Cesaroni Pro 29 Review

[mkadams001]

For those of you who are interested in my opinion of the Cesaroni Pro 29 system follow the link to my blog.

http://web.me.com/ddkbbb/Rocket_Blog/Blog/Entries/2010/4/15_PRO_29_REVIEW.html

Ignore the pretty girls and enjoy the read :p

Thanks

[n3tjm]

Nice Article. Just a couple comments.


The adjustable delay is a great feature; the only problem I would ever see is that if you forgot to adjust the delay at all and you will end up with a nice long wait for ejection.

Something I'm used to flying the other brand motors, except you not supposed to trim those to get the advertised delay time.


One thing I do notice is that the people who have flight problems using Aerotech reloads seem to always have the same problem. This leads me to believe that it is not Aerotech but the operator. Maybe they don’t clean the case properly, or don’t follow the assembly instructions and miss a step.

If ppl have the same problems, I would conclude that there is a problem with the product. I mean, how could you mess up a disposable motor? And I have been using reloadable motors for 16 years, I know that the only thing you can mess up with the dealy is get grease on it or forget the delay o-ring (which is kind of hard to do in the Plus delays because the delay grain will fall out of the closure when trying to screw it on if you forgot the o-ring.

My Club flies a lot of Aerotech motors, and we see a lot of delay problems. The president of the club was very upset when one of his rockets crashed when the disposable F23-4FJ he used was more like a F23-11. I have seen that a lot.

Matter of fact, the LCO's at our club comment on the superior quality of the Aerotech motors all the time. Check this video out :p

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OVdF94gyXs

My friend sean laughed at the comment, because this was the first launch he's ever been to, first time he seen aerotech motors in action, and already saw a cato, fwd bulkhead failure (on a disposable), a couple lawn darts, and a few that ejected right at burn out. Fun :p

I spent quite a bit on aerotech hardware. Now I got rid of most of it, and almost have a complete set of 29-38 Pro hardware.

[stickershock23]

Nice Article. Just a couple comments.



Something I'm used to flying the other brand motors, except you not supposed to trim those to get the advertised delay time.



If ppl have the same problems, I would conclude that there is a problem with the product. I mean, how could you mess up a disposable motor? And I have been using reloadable motors for 16 years, I know that the only thing you can mess up with the dealy is get grease on it or forget the delay o-ring (which is kind of hard to do in the Plus delays because the delay grain will fall out of the closure when trying to screw it on if you forgot the o-ring.

My Club flies a lot of Aerotech motors, and we see a lot of delay problems. The president of the club was very upset when one of his rockets crashed when the disposable F23-4FJ he used was more like a F23-11. I have seen that a lot.

Matter of fact, the LCO's at our club comment on the superior quality of the Aerotech motors all the time. Check this video out :p

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OVdF94gyXs

My friend sean laughed at the comment, because this was the first launch he's ever been to, first time he seen aerotech motors in action, and already saw a cato, fwd bulkhead failure (on a disposable), a couple lawn darts, and a few that ejected right at burn out. Fun :p

I spent quite a bit on aerotech hardware. Now I got rid of most of it, and almost have a complete set of 29-38 Pro hardware.

DOH! "Good luck with that" :shock:

Great write up. thanks for doing that. I am sure it helps people make a good decision If they are just getting into this.

[billspad]

The president of the club was very upset when one of his rockets crashed when the disposable F23-4FJ he used was more like a F23-11. I have seen that a lot.

It was an F22-4J reload. The sim said 4.5 seconds for the delay and the motor was tested as a 4 but called a 5 by AT. Or the other way around. Either way it would have been perfect and it had a video camera looking down so the smoke would have looked really nice. The ejection charge went off well after it hit the ground. The rocket is mostly fixed and amazingly the video camera survived. This wasn't one of those inexpensive key chain cameras. It was a slightly more expensive HD camera. What annoyed me the most was that I didn't get any video out of it. The memory card ejected on impact and I couldn't save the file.

[kelltym88]

I am neither favoring AT nor CTI, but I don't recall ever seeing a CTI motor failure of any kind. I'm not saying it hasn't happened, but...

I used to have several Pro 38 casings and sold them because at the time the variety of motors was not what I was looking for, that has changed, so I will be flying both.

