I know this thread has kind of gone in many directions, but to reply to the OP and his original point, I wouldn't say we are anywhere near the 1999-2009 lowpoint of Estes. Remember the "Pop-Fly" and "Port-Pot-Shot"...UGH! Those were the truly "lean" years in my opinion. In contrast, I like what Estes has been producing lately and their last 2 catalogs have been over 100 pages in length. I do agree there are a TON more RTF, ARF and E2X kits and launch sets than there were in the golden years of the 70s and 80s but it's not a zero sum game. I see plenty of "builders" kits in the new catalogs as well. I have not done a census yet (but plan to soon) with regard to the total number of kits in production, but it would appear there there are more total kits being offered in the past few catalogs than there were in the catalogs from the 70s and 80s.
And for the record, I don't think you are a troll and I didn't take your post as "bashing" Estes. You are just longing for more of a certain type of model rocket that I happen to also share a fondness for. I spend a lot of time cloning kits from those older catalogs than I do building newer stuff, but there is plenty of newer kits I want to build as well. All of the Designer Signature Kits, The Skylab Saturn V and Saturn 1B, Super Mars Snooper, Cosmic Interceptor, Black Star Voyager, Doorknob, Little Joes I & II, etc.
There is also a petition to bring back the Gemini Titan and Mercury Atlas kits (or they might be new kits - I'm not 100% sure).
Best of luck to all and happy building!
Don
I have signed the Mercury-Atlas form and sent an email emphasizing my interest. I’d encourage anyone who
knows they’d buy this kit to do this.
Regarding the original posting, it is a sad reality that genuinely-held opinions are sometimes indistinguishable from satire, tomfoolery, and trolling if they’re strongly-worded, sufficiently devoid of context, and flat-out ridiculous. I don’t
think I expressed in this thread an evaluation of the author’s intent, although I certainly had some questions at times.
Regardless, it appears that the premise of Estes being in overall decline has been rejected, with complaints being confined to specific product lines that are subject to user error as often as manufacturing defects.
The RTF and Beginner rockets are
solid. In my experience they set up easily, look nice, fly well enough to encourage more motor purchases ($), and are sufficiently differentiated from each other to avoid feeling like cookie cutter designs. Every time I look at the instructions for one, I’m glad I did. In terms of construction, I’ve never had two be exactly the same.
Intermediate and Advanced rockets are easy enough to assemble if you’ve developed some hand skills and rocketry know-how already, but they introduce new challenges in measuring, marking, cutting, glueing, priming, sanding, painting, and finishing. Sure, you can probably get them into the air OK, but how nice can you make them look?
Some in the Intermediate and Advanced range also have enough performance potential to pose a challenge of selecting a suitable launch site if flown at full rated power. The Goblin, Hi-Flier XL, and Star Orbiter are such hot rods. Perhaps a few standard-sized birds are as well.
There have been a few eccentricities in categorization by difficulty, especially coinciding with the recent price increases and corresponding website updates, but I’m sure they’ll figure it out through consumer and focus group feedback.
P.S. I actually kinda liked the Port-a-Pot Shot. I believe that there is at least one aspect of each individual’s personality that never advanced beyond age 7. I will always find a portable toilet rocket funny.