CTI vs AeroTech.... Sell me on one...

[stickershock23]

I'm with Troj e-mails to them probably wont get to far to fast. I went to my dealer onsite and BANG they took care of me.
I asked about how they can do that and he said "I know CTI will take care of me so I'll take care of you"

and ONLY A G.. nah its a motor I dont care if its an A or an O you gotta stand behind it!

 

[KevinDunn]

I can't keep brand A and Brand B straight, so for clarity, I'll use actual names. As a consumer, I had an AT hobbyline G cato spectacularly, completely destroying my G-Force. I emailed AT, got a reply, and sent them pictures and parts. They were unable to diagnose the problem, but replaced the forward closure and the G-Force. It did take some time--I had pretty much given up on it when a big box arrived. I had a hobbyline delay that delayed way too long, which claimed my Madcow Batray. I never got around to reporting it.

As a dealer, I had a customer's single-use F30 cato. I returned his money on the spot and reported it to AT. They replaced the motor. The same customer had a delay that delayed too long. This time he wanted more than just the motor, so I suggested he contact AT himself. He did so, and they replaced what he asked for.

I have not had any CTI failures, either as a consumer or as a dealer, so I can't speak first-hand about warranty claims. Occasionally the included motor lighter fails to light the motor. I simply replace the lighter out of my own stash. Never filed a warranty claim.

So far, my experience with both companies has been positive, and I will continue to carry and fly both.

PS The failure rate for copperheads is higher in my experience than other lighters. When there is an issue, I replace them with another lighter. Never filed a warranty claim for that.

 

[Aksrockets]

With all that good being said about Cesaroni, I'm really glad I invested in some AT 38 stuff. My club motor vendor is having a 40% off all Aerotech loads, so I'm going to be flying lots of AT in the next several months (I mean WHO can resist $15 for a 38/240 load!!!).
There are lots of cool AT propellants out there. Redline is one of my all time favorites. IMHO, it's much brighter then CTI's Red Lightning, louder too! IMHO AT's Dark Matter Propellant also beats out CTI's Skidmark. Any sparkies are cool but AT's DM and Gorilla's Black Lightning are in a whole league of their own!

I would go with what brand is appealing to you, and invest in the other a little down the road.

Alex

 

[JoeG]

I have been reading the responses. I would have difficulty choosing one over the other and can't imagine ruling one out over the other.

However, if both manufacturers would care to send me samples of each of their offerings with cases I would be more than happy to offer an unbiased opinion as to the better of the two. Any other manufacturers are also welcome to participate.

 

[stickershock23]

Maybe if they would do that for everyone...... we could have at least one heck of a weekend.. LOL

I have been reading the responses. I would have difficulty choosing one over the other and can't imagine ruling one out over the other.

However, if both manufacturers would care to send me samples of each of their offerings with cases I would be more than happy to offer an unbiased opinion as to the better of the two. Any other manufacturers are also welcome to participate.

 

[troj]

However, if both manufacturers would care to send me samples of each of their offerings with cases I would be more than happy to offer an unbiased opinion as to the better of the two. Any other manufacturers are also welcome to participate.

Hey, looks like there's a viable way for AeroTech and CTI to dispose of their bad propellant batches....

-Kevin

 

[isobig]

Concerning the larger motors, 75 & 98, which is easier to assemble? I've always heard that CTI is easier but looking at the instruction sheet it actually seems a bit more involved than the AT reloads. I know CTI is a piece of cake in 38mm which I have, but looking to get into the larger motors soon.

 

[GaryT]

CTI. Lots more propellant types per case plus the HW is much cheaper.

 

[Daddyisabar]

Ask yourself, do you want to end up like this:



A grumpy old man cleaning soot out of a 24mm Black Jack while the HIP dudes are flying high end CTI motors in sleek rockets in front of CHICKS! Do you always want to say "where can I borrow that dern fancy wrench to close up this 24mm AT bad boy?" or "where's my white lithium grease. . . I must have left it with my teeth!" Well, I have lots of grease left so I just better find me some more cheap AT reloads and start buildin' cause I ain't gettin' any younger.

 

[COrocket]

Concerning the larger motors, 75 & 98, which is easier to assemble? I've always heard that CTI is easier but looking at the instruction sheet it actually seems a bit more involved than the AT reloads. I know CTI is a piece of cake in 38mm which I have, but looking to get into the larger motors soon.

In the 98 and 75, the motors are nearly identical in assembly. You may have seen the CTI instructions share some common steps when putting a CTI load in an Aerotech case.

 

[isobig]

In the 98 and 75, the motors are nearly identical in assembly. You may have seen the CTI instructions share some common steps when putting a CTI load in an Aerotech case.