You can't beat the simplicity of CTI's motors tho...

[Jeroen_at_CTI]

Thanks for your review. Feedback is always very helpful. We continually strive to improve our products - and release new ones.

However, I do not agree with the your view of how CTI deals with competition. We release innovative and cool products and try to lead, rather than follow. I do not have any issues with any other manufacturer and we communicate with many of them at a professional level. Competition is good for the hobby.

Jeroen

[CF-105]

I am neither favoring AT nor CTI, but I don't recall ever seeing a CTI motor failure of any kind. I'm not saying it hasn't happened, but...

I used to have several Pro 38 casings and sold them because at the time the variety of motors was not what I was looking for, that has changed, so I will be flying both.

You can't beat the simplicity of CTI's motors tho...

I've seen a few CTI motor failures over the years. Causes vary, but the most common mode seems to be the user fogetting to put the reload in a casing. I've only seen that with the Pro38's... perhaps that's part of the reason there is a separate aft closure for the 29's & 54's?

[ScrapDaddy]

Guys, I am not a mod, but I strongly insist you follows try and stay on topic, the Pro29 review.it just seems like it is brewing into the classic Cesaroni vs Aerotech fights. :pop:



Happy Camping!
SD

[Pantherjon]

Guys, I am not a mod, but I strongly insist you follows try and stay on topic, the Pro29 review.it just seems like it is brewing into the classic Cesaroni vs Aerotech fights. :pop:



Happy Camping!
SD

Thank you Scrap! Yes, please..We don't feel like doing a massive re-edit of this thread if it can be helped...

[cjl]

Guys, I am not a mod, but I strongly insist you follows try and stay on topic, the Pro29 review.it just seems like it is brewing into the classic Cesaroni vs Aerotech fights. :pop:



Happy Camping!
SD
Uh, scrap...

How about you let the mods do their jobs? I don't see any comments here that even come remotely close to out of line, and I've noticed you attempting to intervene in similar threads before, again without any seeming provocation or inappropriate comments.


Oh, and from what I can recall, I've seen 2 CTI catos (where the motor was fully assembled), and also a couple of situations in which the casing was omitted on a Pro38 (I'm not calling them catos due to the obvious user error). In my book, that makes them extremely reliable products, as I've seen a tremendous number fly.

I agree with the assessment about cost though - the Pro29s are the worst offenders there. As the motors get larger, the CTI reloads are priced much closer to equivalent AT loads, but in the small sizes, CTI is quite a bit more expensive. I'll still happily fly them sometimes, but when the cost difference for an F or G motor is almost a factor of 2, it can be difficult to go with the more expensive option, despite the ease of use and reliability.

[nxj]

I am neither favoring AT nor CTI, but I don't recall ever seeing a CTI motor failure of any kind.


vtn8-j2mE_g



But in all reality, its going to happen with any motor, thats the nature of the beast. Ive had little estes motors cato on me (C6-5, brand new) and ive seen a hybrid cato as well.

Luckily i have the freedom of choice. The local vendors seem to carry both CTI and AT so i know i'll be flying both.

[ScrapDaddy]

Thank you Scrap! Yes, please..We don't feel like doing a massive re-edit of this thread if it can be helped...

You are welcome, and I personaly have seen 3 threads boil down into The CTI Vs AT battle. And Cjl, I do aplogize, as one of those I stated this never boiled down Into it.



APCP, who cares who makes it, just use it! :D

SD

[cjl]

What's ACAP?

:confused:

[Pantherjon]

What's ACAP?

:confused:

I think his fingers were too quick..APCP is, I am sure, what he meant. ;)

[cjl]

I think his fingers were too quick..APCP is, I am sure, what he meant. ;)

I know - I was kidding.

[mkadams001]

Thanks to everyone who read my review.



If ppl have the same problems, I would conclude that there is a problem with the product. I mean, how could you mess up a disposable motor?

What I am referring to are people who seem to always have a problem with their recovery and not random unexpected delays. I have seen the same people fly using AT reloads and have problems with recovery. At some point you cannot blame it on the motor. It is easy to blame the motor and not the builder. I have also seen people try to help the igniter by adding some extra fuel to the fire (so to speak) only to have the motor cato. They then blame it on the motor and send it off for replacement.

