Estes Pro Series II E2X Sale, questions

[clhug]

First, if anybody wants some Estes Pro Series II E2X rockets for cheap, Estes has a bundle on sale that contains a Mammoth, Trajector, and Prowler launch set for $45. The individual rockets are on sale too if you only want 1 or 2 of them. (Go to the main Estes web page, click Specials, then page 4 at the bottom has the individual rockets. But the bundle price is still significantly less than the even the sale prices of each individual rocket totaled up.)

https://www.estesrockets.com/clearance/000-2017-bundle-8-1

I've been doing the standard Estes rockets for 40 years (with a 15 or 20 year break in the middle) but never done anything larger than D engines. I've never had much interest in going larger, mostly due to increased costs, but at this price to get started, I decided to give it a try. I just purchased this bundle. (I have a few models now that will fly on either D or E engines, but still have never actually flown anything on larger than a D.)

I have a few questions about the Pro Series II rockets I'm hoping someone can help with.

Wadding - I see Estes has a Pro Series II specific wadding. What's the difference between this and standard Estes wadding?

Launch system - Again, I see there is a Pro Series II specific launch pad and launch controller. The Prowler kit comes with the "E" pad and launch controller. So why would I consider the Pro Series II specific launch pad and/or controller?

Beyond that, any other tips about the Pro Series II for someone who's generally well experienced in standard Estes rockets but never done anything larger before?

Thanks much!

[kevinj]

Wadding- same stuff, just more in the package.
PSII vs e-Pad- for non black powder motors you need to have more power for the ignitors, that's the difference in the controllers. The PSII pad is larger with a wider base to accommodate the larger PSII rockets.

[Scott_650]

I launch my Mammoth and Trajector off a 5 ft , 1/4 in diameter rod using cellulose insulation ("dog barf") as wadding. I had planned on building my own controller using a rechargeable ni-cad battery but I found a great deal on a PSII Launch Controller - it works very well on Estes 29mm black powder motors.

[BEC]

A little more detail:

The PSII launch controller uses six C-cells for power vs. four AA-cells in the E-controller. Both have 30 foot leads (which you need for E and up). If you’re planning to use the Estes Es and Fs, then what you are getting will be just fine, as they use the same igniters/starters as smaller Estes motors do. As kevinj suggested, if you are planning on using composite motors you may or may not want to/need to upgrade.

On the pads - Kevin pretty well summed it up. On flat ground and with moderate winds, what your’re getting will do.

Many people try to “improve” the PSII rockets with epoxy and fiberglass and such. They work JUST FINE when built as directed with the adhesives directed. Now if you’re looking to put a G80 in one of them then I’d think a little bit about some moderate strengthening.

If you’ve built recent Estes kits you’ll be in familiar territory with these three models save for the sizes of some of the parts.

[ghrocketman]

The PSII rockets EASILY handle the Aerotech 29mm RMS H engines provided you fillet the fins with epoxy and build the engine mount with epoxy as well.
Too bad they discontinued the mega deer red max. That thing can handle a J motor.

[Scott_650]

Speaking of epoxy - using epoxy is a little different than using white/yellow glue. Not necessarily harder but it is different. If you aren't familiar with epoxy I'd suggest trying it out - pick-up an inexpensive package and practice with that before you build an E2X PSII kit. I used regular JB Weld on the engine mounts of my PSII kits but that probably isn't essential. JB Weld is more heat resistant...and I had some handy when I built Mammoth number one .

[LeeR]

[…]First, if anybody wants some Estes Pro Series II E2X rockets for cheap, Estes has a bundle on sale that contains a Mammoth, Trajector, and Prowler launch set for $45.

Thanks much!
[…]

The Bundle 7 has been going on for much longer than I expected. I bought it about 3 months ago. I built the Mammoth and I’ve flown it on the F15 BP motors. A pretty simple, yet enjoyable build. I followed the instructions exactly on glue recommendations. My only mod was to make the rocket break apart at the coupler for easier transport.

Back when I ordered, Estes had free shipping if you spent $39.99. I just checked, the free shipping at $39.99 is still be going on. But they always have free shipping on orders over $50. This is a real bargain, especially with it qualifying for free shipping on that one bundle — maybe one of the best that I recall.

[clhug]

Thanks all! I appreciate the help. Received the bundle today. My local rocket club has a launch on Sunday so I'll see if I can get one of them put together by then (since they're E2X).

Yes, I meant, but forgot to mention the free shipping on orders over $39.99 too. That made it an even better deal.

I checked out my local Hobby Lobby today too and picked up the Star Orbiter PSII using the 40% off coupon. I know this isn't a E2X but it's still pretty basic assembly.

Wadding - if it's really the same stuff, it seems silly they sell it as specifically "Pro Series II" wadding. It's a bit misleading in my opinion. Just the other day I bought some of the regular wadding just because I thought there might be a difference that I might not want to use PSII wadding in my regular rockets. They should just call it a "bulk pack" or something like that. It's definitely more cost effective than the standard wadding package (3x the quantity for only twice the price.

