Anyone have any experience with the LOC High Tech rocket

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

John Taylor

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Aug 22, 2019
Messages
684
Reaction score
228
Location
Fort Worth TX
I am purchasing a new LOC High Tech rocket with 38mm MM.
Anyone have one any comments?
 

Tim51

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2015
Messages
831
Reaction score
122
Location
London, United Kingdom
I don't own one but there's an extensive discussion of building and flying this rocket in Mark Canepa's 'Modern High Power Rocketry 2' pp 194 - 209. Loc have upgraded the shock cord etc since Canepa's book was written but it might still be useful.
 

Rocket501

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
141
Reaction score
44
I built one and I disliked it. However, they may have upgraded the kit since then.

I've disposed of it, so I don't remember all of the problems, but it doesn't come with rail buttons, and it shipped damaged. The directions where unexceptional, but got the minimum job done. The fit and finish were also less than impressive. Personally, I think that the binder designs excel is a much better kit.

If you already have it, I think you should order some rail buttons at the very least, because at least in California, few fields have 1/4 inch launch lugs. I hope you have a better experience than I do and that LOC has improved their manufacturing methods since then. Also, I had to replace the original motor mount, as it was dented enough that the RMS motor casings wouldn't fit inside. It's fairly common, but if I remember correctly, it doesn't have any form of positive retention included in the kit, so you will have to sort that out yourself. I don't hold that against the kit as many high power kits do not.

As for flight, they perform alright. I wouldn't trust it with a J or very high thrust engine, but it would certainly work for a L1 flight if you keep things modest.

A final bit of advice, is that for future rockets such as your L2, I would strongly recommend going up to a 4" body tube. It allows you to get your hand down inside, which is really helpful, is easier to see, and is better for electronic bays when you start to get into that. Also, I'd get one with a 54mm mount and a 38mm adapter, as you will eventually want to fly larger motors.
 

cbrarick

Wildman CT
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
2,413
Reaction score
204
I will disagree with Rocket 501 completely.

I have built many loc rockets, never had a problem. Sure, an individual kit may have issues, most likely caused by shipping. LOC are good people and aren't going to send junk out deliberately (but accidents happen when you're stuffing bags). He's right about rail buttons. Rail buttons are the best way to go, but most manufactures don't add them. Most high power kits come with nothing so you have to buy whatever...
As far as thrust goes, I've taken a bone-stock built with titebond and flown it on J's. My vulconate has survived the CTI J600 bone stock as well
I generally fly mine on Hs and Is as it really goes high on J's
 

John Taylor

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Aug 22, 2019
Messages
684
Reaction score
228
Location
Fort Worth TX
LOC website states this model will fly on 29mm F's and G's with motor adapter. So far all the F motors I've seen the maximum take off weight is too low. I can see launchng it on say a G76 motor or possibly a G64.
Anyone have experience flying this model or similar models on F's or G's?
 

Rocket501

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
141
Reaction score
44
I flew mine (albeit without payload bay) on F51 motors with a DIY 24mm to 38mm adapter. It worked fine, staying nice and low. I wouldn’t try it if the wind was any more than about 5 mph, but it does work. Just be careful packing the chute and with the delay. If you build it right, the flight weight was around 1.5 pounds.

At the time I owned this rocket, I only had 24/60 and 29/180 RMS cases, so those were the two main family of motors I used with it.

My coworker broke his trying to fly it on a J270. He seemed to know what he is doing, which is why I recommend staying a decent bit under that. It took H motors with little issue.

As for the vulcanite, it is a slightly smaller rocket and has smaller fins, so I think it can go a decent bit faster.

As for what you said, LOC overall is a decent company. I prefer binder for my rockets of this type, but I have built the LOC IV and everything went much smoother. However, everyone I built the HiTech with had various construction problems. I think we may have received a bad batch, but I would personally stay away from that model.

What I have used since then is the 3” version of the binder designs Excel. It’s basically the same price (maybe cheaper when you include the extras the hitech needs) and comes with both rail buttons and a very basic form of motor retention. I’ve flown mine on J270, J350 and once on J425 all with basically no damage. It also has great instructions and goes together with minimal fuss. If you end up wanting another rocket, consider checking it out.
 