I like the idea of using CTI loads in the AT cases. Just wish AT would come out with the RAS for 75 & 98 already.

 

[COrocket]

I like the idea of using CTI loads in the AT cases. Just wish AT would come out with the RAS for 75 & 98 already.

A few people have asked on the AT Facebook fan page if/when the RAS will be available in larger sizes, and they havent said anything definitive

If I were you I'd pick up one of the CTI 3G/6G starter sets (includes spacers) during the wildman black saturday sale. You can get a great discount on hardware thats already cheaper than Aerotech. That combined with the fact that the RAS isn't available makes the CTI a no-brainer, at least in the cost/versatility department. You could probably find a case to borrow if you ever had the itch to fly a large Aerotech motor.

 

[4kids49]

I love these threads, because I learn a lot from experienced fliers. Here are my various thoughts on topics touched on in this thread. There are pros and cons to everything. If I had unlimited dollars, I would stock and fly both Aerotech and CTI. Currently, I fly Aerotech reloads 40-120 case for low power, and CTI for hpr. I love white lightning and redline in AT, but opted for the CTI hardware starter sets for 38 mm and 54 mm. For $110 or so (38 mm) you get the 3g / 6g cases, 2 spacers, and the proDAT delay tool. This allows me to fly any CTI from 1 - 6 grains. Try to beat that. Similar for CTI 54 mm. I bought from Apogee (not particularly cheap vendor) because with no tax and bonus points (essentially 10% discount) this translates to nearly 20% discount. The starter set prices were really appealing to me. Loading and cleaning of CTI are a snap. I also love the skidmark from CTI. I will eventually get AT hardware, but for now am spending on tracking, 75 mm rocket and equip., better electronics, while currently purchasing K and L reloads. This all adds up. I launch low power with my kids. In one day, we can launch 14 or more motors, so I am a bit cost conscious there. I buy from Hobbylinc. for low power. They offer great prices, but limited AT reloads. You can get a G76-G reload for $10.69. This will fit the 40-120 case (also cheap from Hobbylinc). Hobbylinc does not offer the AT 120 case, nor reloads for it such as G77-R or G79-W. Green Mojave is not my favorite, but I will take the savings. One thing that I have learned buying hpr motors, is that some vendors will charge the Hazmat, and some won't. I won't name these so as to put them on the spot, but this is a big savings. I tend to buy from my local vendor, but buy from him online in advance, because I like to have my motors before showing up to a launch. If I run out, I buy more at the launch. Just look at the total price including, tax, shipping, motor price, and hazmat fee, not just the motor price. Anyway, I enjoy reading these threads. Any more tips, thoughts, are appreciated.

 

[dixontj93060]

Any more tips, thoughts, are appreciated.

Aerotech (like any mountain top), why? Because it's there (and hard)--that's why I fly Aerotech.

 

[thobin]

One thing you need to consider is the cost per flight, AT per flight is cheaper 24mm to 38mm by a considerable amount. For every 3 CTI you fly you can almost launch 4 AT motors. Especially the 24mm , once you reach the 54mm its not so much. As for the cleaning AT suck to clean, but any one tells you you never have to clean a CTI case is speaking with forked toung. In fact my lvl one flight was a lowly CTI H163 and the liner melted pretty good and it took a bit of scrubbing to get it all out. Not to mention the rear retainer gets just as goobered as any AT Motor, plus all the black powder you have to remove from the spacers if you use them that is.

CTI selection of motors is second to none. I think some of the propellant types are a bit weak. But they have more of them and for every size 29mm on up. The hardware system, lets face it is ingenious and inexpensive.

As for Aerotech, the cost per load is hard to deny, availability at local launches and a few propellant types that are hard to beat. With their spacer system you have almost the same flexibility as you do with the CTI. All that said I lean toward AT because of the cost per flight, I'm not one to need all the different propellant types, although it would be nice to have the CTI selection. And I do like to put the reloads together I think its fun. As you can read I own both and use both and probably always will.

