TZ SHARK 90--The Nitro and electric HELI

[TZ SHARK]

TZ SHARK 90 contains all the best solutions which are now available in the world of the RC helicopter.
our staff created a product which offers everything you can wish:
• low weight: just 9,48 lbs (4,3 Kilograms)
• high centre of mass
• fuel tank on the centre of mass
• nitro engine or electric motor
• rigid and fast head
• full metal head
• easy maintenance ergonomics
• cheap maintenance and spare parts
• low parts count and an ultra-simple build
This kind of mechanics allows to reduce around 30% of parts used by traditional mechanics, and “fewer parts” means “lower weight”, easier assembly and maintenance and lower management costs.
With this model, the pilot can decide to install nitro and electric motors avoiding to change the product as time passes by.
This model is ideal for intermediary and experienced pilots and, in particular, for everyone who wants to approach the 3D flight.

[Rotor Ruiner]

Interesting design, love the frame and what looks to be the easily removable shroud and electronics pod. Is there going to be a torque tube driven tail available? Not too sure about the rotor head design. Would like to see this machine reviewed. What is the proposed MSRP ?

[blax1]

Hi welcome to the forum :)

Extraordinarily innovative concept you have there.. :cool:

I assume this is your web site?

http://www.jsmodel.com/product_903.asp

[Rotor Ruiner]

Will there be any distributors for your products in the US or Canada ?

[tdswan]

Curious....I'll bet this poster only joined to post his product, then to never return. It's better known as spamming, but this time it's at least a helicopter instead of porn or viagra. If I'm wrong, I apologize.....I haven't seen any ads for this helicopter gracing the pages of RCHeli Magazine. :rolleyes:

[Ots]

Buyer beware!!!

[blax1]

Curious....I'll bet this poster only joined to post his product, then to never return. It's better known as spamming, but this time it's at least a helicopter instead of porn or viagra. If I'm wrong, I apologize.....I haven't seen any ads for this helicopter gracing the pages of RCHeli Magazine. :rolleyes:
That thought did occur to me too :rolleyes:
However see what happens...?

[DJB2.0]

http://www.runryder.com/helicopter/t382605p1/?highlight=TZ+Shark

[tdswan]

http://www.runryder.com/helicopter/t382605p1/?highlight=TZ+Shark
Not a single post from the member name posted here, though. ;)

[vermonster]

hey guys they have an add on runryders home page all the way down on the right;) http://www.runryder.com/helicopter/gallery/62345/TZshark01.jpg (http://www.runryder.com/helicopter/vendor/62345/www.jsmodel.com)

[vapochilled]

Curious....I'll bet this poster only joined to post his product, then to never return. It's better known as spamming, but this time it's at least a helicopter instead of porn or viagra. If I'm wrong, I apologize.....I haven't seen any ads for this helicopter gracing the pages of RCHeli Magazine. :rolleyes:

TD has it on the nail, spam spam spam, I much prefer the naked women :)
Post should be deleted or the OP should pay for advertising!

[RKephart]

We are reviewing the TZ 90 Shark in the March issue.

[AaronS]

we are doing a full reveiw.... keep your eyes peeled ;)

[blax1]

I,m not understanding why some of you guys think its spam??? :confused:

[vapochilled]

1st post!~!! no introduction, no, 1st post and it's a "look at my product" I did not even click on it, I won't help a poster who's one and only intent is to sell, never to be seen again.

And the comment "we're reviewing it" does that make it ok? If so I have a couple of products you can review, in the meantime I'll just start using this place for free advertising if that's ok?

[vermonster]

with an attitude like that you belong on RRhttp://smileys.smilchat.net/smileys/argue/beleubeleu.gif

it's also the community that breeds this XXXX, I'd prefer them to stay there!
So far, this site has avoided the child like behaviour that seems to aflict so many other forums. Sure we have our "characters" but nothing like the single cell plebs that have nothing better to do than stir up XXXX and then sit back and chuckle!
I've only visited RR once and that was enough,

[lncifg]

Maybe the guy just share with us his new heli
I think this product is perfect. but never see it.

