed at you or your issue but rather at those who might get the idea that if they have any problems with their purchase that the manufacturer or distributor is at fault.

I believe that you have a high level of experience and competency but many reading these posts do not and so I was trying to get the readers to evaluate their own role in their planes demise prior to attempting to claim warranty. The less bogus warranty claims the better response the manufacturers would provide.

Have fun!
 

Konrad

Posting Elsewhere
#14
No problems Konrad!

My post was not directly aimed at you or your issue but rather at those who might get the idea that if they have any problems with their purchase that the manufacturer or distributor is at fault.

I believe that you have a high level of experience and competency but many reading these posts do not and so I was trying to get the readers to evaluate their own role in their planes demise prior to attempting to claim warranty. The less bogus warranty claims the better response the manufacturers would provide.

Have fun!
To that end I agree.
I also have to say that reading what I have on the MotionRC/Hobby Squawk site MotionRC has been more than accommodating to "stupid".

On one hand I can see how a beginner might think this is advantageous.

But I as a skilled modeler myself, have to wonder what kind of mark up I'm having to suffer for the lack of competence and honor of some of my fellow hobbyist.

But that really is an issue for MotionRC and a discussion between me and my wallet. I try not to make too many value judgements outside of safety.

And yes I'm have fun. Critiquing products and corporation is how I've made and lost my millions. ;)

All the best,
Konrad
 
#15
Where I take issue with the subject is that none of these complaints are unique to Motion, they could be applied to any foam airplane manufacturer that I am aware of. Lets take servo specs for example. No manufacturers that I know of release servo info on a arf/PNP model. Even if you look at one of the most well regarded foam planes on the market, the Eflite Apprentice, there are no specs available on the servos, just the weight. That is more or less the excepted convention throughout the entire RC industry. Is that unfortunate? Yes. Is it a MotionRC specific issue? No.

Your other complaint was CG and control throws listed in the manual. These are easily the most often incorrectly printed pieces of info to make it into a manual. It's happened to ever manufacturer that I know of. Back when the Eflite Hurricane was released, a very unstable CG was listed in the manual, leading to most owners totaling their models on the maiden flight. Banana Hobby is even worse, most of their jets have an incorrect CG listed by as much as 50% chord, and lack spars. On many LX EDFs, the wings glue on with epoxy and a butt joint. They also tended to be terribly lacking in power, and NO control throws are listed at all. Their retracts were made of plastic and broke if you looked at them wrong.

This is the reason that I love the Freewing jets that MotionRC carries. They are generally very Scale looking, structually sound, with quality electronics and good power. And most importantly, they tend to fly very well! And, MotionRC does an excellent job of covering any components that may have been sub par out of the both. Most other places prefer to leave things like a dead servo, retract, dented wing, or smeared canopy as the buyers problem, horizon and motion being the exceptions. Motion corrects the issue and generally sends out a new part within a day. On top of all this, their test pilots tend to be very communicative on forums, and are happy to share the rates that they used in their product evaluation flights. They aren't the one's writing the manual though, that is done by a test pilot in China. And if they like an extreme roll rate, they might give you some very sensitive throws. As Flying Monkey said, most of us who fly foam models are used to double checking these values with other sources anyways. And on top of the service, Motion has a lot of competively priced planes with free shipping. Again, much better than your average online RC store. At least, in my experience.
 

Hai-Lee

Old and Bold RC PILOT
Mentor
#16
I lost my millions through 3 wives and 7 children:rolleyes:.

As a would be manufacturer so far I have a single model in the local market and I have sold 9 so far! Profit? Perhaps one day! Funny enough it took me longer to get the instructions precisely worded and accurate than it did to design, manufacture and test fly the released model.

There are still a few holes in the market as far as designs and materials are concerned and I hope to fill those, (at least locally).

I seek simple to build and solid performance craft with good flying qualities so those wishing to fly to their ego's limits can do so without raising the dreaded false warranty claims.

As a side issue I may post soon a simple flying wing design of a type not yet posted under the FT forums, (as simple lightweight design with slightly different techniques than those used for the majority of the FT designs).

Anyway, commercial over Ha! Ha!.

Have fun!
 

Konrad

Posting Elsewhere
#17
DD
The issue with the servo is relatively new most OEMS did mention the spec's required of the servo for their ARF. The lack of published spec does not exonerate you or I in a court of law, if asked when we did the high speed pass and crashed into the pits with our jets were we aware of the load on the elevator servo and was the servo up to the task?

As to CofG and throws, Horizon Hobbies has issued many addendum and quickly for such issues in the past I'm thinking of my Carbon Yak 54. So Motion should have posted on their sales page what their own pilots were screaming in their sales videos. The deficiencies of others is no excuse.

And if you care to do a search under my name you find that I also hold other firm accountable. I'm not just picking of MotionRC. Given enough time all will be under the scrutiny of my critiques. I'm sure some will fair better than others.

But is what I describe false or a misrepresentation of the short comings of the kits and services? I see much room for improvement.

All the best,
Konrad
 
Last edited:

Konrad

Posting Elsewhere
#18
I lost my millions through 3 wives and 7 children:rolleyes:.

As a would be manufacturer so far I have a single model in the local market and I have sold 9 so far! Profit? Perhaps one day! Funny enough it took me longer to get the instructions precisely worded and accurate than it did to design, manufacture and test fly the released model.

There are still a few holes in the market as far as designs and materials are concerned and I hope to fill those, (at least locally).

I seek simple to build and solid performance craft with good flying qualities so those wishing to fly to their ego's limits can do so without raising the dreaded false warranty claims.

As a side issue I may post soon a simple flying wing design of a type not yet posted under the FT forums, (as simple lightweight design with slightly different techniques than those used for the majority of the FT designs).

Anyway, commercial over Ha! Ha!.

Have fun!
I too manufactured and distributed a hobby product I called it the Denver Unlimited Mustang Prototype (D.U.M.P.). I think I may have had some marketing issues. It was 2.5cc sized QM glass pylon racer. Can't say I even made a dollar with the sale of only about 80. The tooling and marketing cost where just too high.

All the best,
Konrad
 

Hai-Lee

Old and Bold RC PILOT
Mentor
#19
TOOLING COSTS!!! Tell me about it! I admire your bravery at trying to market a FGlass model of any sort in face of chinese competition.

My business model is to try and manufacture in the transport cost differential which does not allow for much in reality. My models do offer best bang for buck available locally and are in the sub $50 AUD bracket. you cannot buy anything in that price range from china at the moment in the stores.

Eventually I seek to compete directly with the imports but that is a far distant goal at this time. Still designing and testing the local market getting ready for someone with a little venture capital who wants to dabble in the space.

Anyway, off to get some more FB for my next prototypes, (and perhaps the aforementioned wing).

Have fun!
 
#20
I'm not getting in to arguments, but I had the same problem with Banana Hobby. They sold me a trainer that has a really special feature: when plugged in, magical smoke AND fire pours out of the ESC!!! If that's not enough, you ALSO get a scorched table and the wonderful aroma of freshly melted foam! All for a shoddy price of $not worth it.