Cellulose for wadding - that's the "blow-in" type of insulation, that looks like shredded newspaper, right? Is that stuff fire resistant like the Estes wadding is? I didn't realize that. If so, then yeah, I can see that might be much more cost effective, especially for larger rockets.

PSII Launch controller - I knew it used 6 C cells vs. 4 AA cells, and thus would have more power, I just wasn't sure when I'd need that more power. Thanks for the clarification regarding the larger engines. I'll probably stick to E & F engines for a while. If I can find a really good deal on a PSII controller and/or pad at some point, I might pick them up.

Epoxy - Since I'm probably going to stick with the E & F engines recommended for these models for now, I'll probably just stick to regular glue. If I decide to go larger, I can always build some later models with extra strength. I've definitely used epoxy to glue things in general and do know how it works, but never on rockets before. Yeah, I'd probably need to practice up a bit for more precise gluing needs on rockets. Though I suppose it'll have the advantage of setting up quicker than regular glue. (THE biggest thing I hate about building rockets is waiting for glue to dry.) But that also means I have to be more precise and right on with my alignment up front.

Thanks again!!

[BEC]

You will be using epoxy a little on these models (including the Star Orbiter) to install the motor retainer. But for the wood/paper ones that's the only place it's needed. I am not that familiar with Trajector or Prowler...they may (like the Majestic I AM familiar with) call for epoxy to glue fin halves together and/or to the centering rings/fin support structure).

[neil_w]

You will be using epoxy a little on these models (including the Star Orbiter) to install the motor retainer. But for the wood/paper ones that's the only place it's needed. I am not that familiar with Trajector or Prowler...they may (like the Majestic I AM familiar with) call for epoxy to glue fin halves together and/or to the centering rings/fin support structure).

They call for CA to glue the fins together but epoxy to glue the motor mount and the fins into the slots.

[clhug]

Well, I happened to be driving past Hobby Lobby again this evening so I stopped in and bought a package of the Bob Smith 30 minute epoxy using the 40% off coupon again (after reading several other threads here about epoxy, many recommended this one).

CA for the fins? I find that interesting. Most threads/posts in these forums about CA state that it's pretty worthless because it's so brittle. At one point I thought seriously about using CA glue for all of my regular rocket builds because I HATE waiting for regular glue to dry (I do use wood glue, not white glue), but after reading so many bad comments about CA glue on these forums I decided to give up the idea.

Does it have to be a specific CA for this purpose? I do have some just regular household superglue, but I'd have to run out to buy any special modeling type CA glue. (I do know there are various thicknesses of CA for different purposes.)

Side note, Hobby Lobby did also have the Majestic kit on the shelf, but it was a $50 kit compared to the Star Orbiter being a $22 kit. Even with the 40% coupon, I'm not quite ready to spend that much on a rocket yet.

I will say, getting into the PSII line kind of violates my personal preference on the types of kits I typically buy. I typically stay away from the just plain tube with fins type, which all of these PSII models are. I go more for the cool sci-fi'ish looking rockets that look like they could be an actual space ship, or scale models of actual rockets (my pride is still my Saturn V I built about 25 or 30 years ago and still have). But as I stated in my original post, for the cost of this bundle, I decided to give more power a try.

I love WATCHING other people launch high power rockets, but for my personal tastes I like looking at them as a model of something cool just as much as I enjoy launching them.

[Initiator001]

CA for the fins? I find that interesting. Most threads/posts in these forums about CA state that it's pretty worthless because it's so brittle. At one point I thought seriously about using CA glue for all of my regular rocket builds because I HATE waiting for regular glue to dry (I do use wood glue, not white glue), but after reading so many bad comments about CA glue on these forums I decided to give up the idea.

Does it have to be a specific CA for this purpose? I do have some just regular household superglue, but I'd have to run out to buy any special modeling type CA glue. (I do know there are various thicknesses of CA for different purposes.)



I have built and flown all of the Estes PSII E2X models.
All the fins were assembled with medium grade CA (ZAP). No issues.
My Estes PSII Nike Smoke (Non E2X) had the plastic fins also assembled with medium CA.
The model flew fine on an AeroTech G80 motor with no issues.

I do use epoxy to secure the fins to the model.
I don't use much, just enough at all the areas of contact.
Never had a fin come off/out.

[clhug]

I dug out the instructions from the Trajector box. It uses ONLY CA and epoxy, no regular (white/yellow) glue at all. It says to use CA to glue the fin halves together, and epoxy for everything else. It doesn't say what kind of CA though, so thanks for the pointer to use medium. I'll have to run back to Hobby Lobby with that 40% off coupon again.

The one question I have though is, the fins are plastic. Why are we using CA to glue plastic parts together instead of the traditional plastic cement glue I've always used on plastic parts in the regular Estes rockets? That stuff actually melts the plastic a bit and makes the plastic from the different parts stick together, almost like a plastic "weld".

Thanks again!