Last edited:

John Taylor

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Aug 22, 2019
Messages
684
Reaction score
228
Location
Fort Worth TX
I flew mine (albeit without payload bay) on F51 motors with a DIY 24mm to 38mm adapter. It worked fine, staying nice and low. I wouldn’t try it if the wind was any more than about 5 mph, but it does work. Just be careful packing the chute and with the delay. If you build it right, the flight weight was around 1.5 pounds.

At the time I owned this rocket, I only had 24/60 and 29/180 RMS cases, so those were the two main family of motors I used with it.

My coworker broke his trying to fly it on a J270. He seemed to know what he is doing, which is why I recommend staying a decent bit under that. It took H motors with little issue.

As for the vulcanite, it is a slightly smaller rocket and has smaller fins, so I think it can go a decent bit faster.

As for what you said, LOC overall is a decent company. I prefer binder for my rockets of this type, but I have built the LOC IV and everything went much smoother. However, everyone I built the HiTech with had various construction problems. I think we may have received a bad batch, but I would personally stay away from that model.

What I have used since then is the 3” version of the binder designs Excel. It’s basically the same price (maybe cheaper when you include the extras the hitech needs) and comes with both rail buttons and a very basic form of motor retention. I’ve flown mine on J270, J350 and once on J425 all with basically no damage. It also has great instructions and goes together with minimal fuss. If you end up wanting another rocket, consider checking it out.
Thank you!
 

GaryT

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
2,084
Reaction score
96
Location
Guilford CT
The Hi-Tech and EZI-65 are both great little kits, always loved the look of them.

 

crossfire

Lifetime Supporter
TRF Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 16, 2011
Messages
3,925
Reaction score
305
I just completed an EZI-65. It's a great kit. No problems at all. I would recommend LOC kits to all.
 

dmgrime

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2015
Messages
244
Reaction score
27
Big fan of LOC stuff here as well. Using a lot of LOC materials for scratch building lately, and did my L2 on a mega magg with an AT J340M. I wanted to keep my L2 low and the mega magg was perfect - 1355' L2 flight according to the JL3 onboard :)

Building an upscale 4" bertha using LOC ingredients and so far it is coming along well!
 

seth_cooper

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2015
Messages
174
Reaction score
77
Finished one this spring and finally got to fly it 3 weeks ago. I used Titebond 2 throughout. I added an e-bay to mine. Flew great on an H180.

LOC makes great rockets in my opinion.
 

John Taylor

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Aug 22, 2019
Messages
684
Reaction score
228
Location
Fort Worth TX
I flew mine (albeit without payload bay) on F51 motors with a DIY 24mm to 38mm adapter. It worked fine, staying nice and low. I wouldn’t try it if the wind was any more than about 5 mph, but it does work. Just be careful packing the chute and with the delay. If you build it right, the flight weight was around 1.5 pounds.

At the time I owned this rocket, I only had 24/60 and 29/180 RMS cases, so those were the two main family of motors I used with it.

My coworker broke his trying to fly it on a J270. He seemed to know what he is doing, which is why I recommend staying a decent bit under that. It took H motors with little issue.

As for the vulcanite, it is a slightly smaller rocket and has smaller fins, so I think it can go a decent bit faster.

As for what you said, LOC overall is a decent company. I prefer binder for my rockets of this type, but I have built the LOC IV and everything went much smoother. However, everyone I built the HiTech with had various construction problems. I think we may have received a bad batch, but I would personally stay away from that model.

What I have used since then is the 3” version of the binder designs Excel. It’s basically the same price (maybe cheaper when you include the extras the hitech needs) and comes with both rail buttons and a very basic form of motor retention. I’ve flown mine on J270, J350 and once on J425 all with basically no damage. It also has great instructions and goes together with minimal fuss. If you end up wanting another rocket, consider checking it out.
 

Rocketjunkie

Addicted to APCP
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
4,027
Reaction score
252
I have one that I've flown since Y2K and it has 39 flights on it. It's set up for dual deploy.
These are the flights I have data for. Weight is 39 oz on the pad with a 29/40-120 G motor installed.
Altitude, motor, date.

