Blue Tube vs. LOC (HPR) Big Tubes

So looking at scratch building my first HPR and planning on using a 4 inch airframe. I am looking at materials right now and wondering what to use. I think that this will be a Mid-H to Mid-I flyer so I think that normal LOC big tubes would be a good choice as far as being able to handle the stresses. So is there any reason to upgrade to a Blue Tube, other than the marketing reasons they give you? Especially considering the cost difference. At this size it is .30 cents/inch vs. .80 cents/inch, a full .50 cents/inch more for the blue tube.

Thoughts and experiences?

Loc tubing will give you a substantially lighter rocket, at the cost of significant durability. Loc tubing won't take rough landings as well, it'll zipper easier, and it is more prone to water damage (even in mild moisture). However, it does give you a substantially cheaper and lighter rocket (which then means that it's cheaper per flight too).

All the info cjl is correct,but I used BlueTube for the first time (used Loc very often ,as well as Quantum Tube and PML Phenolic) and I`m sold on the product.This stuff finishes nicely ,spirals are tiny ,sands to a smooth as glass touch without ridges and lumps,cuts well with table saw / miter saw with a good carbide finish blade (although I suppose you could use some other form of saw.....but not a razor knife) and accepts epoxy well with proper sanding.I did use some Bondo Spot putty for the spirals ,but a minimum was used ,but I heard you could just use several coats of filler primer ,although I reserve judgment on this.

This stuff seems very durable, and is my new favorite BT if weight is not a factor (I`ll just use bigger grain re-loads if it is )

I`ve had some pretty lumpy Loc tube as of late (4 ") making finishing very difficult without having to sand through the top layer and making a mess of the BT ( fuzzy wuzzys = PITA) I guess this makes no difference if you glass the tube ,but should not be the case.

Paul T

I had the opportunity to test the 3" Blue Tube 2.0 last year and was quite impressed. As stated above the Blue Tube is a bit more pricey and a little heavier. But, it is also more durable. the rocket I built with the Blue Tube has been launched several times on H and I motors and has carried ham radio payloads without any damage. Long story short - Both are good tubes. You have to weigh durablity of Blue Tube vs lighter weight and economy of LOC.

Cliff

built my 38mm minimum diameter rocket with it. i figured that it's really strong, ligherweight than glass, but heavier and way cheaper than CF.

most importantly, like was said above, finishing is a breeze. did a quick 220 grit slide across the tube, sprayed on a coat of primer, sanded it with 400 grit, did another one to help with spirals (should've sanded more, but live and learn). applied 1 coat of paint to each area, with small touch up blasts later on, and it's perfect. And 220 grit helps it bind to epoxy no problem on the outside, inside of tubes works great without anything since it's not intended to be finished nicely.

and if you're expecting high gees or hard landings, it's great, unless you wanna glass loc tubing, but for a 4" H-I rocket, loc should work perfectly

Check out my BT (v1) after a month in the Florida weather!

https://www.rocketryplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7386

Still ready to go! Can't do that with paper...

Hmmm... that may be a consideration. I store the rockets in the non-climate controlled garage and the heat and humidity in TN can both be in the 90s during the simmer, uh summer. Might want to invest in the Blue tube to just prevent heat and humidity damage over the years.

cdondanville said:

Hmmm... that may be a consideration. I store the rockets in the non-climate controlled garage and the heat and humidity in TN can both be in the 90s during the simmer, uh summer. Might want to invest in the Blue tube to just prevent heat and humidity damage over the years.

Click to expand...

Right about now, someone is bound to mention that they've seen pictures of Blue Tube rockets that seriously warped in high humidity direct sunlight. Yep, at Southern Thunder a couple of years ago, right after Blue Tube was introduced, Carey Huff of Huff Performance build a longish BT rocket and laid it out in the sun. It warped. But, that was Blue Tube version 1.

A reformulation of the binder inside the BT Version 2.0 has gotten rid of that problem - before SLI last year, we took a four foot chunk of BT and stuck it in a commercial heat oven that could be brought up to almost 100% humidity and heat-soaked it for six hours. No warpage. We documented it for NASA as part of our SLI contract, so now the US Government can show documents that say BT 2.0 don't warp!!! :roll:

Unless there's a reason you don't want a strong tube that, while a little heavier and costlier than LOC tubing, will definitely stand up to a lot more use and abuse, I'd suggest the Blue Tube.

cdondanville said:

So looking at scratch building my first HPR and planning on using a 4 inch airframe. ...

Click to expand...

I take it this will be a Level 1 cert?

If so, then for a H motor, Loc is more than able to handle the task. I have built H and I powered rockets with Loc tubing and no problems. ( I didn't paint them).

My next rocket will be J/K/L powered and the blue tube and coupler is on order. Other tube is here now. But I intend to make multiple flights. My other rockets were flown once and retired. It would have been a overkill and waste of funds to go blue tube.

You should look at your needs and future intentions when deciding.