[TZ SHARK]

I am back!
Thanks for all your attention!
This is the my first post on foreign forum. And i usual on www.5irc.com.
I joined you with a new style helicopter. Just want to introduce something new and share with you.

Attached some flight pictures.

[tdswan]

Welcome back, Shark. Looks like I was wrong. Like I originally posted, I apologize. I feel like I may have "mobilized the troops" a bit early with my original post. I'm glad to see you checked back. An introduction would have been nice ;)

[vapochilled]

Welcome back, Shark. Looks like I was wrong. Like I originally posted, I apologize. I feel like I may have "mobilized the troops" a bit early with my original post. I'm glad to see you checked back. An introduction would have been nice ;)

As it appears was I, allways glad to be wrong,lol

[Jeff Bulmer]

The heli looks pretty nice in the pics..nice to see something new , instead of just copied.

I wonder where would it fall in the size arena?? It looks about the size of the lepton ??


Never mind the size ....doh...another 90 , but without flybar

[Ots]

"Oh, the weather outside is flightful, but here is so deriteful..."

[TZ SHARK]

THAT'S OK!

I accept your apologize and suggestions.
I will complete my introduction.

[bboy]

I wonder if you could change your name to spam shark ":D" Just kidding welcome! and cool heli's look forward to the review in the mag :cool:

[TZ SHARK]

MERRY CHRISMAS DAY AND HAPPY HELI FLIGHT!
:D :)

[TZ SHARK]

Who can tell me the maximum running ratios of T-Rex 600 Nitro, i will be more than grateful :) :)

[Ots]

Running ratios???

[TZ SHARK]

I mean the rate of main blades. The manuals said it is safe between 1500-2200 RPM. Have you try over 2200 RPM? If yes, is there any vibration?

Thanks!

[heli-cuzz]

2200??? That's not enough :confused:

[Ots]

2200 RPM at the rotor head would be a lot for me.

If you are going to run that high of a head speed just make sure the blades and the blade holders are up to the job.

[TZ SHARK]

Frankly speaking, 2200 RPM is enough. :D

But if you want to take a risk and get more from flying heli, you can try a higher rotor head speed. :D :D

[blax1]

Its a 90 isn't it?? 2200 RPM at the head would be heaps IMO :)

[Ots]

Yes.. definitely heaps.

[TZ SHARK]

No,it is not a 90 but 50.

I find a interesting flight video on YOUTUBE.Here is the link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txAWHWE94go

[GMONEY]

ONE question. who will handle parts and service? I'm sure you realize without that the best heli in the world is dead.. good luck with your new bird. I look forward to reading what the killer staff at Rchelimag has to say about your new product.. I sure hope she is up to the abuse these guys put there birds through....

G

RCH,
Which one of the guys pulled the ticket on this one? Ryan? I really liked the work he did on the 3D 90...

G

[Jeff Bulmer]

looks like a good review..a few bugs to work out , but the design is awesome looking with the frame layout!

very interested to see if the 50 size looks this cool!!

[ErichF]

Aaron Shell did the review of the 90 this month.

I was interested to read that he had to loosen up his blade grips to eliminate a wobble in the heli at moderate to low RPM. My high-end Caliber 90 will do the same thing. If you notice, the Shark's head and mixer system is somewhat a copy of the older Caliber 60/90 heads, as is the Stinger 90. The current version '06 of the Caliber 90 has a different head block and yoke setup, but still uses similar bell mixers and flybar see-saw.

Anyways, I had an issue with head wobble at an RPM range of 1450-1650 on the Caliber 90. Some of it was the geometry I had set in the mixers and Delta of the head. However, I can get the wobbles back if I have the blade grips down too tight.

