Mini Funtana vs Katana ES 35 for 3D-type flying - a comparison.

The marketing folks have been busy. If you believe everything you read, you might be convinced the Mini Funtana from E-Flite is the best 3D electric available. In this comparison, I will break down the claims and see how they stack up to other 3D aircraft... namely the Katana ES 35 from Accel Hobby. I will pull not only from my first hand experience with both models, but also those from other far more capable pilots. (I'm still learning 3D).

These are similar models, both loosely based on the full-scale Katana. The Mini Funtana (called MF from here on out) has a slightly bigger wingspan (37" compared to 35", fuselage width being the difference), but less wing area. The MF is 36" long, compared to 35" for the Katana (called Kat35 from here). They both have finished weights in the 20-26oz range. The Kat35 is a profile, which gives it certain advantages, such as better control surface authority when prop blast is the only air moving. The MF is a full-figured gal. ;) Better looking maybe... but that depends on your point of view (form over function?).

Let's take a look at some of the marketing hype.

"Rock-solid harriers."

Inverted harriers aren't bad on the MF, the plane locks in pretty well with little or no wing rock. Upright harriers are another matter. Mine rocks side to side pretty badly and never really locks in. Not what I call "rock-solid". Combine that with the MF's relatively high stall speed and harriers down low are pretty scary (so are all other slow down-low maneuvers... including landing). If you let it get too slow... it will drop like a rock. Landing the MF requires constant throttle... like a bigger glow plane.

In comparison, the Kat35 is very stable, either upright or inverted, with no wing rocking. It's very light wing loading means it will crawl around at or near zero airspeed... even backwards if there is much wind. Flying it inspires confidence in trying things down low. Landing is simple, as slow as you want to make it, and not scary at all. The prototype was even flown inside a public school gymnasium for several of its test flights. Try that with your Mini Funtana!

"Stable torque rolls."

Stable? Maybe for someone who can torque roll a high-wing trainer. The MF will hover and torque roll, no question about it... but not what I'd call stable or easily. If you get more than a few degrees off dead vertical, the rudder will not bring you back. If you increase the size of the rudder, you'll find it just snaps out at full deflection. Hovering is an unpleasant chore with the MF. I've even heard the MF described as a 3D trainer... they must be joking!

The Kat35, on the other hand, is a joy to hover. It locks in nicely. It also seems to have a larger margin where lessening the power will cause the model to decend in a hover, or tail-slide, instead of simply falling out. The Kat35 has effective enough control surfaces to bring you back to vertical from any angle. Part of this is the nature of profile aircraft, blocking less of the surfaces from the prop-blast. Take a look at the photos in this comparison showing the relative sizes of the tail and ailerons. Remember that my MF has an enlarged rudder... the factory rudder is even smaller.

Waterfalls...blenders...parachutes...all the aerobatic maneuvers imaginable."

The MF will do blenders, but I wouldn't recommend them at anything but zero-throttle (wing attachment area is a little weak). With some tendency to snap on full elevator, either full up or full down, waterfalls and parachutes are not easy to do. The MF does a nice flatspin, both upright and inverted, and a really wicked cool nose-down "whirligig" looking spin with the sticks jammed to the inside corners. With serious rudder coupling (strong pitch to the belly), knife edge maneuvers require a lot of practice... even with computer mixing. Knife edge transitions (knife edge down the runway, then rudder up past vertical to knife edge going the other direction) are very difficult... nearly impossible. Forget knife edge loops. The rudder coupling is the biggest complaint I have about how the MF flies.

The Kat35 performs all the same maneuvers with ease. Flat spins will come to a complete stop, and might even start climbing if I move the CG back a little more. Best looking waterfalls I've ever done. Since it has no tendency to snap out, parachutes can be done down close to the ground without fear. While I've done a couple blenders, I haven't tried a full-throttle blender yet. The airframe should handle it fine. The Kat35 suffers from far less coupling with the rudder, and it doesn't snap out with too much rudder or elevator throw. Knife edge is very easy, knife-edge transitions and even knife edge loops second only to my smaller Extreme-Flight Yak55SP-E. You can move from a hover into a high-alpha knife edge and back very cleanly. The Kat35 really would make a good 3D trainer (I usually recommend a foamy for that... mainly to remove the fear of crashing it).

"The Funtana EP's low wing loading and finely engineered tapered constant-thickness airfoil produce excellent slow-speed performance and handling, while its large control surfaces provide unbelievable control authority."

Low wing loading? Compared to what, a heavy warbird, or a much bigger airplane? My MF weighed 13oz out of the box, with no glue or anything. In comparison, the Kat35 weighed 8.5oz all glued and ready for equipment. Even with different servos that added a whole ounce more... the Kat35 still built out 3.5oz lighter than the MF using most of the same equipment. The MF's 329 sq-in of wing, added to its portly weight... gives a higher than ideal wing loading (11.75oz per sq foot). The Kat35's huge 429 sq-in wing, combined with its lighter finished weight, gives a foamy-like wing loading of 7.83oz per square foot.

Wing loading numbers are really only valid comparisons for models of the same size. What is considered a low wingloading for a 35% bird (say 26oz/sq-ft) would be piggy on a 60-size bird... and downright made of lead for a small indoor model. You may also hear some folks say that light wing loading isn't good for 3D. If you believe them, I suggest you all go out and add a few ounces or pounds of lead to your 3D birds. If a high wing loading is good... a higher wing-loading must be better. ;)

"The added weight provides better flight performance in winds that force smaller electric planes to stay on the ground."

That's a trick one. :) This statement is from Accel about the Katana 35. The fact is, the Kat35 cuts through the wind better than the MF. Seems less effected by a crosswind too (the MF doesn't like crosswinds). The MF is a very fun plane to fly general aerobatics with on a windless day. Grooves around very nicely. But, the Kat35 can fly just as well with a 5-10mph wind and handles even higher wind better than the MF. We have an MF at our field that does fly smoothly in the wind... because the owner put a gyro on every axis! The Kat35 doesn't need gyros to fly well.

"It’s the same level of materials and craftsmanship that goes into our Hangar 9 brand, but at a lower price point than competitive products."

Here is an area where I agree completely with the E-Flite marketing folks. I'd even go farther to say the MF is an extraordinary value. Very well constructed, fit and finish were perfect, a lot of airplane for $90. Maybe too much airplane... the MF would sure fly better without those extra ounces of weight. I also like the yellow colorscheme better, plus its REAL Ultracote so you can repair it.

The Kat35 had construction issues and suffers from china-cheapitis. A little expensive for what you get. It's only available in white right now, but has no decals applied at all. This gives you a blank slate to create your own colorscheme, or use the included decals if you wish. Too bad the covering is "china-kote" and more of an ivory color than white. Neither the white nor the blue transparent on the bottom will match anything commercially available in the USA.

Conclusion...

If I was buying a plane on just construction quality, "ARF-ness" (how almost ready to fly it really is), or how nice it looks hanging from the ceiling... the Mini Funtana would be my choice. However, I don't buy these to look at them... they must fly better than they look! Since the Kat35 will do every maneuver the MF will do as well or better (including 3D, IMAC, pattern, and even just circle-flying), plus some things the MF will not easily do... the Katana ES 35 gets the nod for me. Like its big brother Accel Katana GS 40's and 70's, it's also a fully capable bird in the hands of an experienced 3D pilot.

So, If you're looking for a 3D trainer, an all out 3D machine for an experienced 3D'er, or even just a good sport flier (on low low rates) with unlimited potential for more fun in the future... give the Katana ES 35 from Accel Hobby a chance!

Click here to return to the main R/C page.