5374 I85 (38/720 D) 4/9/00
3615 I357 8/12/00
2777 H100hf (vulcan) 9-9-00
3150 H45 (38/360 D) 11-11-00
3099 H45 (38/360 D) 7-7-01
1234 G80 8-12-01
1220 G64 3-10-02
1071 G40 8-10-02
3314 I150 Ellis 12-8-02
1047 G64 6-7-03
3005 H153 Pro38 8-9-03
2088 H110 EX 7-11-04
1830 H73 1-9-05
2078 H140 38/240 4-10-05
1823 G54 CTI 6-11-11
2160 H210 7-3-11
3388 H999 9-4-11
2867 H55 (38/360 D) 11-12-11
3104 H45 (38/360 D) 11-13-11
4211 I49 1-8-12
2941 H268 9-1-12
1867 H140 (38/240) 11-10-12
1882 H163 4-14-13
2310 H148 6-8-13
1034 H90 (38 2g EX) 7-5-14
2041 H90 (38-3g EX) 9-1-14
3206 I130 (38-4g EX) 9-1-14
1685 G138 10-11-14
4257 I55 4-11-15
1296 G200 (Vulcan) 11-14-15
4192 I55 5-12-16
1061 G33 11-12-16
1089 G33 5-6-17
2804 H45 (38/360 D) 7-8-17
2097 H100 (38/240 ex) 9-2-18
2033 H100 (38/240 ex) 2-9-19
 

John Taylor

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Aug 22, 2019
Messages
684
Reaction score
228
Location
Fort Worth TX
I have one that I've flown since Y2K and it has 39 flights on it. It's set up for dual deploy.
These are the flights I have data for. Weight is 39 oz on the pad with a 29/40-120 G motor installed.
Altitude, motor, date.

5374 I85 (38/720 D) 4/9/00
3615 I357 8/12/00
2777 H100hf (vulcan) 9-9-00
3150 H45 (38/360 D) 11-11-00
3099 H45 (38/360 D) 7-7-01
1234 G80 8-12-01
1220 G64 3-10-02
1071 G40 8-10-02
3314 I150 Ellis 12-8-02
1047 G64 6-7-03
3005 H153 Pro38 8-9-03
2088 H110 EX 7-11-04
1830 H73 1-9-05
2078 H140 38/240 4-10-05
1823 G54 CTI 6-11-11
2160 H210 7-3-11
3388 H999 9-4-11
2867 H55 (38/360 D) 11-12-11
3104 H45 (38/360 D) 11-13-11
4211 I49 1-8-12
2941 H268 9-1-12
1867 H140 (38/240) 11-10-12
1882 H163 4-14-13
2310 H148 6-8-13
1034 H90 (38 2g EX) 7-5-14
2041 H90 (38-3g EX) 9-1-14
3206 I130 (38-4g EX) 9-1-14
1685 G138 10-11-14
4257 I55 4-11-15
1296 G200 (Vulcan) 11-14-15
4192 I55 5-12-16
1061 G33 11-12-16
1089 G33 5-6-17
2804 H45 (38/360 D) 7-8-17
2097 H100 (38/240 ex) 9-2-18
2033 H100 (38/240 ex) 2-9-19
 

John Taylor

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Aug 22, 2019
Messages
684
Reaction score
228
Location
Fort Worth TX
Thank you so much for taking your time to take care of my request. You truly went above and beyond.
Thanks again,
John
 

cbrarick

Wildman CT
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
2,413
Reaction score
204
I have one that I've flown since Y2K and it has 39 flights on it. It's set up for dual deploy.
These are the flights I have data for. Weight is 39 oz on the pad with a 29/40-120 G motor installed.
Altitude, motor, date.

Needs a J........
 

Rocketjunkie

Addicted to APCP
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
4,027
Reaction score
252
Needs a J........
The fins are prone to flutter. Maybe a Mellow J94, barely a J. A J150 would probably flutter the fins off. It's designed for long burn motors hence the H45 in the name.
 

cbrarick

Wildman CT
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
2,413
Reaction score
204
Ooops, don't tell mine that. Tite-bond and bone stock. It's done a bunch.... I guess what it doesn't know won't hurt it.
Of course, fly yours like you will, we're all different.....
 

Latest posts

Top