I think it's more inherent in that type of mixer setup than anything to do with the Shark's head in particular. Of course, Aaron mentioned in the review that the head yoke and block fit wasn't all that tight, which can exagerate an issue like this.

[sodi]

Hey guys,

I am from South Africa, and a dealer for the TZ. It's a new heli here, so I thought I would give it a go and it turned out not to be so bad. The cyclic on the heli is very good. It is extremly responsive to your input and flies really well. In 3D flight it is also very stable and does the job. Inverted hovering is also not a problem. The only problem I have is that when the kit is put together the clearances are very tight, this putting huge amounts of pressure on the one way bearing and causing it to break. Another thing, when the bearing is outside the casing it turns freely but when put into place it tightens up straight away which is causing vibrations. It seems to me that there is a misalignment problem between the top bearing and the middle bearing causing the problem to be transferred to the one way bearing.

If anybody can maybe give me something to try and see if I can fix the problem, it would be an awesome entry level chopper at a very good price.

Thanks ;)

[Ots]

Best way to fix the problem is to stay with quality equipment.

[TZ SHARK]

I agree that such problem maybe caused by a misalignment problem between top bearing and middle bearing.

You'd better ask the manufacturer for help to fix such problem. As i know, they guarantee change or refund if unsatisfactory.

[RotorDoc]

I think one of the ratings on any review, should be one that takes into account the "history" of the company. How long it has been distributed in the North American market and how proven the parts supplies have been over at least a three year (preferably 4 or 5) period, along with how many sources there are to provide help, service and parts.

When I read this review, I must say that I lost some respect for R/C Heli mag, because it was quite clear to me, that the magazine reviewed the product and allowed this type of "spammish" thread, because of the large advert that appeared in the mag. This may not be the case, but it certainly smacks of it.

And doing a review without any price being yet established....even more questionable??? Talk about premarket hype!

To me this is as bad as having reviews, in their competing US magazine, that are written by people associated with the manufacturer of the product they are reviewing. All because of the ad revenue these companies generate for the publication.

Over the many years that I have flown R/C helis, I have seen a lot of product come and go in relatively short order, leaving the consumer holding the bag. Personally, it has taught me to let others be the beta testers for the product and the company's service and endurance. Only then will I commit my hard earned dollars to purchasing any such product.

Heck there are a lot of proven helis out there, from long term manufacturers, that R/C Heli has not yet reviewed. These IMHO should be reviewed first.

In this case, I do not think any company should expect their customer to solve design issues for them. The seller/distributor should not have to ask the manufacturer to look after such basic problems as seen here and in the review. The manufacturers R & D team should have discovered all of them and subsequently have them addressed, before put on the market or submitted to a magazine for review.

[AaronS]

My job when I am reviewing a model is to give an unbiased account of my experience with a given model. It is not my job to say who can and cannot sell a helicopter to the public. If I were to do that it would be the most biased thing I could do. In my article I pointed out that "There seems to be some minor quality control issues...The model needs to be well supported, priced right, and made available through a distributor." JS Model is a manufacturer that has been selling models worldwide for several years, under their name abroad, and sold under a different name in the US. That was pointed out in the review as well, so I believe I covered company history.

I know I have no way of proving this, it has come up before and it will come up again, but when I or anyone else working for the magazine does a review, the last thing influencing our writing is our advertising department. As far as the "Spammish thread" goes, we happened to know that it was a legitimate manufacturer trying to expose a new product, so we allowed it. We do not delete legitimate posts for political reasons like some forums.

As far as reviewing the model before we knew the price... you said yourself you were tired of being a beta tester.... if you read my review, it gives you a very good idea of what you are up against if you do decide to purchase one. If a manufacturer wants to send us a model, we will review it as long as it is safe to fly. Of course there are lots of good models on the market that should be reviewed eventually, but it is not possible to review everything. We have companies constantly sending us models for review, and don't always have the opportunity to review every model on the market.

Thanks for reading

[Ots]

Aaron is appropriately diplomatic in his response.

I, however, have no connection to the magazine.

"RotorDoc," whatever that means, this forum is not terribly fond of posts like you left about the review.

It's more of a positive, upbeat forum than some other forums I've read. But then, if you didn't pick up on that reading other threads here, I'm probably wasting my time pointing it out to you.

Some people never really get it.

[RotorDoc]

Aaron,

I am sorry if you took my post as a negative critique of your reviews or what you said in that review in particular. I have nothing but respect for what you always try to do in your reviews.

The two major points I was trying to make is:

1 - That I think the magazine and its readers would be better served by having you spend your valueable time, using your review expertise, on product that is more widely available to most of us, and that has an established network of suppliers. (That could possibly be a criteria for any product to be reviewed)

2 - That I hoped this review was not an indication that R/C Heli was possibly starting on the path that one of your competing magazines took a number of years ago. And from your comments it is clear that we both know what mag that is ;)

As for your review, I maybe should have said that I also thought that you handled it extremely well from a "politically correct" point of view. I just thought that maybe Mike should have not put you in a position to have to write a review of such a product.

As for the "spammish" post by the manufacturer, I think most forums have regulations against this. I believe that is because without such regulations, a forum could quickly become a free for all for every manufacturer (from micro toys to the Yamaha professional product) and would quickly become very tedious. Much like what has evolved with our snail mail and telephones.

Ots,

Yes this forum site is definitely more upbeat and positive compared to some others. I just think that positive critism can be a good thing, and may well keep a great, but young magazine like RC Heli and this associated forum, from going the route of some others that cannot tolerate any type of criticism. This can quickly lead to a dictatorial type of forum that will only tolerate readers who see things their way.

Heck, I have recently browsed such a forum, where the "GURU" actually thinks a 1985 Schluter Champion would still be competitive in today's FAI/F3C and the XTC competitions....and will not tolerate anyone disagreeing with that. I do not think this would be what Mike V would want here. (Although I doubt anyone from RC Heli would seriously make such a statement) :)

I have spent a lot of time suggesting people buy and read RC Heli in a number of forums, whenever the question comes up, because I think it has come a LONG way in a very SHORT time, so I guess I expect a lot from it, and would not like to see it become less.

[MikeV]

What's Up Doc?

Sorry couldn't resist.

Every fault that we discovered on the TZ Shark 90, as with all of our reviews, was disclosed and discussed in the article. Along with the fact that as of the printing that there were no US distributors. The manufacturer came to us, asked us to review to help crack the market. As long as they realize that we will pull no punches and that our absolute first commitment is to our readers we'll perform the review. We were very careful to fully disclose everything possible so that our readers understood the situation. In the 90-size category there's no long list of relatively new 90's that we've yet to review. We like balance and to cover all aspects of the hobby. When the opportunity to review the Shark came up we put it on the schedule as a service to readers.

Doc, I can see your position and appreciate your feedback.

Mike

[RotorDoc]

Thank you Mike,

I appreciate you taking time to come into this thread with your post on the report etc.

We all know that there are a number of 90's currently on the market, that may not be a "new: release, but if they have not previously been reviewed by Aeron, then I would have liked to see him do so. And, as I always find Aaron's reviews and hi"take" on the subjets he has reviewed, I guess I would even like to see his take on helis that are still currently on the market (and may even have been on the market for a number of years). In that way, we could have a better idea of how they compare to some of these new releases.

I say this, because in the many years that I have been flying these helis, there have been a number of times that I have found past airframes better then or as good as, some newer items I subsequently bought...specially when I equiped both with the same top equipment (radio, servos, gyro, motor, muffler etc.).

P.S. I really think that his follow up, in the last issue I read cover to cover as usual, to his previous review of the Align T600N, and the relative high wear factor of some of its components (similar to what I discovered) was a step above what we generally see in other magazines. Well done gentleman....it certainly presents a balanced view. :)

[Ots]

amazing...