I think AT has some work to do, they had better step up to get more reload types and find a way to get the cost of their cases down. CTI is 5 bucks a load price drop from being the only motors used! Although CTI needs to open up on the distributer side, so local launch vendors will have better access to their products! IMHO

TA

 

[mdoering]

I think the AT hobbyline (29/40-120) reloads can't be beat for price and selection and I will continue buying them... I may get more AT stuff in 75mm and 98mm eventually, but I flew all weekend on CTI stuff last weekend with the exception of 2 flights on AT reloads and it was a far more enjoyable experience without having my son yankin' on my pant leg like Oliver Twist saying :sad: "Please, sir, I want some more" :sad:

Not to mention the fact that the second AT reload killed my initiator... :rant:

Clean up was a snap on both the 29mm 3 grain and 6XL cases (used a spacer in the 6XL and mainly flew 6G Hxxx skidmarks all weekend) A quick run through with a baby wipe and a wooden dowel like I was swabbing a gun barrel and the case and spacer were ready to go... No black smelly greasy fingers like when I clean up the AT case... No cleaning the tiny ejection charge well and inside of a forward closure... The rear closure just had to be rubbed quickly in a baby wipe between thumb and forefinger and it was good to go. I flew 7 skidmarks and 2 AT reloads, some melting of the plastic was evident near the front of the skidmark reloads when they were removed from the casing, but no burn through occurred. The first AT reload burned through the liner (common it seems for me on the hobbyline reloads but did not happen when I flew my L1 cert flight with the H165R-M in a larger 29mm case) the second AT reload killed my initiator and I was too mad to notice if there was burn through on the liner...

As I mentioned before we don't usually have a vendor on site and there's no one locally that sells reloads, so the convenience factor isn't a part of the equation for me.

 

[cjl]

Concerning the larger motors, 75 & 98, which is easier to assemble? I've always heard that CTI is easier but looking at the instruction sheet it actually seems a bit more involved than the AT reloads. I know CTI is a piece of cake in 38mm which I have, but looking to get into the larger motors soon.

In the larger motors, honestly, it ranges from nearly identical to AT being quite a bit easier. I love CTI, and I fly their large stuff fairly frequently, but AT's 75mm and 98mm motors tend to be a bit easier to assemble than the large CTIs. This is especially true for really large (98mm large M and N) motors - in 75, they're pretty close. Interestingly enough, this is a near complete reversal of the smaller motors, since in the smaller (54mm and down) sizes, CTI is substantially easier. Honestly, neither is all that difficult, but I would say AT tends to have the advantage in ease of assembly in the really big motors.

 

[CarVac]

How is it easier? Looser fitting liners? Integrated knurling on the closures?

(note: my only data point for assembling motors in the 'big' region is an N5800, and that was.... a three-person job)

 

[cjl]

Fewer components for the most part, and to my knowledge, no large AT motor except the moonburners require glue. There is no nozzle carrier required, the forward and aft o-rings are the same, and pretty much all you have to do is put the smoke in the forward closure, slide the grains in the liner, put in the nozzle, add an o-ring to each end, and then put on the closures. The lack of glue means you don't really need to plan ahead either. The knurled closures are nice too, since you don't need a separate wrench to screw them on.

Now, honestly, I think both AT and CTI are easy enough to assemble in the larger sizes that I don't let that influence my motor decisions, but I do think that the big AT motors are just a bit easier.

 

[SMR]

Fewer components for the most part, and to my knowledge, no large AT motor except the moonburners require glue. There is no nozzle carrier required, the forward and aft o-rings are the same, and pretty much all you have to do is put the smoke in the forward closure, slide the grains in the liner, put in the nozzle, add an o-ring to each end, and then put on the closures. The lack of glue means you don't really need to plan ahead either. The knurled closures are nice too, since you don't need a separate wrench to screw them on.

Now, honestly, I think both AT and CTI are easy enough to assemble in the larger sizes that I don't let that influence my motor decisions, but I do think that the big AT motors are just a bit easier.

+1. Well put, Chris. I also fly both, and for the most part the experience in assembly is the same. The not needing a wrench, nor needing to glue the grains in the liner, are bonus features for AT. And I love White Lightning propellant. But, when you need to lift your heavy projects off the ground, AT starts running out of options around 3000 N of thrust. CTI has a significant advantage in the propellant options department, plus they are actively certifying new loads with vigor. I guess it comes down to personal preference with a little insight in knowing what your plans might include down the road.

Oh, and one last thing in the large bore group... when you are testing ejection charges, you need a motor case to plug the hole. AT (one-piece) closures seal when empty. CTI (two-piece) closures only seal with a reload installed. (or at least a liner.)

 

[gdjsky01]

I am not even going to read all the replies. I don't have time. Listen, you'd do fine with either. What's great about CTI is the range of choices and the FACT that it is like a single use motor in its simplicity of use. Its more expensive. But ONLY SLIGHTLY if you compare N/S for N/S which most people don't. All they know is letter codes. Which are misleading. Nonetheless AT is cheaper.

BOTH WORK FINE. Buy what you want/can afford.

We are lucky to have a choice.
JMO
:2:

 

[SS/EA 6BBL 71 Cuda]

Wow.. maybe I imagined I posted it then... Oh well.