[Scott_650]

Traditional plastic cement is for polystyrene - I think the PSII fins are a some other plastic, polyethylene maybe? Be careful not to let the CA ooze onto the outside of the fins if you want a nice clean look. I ended up with some CA on the outside of the fins on Mammoth no. 2. Haven't built Trajector no.2 yet since I'm trying to decide if I want to use an Accur8 (John Pursley) vinyl wrap on that one.

[neil_w]

Traditional plastic cement is for polystyrene - I think the PSII fins are a some other plastic, polyethylene maybe? Be careful not to let the CA ooze onto the outside of the fins if you want a nice clean look. I ended up with some CA on the outside of the fins on Mammoth no. 2. Haven't built Trajector no.2 yet since I'm trying to decide if I want to use an Accur8 (John Pursley) vinyl wrap on that one.

I got the NASA skin for my Trajector, I think it'll look great. I have all parts prepped, just waiting for the winter when I'm stuck inside.

I think the wraps are a great way to take a simple E2X model like the Trajector and turn it into something special.

[clhug]

Traditional plastic cement is for polystyrene - I think the PSII fins are a some other plastic, polyethylene maybe?
Ah, that makes sense. Thanks!

[mwtoelle]

Traditional plastic cement is for polystyrene - I think the PSII fins are a some other plastic, polyethylene maybe? Be careful not to let the CA ooze onto the outside of the fins if you want a nice clean look. I ended up with some CA on the outside of the fins on Mammoth no. 2. Haven't built Trajector no.2 yet since I'm trying to decide if I want to use an Accur8 (John Pursley) vinyl wrap on that one.
Actually I believe the fins are made of ABS, and no the standard PS glues will not work on ABS. I believe that polyethlene would flex a bit too much and be highly resistant to paint and glue. I think that At, LOC, PML, etc. use PE in their nose cones. CA is a great bonding agent if the joint are not put into shear.

[stefanj]

I used CA on my Nike Smoke's fins. With adequate clamping, they came out just fine.

I passed on the current PS II deals. SO, SO many unbuilt models.

I hope the sell-off doesn't mean Estes is discontinuning the line! The E16 and F16 aresn't as widely useful as I'd like, but they're definitely appreciated.

[neil_w]

I hope the sell-off doesn't mean Estes is discontinuning the line! The E16 and F16 aresn't as widely useful as I'd like, but they're definitely appreciated.

I have to say I'm getting frustrated about their local availability. Hobby Lobby is the only place that sells them at all around here that I've found (none at any LHS), and even their selection is limited and stock is erratic at best. Mail order requires hazmat.

[Scott_650]

I think the release of the Star Orbiter and the upcoming Super Big Bertha shows that the PSII black powder motors aren't likely to be discontinued any time soon .

[ghrocketman]

I like the Estes E16 and F15 29mm BP motors, but an E35 or F40 in the same SU BP format would be far more useful. All it would take is a pintle in the nozzle when the BP core is pressed into the casing. Would be similar to the old C5/B8 18mm motors- "semi" port-burning without the hazard of drilling cores like the old B14. It was easily done in the 60's and 70's...it could be done far easier and more safely now with automated controls. Why it is not done is a bunch of hogwash EXCUSES.

[stefanj]

Yes! Even a relatively tame F24 would be welcome. An F24-0 would give a nice kick to two-stage models.

[Doug Sams]

I like the Estes E16 and F15 29mm BP motors, but an E35 or F40 in the same SU BP format would be far more useful. No doubt, in booster applications, the higher thrust is very significant to avoid weather-vaning (and cruise missiles). But we also know that the higher pressure of the deep core will have the guys in the quality and reliability departments throwing their trump cards at the motor engineers :) There will surely be a shift in failure rate and hence more liability, with possible safety issues as well. (Alternatively, fixing all that would push the costs out of range.)

Anyway, using these motors, the challenge is to either build very light, or build a cluster to get the rocket in the air with authority. A lightly built rocket on an F15 might need to have intentional drag added to keep in recoverable. And a cluster has the challenge of getting them all lit, but that's manageable - I've had success with several rockets that use a larger central motor with multiple smaller outboards. And that's pretty much how I have envisioned using the 29mm Estes E and F booster motors.

Doug

.

[5x7]

The Estes Catalog reccomends an E16-8 for the Mammoth which I think would eject way late. The max liftoff weight of the E16-8 is an optimistic 14oz, and the Mammoth is 13.3 according to the Catalog.

Does anyone have an actual weight for their Mammoth? Has anyone tried the E16-8 in a Mammouth? Can anyone tell me what motors the instructions reccomend?

[LeeR]

I weighed my Mammoth a few years ago and seem to remember it tipping the scales at about 14 oz. I first flew it on an F15-8, but then switched to F15-6s. The shorter kits like the Prowler, Trajector, or Majestic would be OK on the F15-8. It’s also the engine I have used in my Star Orbiter.

[5x7]

Good to know, I wonder if anyone has flown it on the catalog E16-8.