I personally never seen an AT single use motor fail and I have never had one fail on me; and I am not saying that it does not happen. I have also been at our club launches and watched every composite motor (SU & RMS) fly without issues and delays being within reason of the advertised delay. So, based on my personal experience and observations I would say that AT is a reliable motor. Of the few flights I have seen of CTI motors I would say that they are a reliable motor. If they are better than AT in delay reliability then I would hope that encourage Aerotech to make improvements in their product.

And to keep it clean, please understand that I am addressing the quoted text and not trying to start up the war of the motors. Go to my blog if you want to read my thoughts on that topic.

[madsen]

I have seen the same people fly using AT reloads and have problems with recovery. At some point you cannot blame it on the motor. It is easy to blame the motor and not the builder. I have also seen people try to help the igniter by adding some extra fuel to the fire (so to speak) only to have the motor cato. They then blame it on the motor and send it off for replacement.

I personally never seen an AT single use motor fail and I have never had one fail on me. So, based on my personal experience and observations I would say that AT is a reliable motor.

I completely agree. This has also been my experience. It is unfortunate that a handfull of people cannot read anything about motors without turning it into a personal attack on Aerotech. I have never used a CTI motor--I would guess that they work fine. I also think that Kosdon works, Loki works, and Gorilla works.

This was started as an opinion piece about CTI 29MM motors. The very first posting to it after the initial post was an attack on Aerotech quality. Based on the many attacks this person has posted attacking the quality of Aerotech reloads--it appears that unlike 99% of all flyers--he cannot assemble an Aerotech reload. In view of the fact that he has been complaining about the same problem for a very long time in post after post--one must wonder why he still has any Aerotech inventory.

The second response to the initial post was from an ex-employee of Aerotech--he just forgot to mention that. He has literally hundreds of posts on the forums--all extremely negative towards Aerotech--or cheerleading for CTI. I might mention that if you go back and read his old posts, you will see that he has gotten free hardware from CTI--I'm sorry--he gives CTI old evil Aerotech hardware that falls apart--and CTI gives him new CTI hardware. Heck--for free hardware--I might convert. According to this ex-employee--Every launch he attends--or hears about--has Aerotech parts etc. raining down from the sky. That is amazing. In 19 years of high power--I have never even seen an Aerotech light shower. As a matter of fact--I have never had a cato with an Aerotech motor. (Ever see an ex-employee that liked his old boss?)

People have driven Aerotech off the forums because it is not worth the time of Gary to respond to such constant dribble. That is very unfortunate. We no longer have the benefit of exchanging information with largest supplier of Hobby rocket motors for the past 20 years. It would be very nice if someone could post information about motors without the same few people turning it into a vendetta against Aerotech. It is very obvious that their main aim to to hurt the sales of Aerotech. I find that rather disgusting. One of these people even has a sticker on his trailer that says "Friends don't let friends fly Aerotech" I think that is a pretty good indication of the aim of his postings. I must admit it is a very nice sticker.

I just wish that people could keep personal grudges out of the forums. My favorite kit vendors are RDS and LOC--but I will not post anything negative against any other kit builder--that would be stupid. If you have a grudge against one vendor--do not buy their merchandise--and let it go at that.

[cjl]

Agreed. I happily fly a variety of motors - this weekend, I plan to fly both CTI and AT for example. Recently, I've been flying more CTI, but prior to that, I flew more AT, and I suspect it will continue to fluctuate based on availability, what happens to be on sale, and what I feel like flying. I have had excellent success with both (and I'm sure the other manufacturers are good too - I just haven't flown many of their motors).

[Mikus]

I am neither favoring AT nor CTI, but I don't recall ever seeing a CTI motor failure of any kind. I'm not saying it hasn't happened, but...

I have, the casing ruptured and blew a hole in the side of the bird. Nice cartwheels though. :shock:


Disclaimer: And no, I'm not making any statements either way. I'm just sayin'.... ;)

[ScrapDaddy]

I think his fingers were too quick..APCP is, I am sure, what he meant. ;)

Actually, I sat there for a while, because ACAP didn't look Quite right. Oh well live and learn. ACAP, what was I thinking? :roll: