Airtronic MX3S versus MX3FG
#3
Tech Master
iTrader: (70)
Not an Airtronics guru but I did stay in a Holiday Inn last night
If I'm not mistaken, the MX-3S is the synsthesized FM version.
Now they had the MX-3FHSS 2.4Ghz radio and now they have a newer version of it with the FG designation. As far as I can tell, the only difference between them is that the new version has a higher power signal output.
If I'm not mistaken, the MX-3S is the synsthesized FM version.
Now they had the MX-3FHSS 2.4Ghz radio and now they have a newer version of it with the FG designation. As far as I can tell, the only difference between them is that the new version has a higher power signal output.
#4
Hehe, thanks for pointing out my typo of the MX-3 "S." I really did mean the FHSS and the FHSS2, but you answered it anyway. Perhaps you are like the people I saw in the Holiday Inn commercial
Higher output at the antenna? My god, I wonder what drove them to do that, was it some ranging problem? These transmitters already eats up my batteries, perhaps it's time to get rechargeable ones...
I've read in another thread that the FAAST system actually puts out less power at the antenna as compared to the FHSS (or the FHSS2 now) for a comparable performance, is this true? If it is, I might decide to get the Futaba stuff for my next 2.4ghz system...
My only gripe is that the Futaba radio isn't as aesthetically pleasing as the Airtronics/Sanwa stuff (don't get me started on the aesthetics of the Spektrum, they are just plain fugly).
I suppose I might've created a spark with that fugly statement about the Spektrum, flame on
Higher output at the antenna? My god, I wonder what drove them to do that, was it some ranging problem? These transmitters already eats up my batteries, perhaps it's time to get rechargeable ones...
I've read in another thread that the FAAST system actually puts out less power at the antenna as compared to the FHSS (or the FHSS2 now) for a comparable performance, is this true? If it is, I might decide to get the Futaba stuff for my next 2.4ghz system...
My only gripe is that the Futaba radio isn't as aesthetically pleasing as the Airtronics/Sanwa stuff (don't get me started on the aesthetics of the Spektrum, they are just plain fugly).
I suppose I might've created a spark with that fugly statement about the Spektrum, flame on
#5
i dont like the triggers on the spektrum radios. you need a sausage finger to hit the brakes. the mx3 feel just like the m11 only with a higher wheel placlement. If 4 extra aa batteries adds too much weight to a radio maybe people should hit the gym instead of the track.
#6
From what I see at my LHSm the MX-3FG is using the DSSS system whereas the MX-3 is using FHSS. I don't know which is better... anyone knows?
#7
Tech Adept
iTrader: (1)
they originally devoloped two systems. the fhss draw too much power and got hot. the dsss system they designed went in the m11 module kit first. thye decied they didnt need 2 incompatable systems and mad the mx3 use the same systemos they now cna use either systems reciever and it will work on the other. the fhss recievers dont work with the dsss system or vice versa
#8
Tech Rookie
Hehe, thanks for pointing out my typo of the MX-3 "S." I really did mean the FHSS and the FHSS2, but you answered it anyway. Perhaps you are like the people I saw in the Holiday Inn commercial
Higher output at the antenna? My god, I wonder what drove them to do that, was it some ranging problem? These transmitters already eats up my batteries, perhaps it's time to get rechargeable ones...
I've read in another thread that the FAAST system actually puts out less power at the antenna as compared to the FHSS (or the FHSS2 now) for a comparable performance, is this true? If it is, I might decide to get the Futaba stuff for my next 2.4ghz system...
My only gripe is that the Futaba radio isn't as aesthetically pleasing as the Airtronics/Sanwa stuff (don't get me started on the aesthetics of the Spektrum, they are just plain fugly).
I suppose I might've created a spark with that fugly statement about the Spektrum, flame on
Higher output at the antenna? My god, I wonder what drove them to do that, was it some ranging problem? These transmitters already eats up my batteries, perhaps it's time to get rechargeable ones...
I've read in another thread that the FAAST system actually puts out less power at the antenna as compared to the FHSS (or the FHSS2 now) for a comparable performance, is this true? If it is, I might decide to get the Futaba stuff for my next 2.4ghz system...
My only gripe is that the Futaba radio isn't as aesthetically pleasing as the Airtronics/Sanwa stuff (don't get me started on the aesthetics of the Spektrum, they are just plain fugly).
I suppose I might've created a spark with that fugly statement about the Spektrum, flame on
I totally agree with the Spektrum statement, i wouldnt buy one for that very reason
#9
/http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXWYX8&P=7looking at getting this anyone have one I cant find a review Airtronics MX-3FG FHSS-2
#10
MX-3
I haveth 2.4ghz radio and like it alot I can runabout 10 to 12 hours on the batteries. Have not had a problem yet.
i used some grip wrap to make the grip a lil larger is all. Like the kind you put on tennis raquets.
i used some grip wrap to make the grip a lil larger is all. Like the kind you put on tennis raquets.
Last edited by YotieKillin; 05-25-2009 at 10:37 PM. Reason: i wanted to
#11
I have that radio and like it lots the grip is a lil small for my hand so I used tennis raqute grip tape and wrapped it around it. I can get 10 to 12 hours out of the batteries.
#12
I had a MX3 FHSS about a year ago and it was a nice radio the part I really liked was the digital screen and trim controls def a step up from the tactics and traxxas links and hobby king radios!