Construction Rating: | starstarstarstarstar |
Flight Rating: | starstarstarstarstar_border |
Overall Rating: | starstarstarstarstar_border |
Manufacturer: | Estes |
Brief:
After I entered some old flight logs on the Estes Sizzler, I decided to look at the EMRR review. To my surprise, this was not the same kit! The newer Sizzler was not merely a re-issue with materials differences, it was larger (BT-60 vs. BT-50), had a different fin design, and used rear ejection vs. standard NC ejection.
Construction:
The original Sizzler (#1906) was a basic 3FNC Skill level 1 rocket. I bought mine in 1987 as part of a starter set - my first act as a BAR. The attached pics provide a good description of the rocket (click picture on left to enlarge). I really loved the looks of the original. Originally, mine looked like the ads - now it is fairly flight worn.
Construction Rating: 5 out of 5
Flight:
I flew this rocket many many times times on A's, B's, C's, and one D It has landed on people's roofs and a ledge of a nearby office building. We were lucky they had scheduled a window cleaning that weekend (before it rained!). It survived these flights well, with a 12" plastic chute and the rubber band shock cord. On its last flight, I used an Aerotech D21-7 for a really fast take-off. The ejection charge burned the body tube and blistered the paint. The tube almost feels like it melted. The Sizzler is now enjoying a happy retirement in my Rocket Ranch. Maybe someday, she will see an offspring (upscale).
Recovery:
PROs - Flies great on any class of 18mm engine CONs - Uses a short rubber band shock cord. However, this was typical for all Estes kits back then.
Flight Rating: 4 out of 5
Summary:
PROS - It's a good performing, basic starter rocket. CONS - None noted
I think the new version is a more interesting rocket (with rear ejection, etc.), but I liked the overall look of the original better. I think Estes should have issued their rocket under another name, IMHO.
Overall Rating: 4 out of 5
Sponsored Ads