I always felt the 1/2 off priced AT kits at Hobby Lobby were darn nicely priced.... heh.. They are well designed kits, and fit the mid power nitch nicely. Little expensive maybe and full retail but what kits aren't...?
I've only got one PML kit and that's the 4" Amraam, I was going to get all three but that's a negative now having this one and flying it... now if someone could show me how to retrofit the stock kit for dual deploy it would get flown alot ...but the extra $140 to make a $130 kit dual deploy was quite a bit over the top...
I'm sure there's got to be another way to do it or i'll figure out a way..
I'm with Rstaff the G10 fins are great but to each their own on the QT. It takes quite a bit of careful prep for epoxy adhesion, more so than most paper kits. My biggest issue with it though is that it's a high power kit, and they advise against pushing Mach with QT.. unfortunately i found that out after the purchase.
With paper rockets you can build them to take any motor that will fit into their motor tubes, with QT that's not always the case. Heck check out this thread to see an Estes V2 modded to take a Pro 54 K motor..
https://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8296&perpage=20&highlight=estes v2k&pagenumber=2
Paper rockets can be built up.. QT can't.
The QT just doesn't seem as flexible when it comes to making modifications but much more a dream to finish.
I'd seen too many negatives on the net from others about the piston so I pulled it from mine, but there's enough out there about it that i found the stories to have some merit, especially the explanations on the different expansion and contraction temperatures between the phenolic piston and QT.
Chutes are nice, but mine was undersized for the kit or at least mine at 12 oz heavier than PML's estimated finished weight. (90 oz complete and ready to fly minus motor) I do need to measure the chute also as the PML 54" chute is smaller than my BSD 45" chutes.
My biggest pet peeve on the PML Amraam is that Estes seemed to be closer on the decals than PML was, the mixing of the blue and yellow stripes is a contradiction, and maybe they found one in a museum that had been decomissioned I don't know, but in reality the missile should have one or the other.. the chrome area I assumed was a mistake but i have been able to find one missile with this area, visible on it, it's from a ground launched setup.
So yeah PML kits are nice, but they too aren't without their own issues.... Commonwealth, Magnum, and performance were all between $120 and $130 on the stock 4" Amraam, Greatlakes was a little better at around $115 ...
I agree with Jetra they are a little bit pricey, I know nothing about the QT maybe it is quite a bit more expensive than paper tube and that's why..
"I guess my question is that why do they feel they can charge so much for them? Are they really high quality, with great instructions/parts/easy assembly?"
They can charge so much because people will pay it.
High quality yes.
Great instructions, no. Adequate yes.
Parts, they have their pros and cons.
Easy assembly, no, more difficult than paper tubes. (all-though they are preslotted)
Will I be getting more PML kits..?? Only if I can find a reasonably priced way to mod them to dual deployment, (this may just be my lack of understanding with the QT) i like the designed "look" of several of their kits, i'd get the other two amraams and probably an Endeavor or two.