Then what I said (or tried to) was

If you fly long egnough sooner or later you are going to have an issue with a motor. nomater who makes it.. and when you do.. you need to think about how that is going to be taken care of..

I have had 3 CTI motor issues. all 3 times I have walked away from the launch with my case and reload replaced. NO MAJOR ISSUES.

THat right there is worth its weight in gold. I would pay WAY more for a realod any day knowing that is was backed 100% by its manufacturer.

now with brand "A" the story is the opposite. EVERY time I have had an issue I have been told "it was operator error" or something similar and/or was told Sorry we dont cover your case. and if you want any warranty I need a copy of your receipt, your TRA card, where you bought who you bought it from your mothers maiden name and a blood sample.. send that in and we will consider it.. then weeks later you call back wondering what happened. and you get oh sorry. but you assembled it wrong.. or the moon wasn't properly aligned with Uranis we wont cover you.

I have had them replace a couple single uses but it was ALWAYS more hassle than what it was worth to get it.

BINGO!!! Your right as rain Mark......I personally don't get wrapped up in slight cost differences or assembly easy.... its all in the warranty if something DOES go wrong.
Anyone else like the Kosdon By Aerotech line of motors too? Awesome stuff for sure but, anyone here flown the L2300 Mojave Green without burning a nice hole in the side of their AMW casing? Bet not recently.
Thats what happens when Aerotech goes to cheaper liner material......sure, Garys daughter will claim its all in the inferior AMW casing you installed their reload in.
When something like THAT happens.....and, were not talking about a crunched nosecone, a Cato'd Sumo etc...etc...were talking some serious loss here.

Anyone ever met Gary R? What i like about Jeroen at CTI is that i had his cell phone number and, thirty minutes of his time long before i ever met him.....He's helped countless "weekend warriors" like myself out with emails, text and, the occasional phone call whenever i had a question about ANY of his products (mostly 75mm,98mm or 150mm).

This weekend will be the third time i'll have a chance to run into him at Midwest Power-X and, tell him "Thanks Dr. J.....keep up the good work....."

Fly whatever makes you the happiest......

 

[CarVac]

Are L2300's that problematic? Googling just now yielded only one report of a failure, and two by hearsay in the same thread...

I'm planning on flying twelve of them over the remainder of the academic year for research (for maximum velocity from a 2" motor). Should I look into replacing the liners and flying at FAR or something?

 

[SS/EA 6BBL 71 Cuda]

After watching our clubs Prefect burn one up i have heard from a trusted source in the club that he knew of at least three others that had done that.....Now, i wish i could positively say i saw all three instances personally....but i can't. I'm going on a source i trust very seriously. I have flown both 75mm KBA reloads with no issues what so ever but, being let in on the emails between my friend and Aerotech's warranty department pretty much sealed the deal to avoid that path from that day on.
Maybe things have gotten better maybe not.
I do wish you luck on that particular reload though.

 

[GaryT]

Personally l wouldn't feel comfortable flying it.

 

[CarVac]

Personally l wouldn't feel comfortable flying it.

Any reason why, or personal experience?

There's not much in the way of alternatives; the Loki L1400 (the only other option) is a good deal more expensive per reload and not certified in California.

For this project I need to get a 3" rocket with a 2" motor a good deal above Mach 1.2, for measuring the drag on tailcones. Slower motors than the two (e.g. L935, L1030) are simming in the Mach 1.5 region, but the L2300 hits Mach 1.6 and the L1400 Mach 1.57.

I am going to have redundant airframes, but I'd rather not lose one to a cato.

 

[Blastcap Rocketry]

Not exactly personnel experience. I have however personally seen one Cato and one fly great. At the time I did have one in my inventory but swapped it out for a different load once seeing the Cato. I guess my scenario doesn't really offer up much data but for me it was enough to stay away.

I flew 2! KBA M3500R loads and both times it blistered my case, now both cases where warrantied and replaced but I'll never fly that load again either. Its a shame too as that is a great load, its just not worth the risk IMO anyways.

 

[iter]

to my knowledge, no large AT motor except the moonburners require glue.

Not sure if you count them with "big" motors. I49 and I59 (AT 38mm) require epoxy.

Ari.

 

[CarVac]

Also, the J1299 requires epoxy.

 

[Rocketjunkie]

Not sure if you count them with "big" motors. I49 and I59 (AT 38mm) require epoxy. Ari.

Also, the J1299 requires epoxy.

I've never epoxied any of these loads. All worked fine. I did epoxy the J99 per instructions and had a cato. On the I49 and I59, grease on the forward end of the grain serves as inhibitor.