New style Brodak handle

[Jerry Tarnofsky]

Have one of the 'new' red Brodak handles with hard point connections and adjustable arms.
Worked great with an airplane that always had trouble with outside turns, a Dick Mathis Koyote. (flapless)
Always had to adj. the down line as far outside as possible with the older handles and still had
to fight it to turn fast enough on outside bottoms.  With the Brodak handle, I set the lower arm 1/2"
farther out than the upper and used the 2nd hole from the bottom. Made line clips to get the centering correct. The extra leverage works just great, the bottoms no longer get close to the gopher holes.
The handle is heavy but you do not feel it once the plane is airborn. It is also large for my hand but seems to
stay centered during the flight. 

Jerry

[Steve Helmick]

I've seen one, picked it up and carried it...I think "amazingly heavy" is an accurate description. I flew with a "Ted Handle" again this weekend (tho this one fit my hand ok...it was Dirt's), and I think light weight is pretty nice, but speculate that it might matter less on a model with heavy line pull, or matter more for a pilot with skinny arms. I'm not sure why the new B-Handle is so big, but it is, so there's lots of plastic and metal in it. Just my impression. Steve

[Bradley Walker]

I'm not sure why the new B-Handle is so big, but it is

It is large because the first one the "large" size (it fits my hand perfectly).  The "small" size is due out in spring.

[Bob Reeves]

As soon as the smaller version is available I'm going to order a bunch.. Wished they had produced the small one first, we only have one club member that the large one fits.

[Randy Powell]

I think it's a great beginners handle. The hard point contacts are nice. But like Steve, I didn't care for the weight. A lot of feedback gets deadened when the handle is real heavy. Trust me, I've made several that were overweight pigs.

[Bob Reeves]

The weight doesn't really concern me, the smaller handle will obviously weigh less and fit more people.

[Bill Gruby]

  While on the weight question, what is considered heavy? My custom comes on at 6.1 ozs and is fully adjustable. I have no problems what-so-ever with it. I have a 4.5 inch grip. Big paws.  LOL

  "Billy G"

[catdaddy]

The weight doesn't really concern me, the smaller handle will obviously weigh less and fit more people.

I wish I was skilled enough to take advantage of the tremendous amount of feedback one gets with a super lite handle. To be able to twitch my fingers and groove inverted laps like a walker cup champion... alas I'll settle for a durable handle, even if it weighs several grams more than the champs use.

I'll take 2 of those new small ones Mr. Brodak.

[catdaddy]

  While on the weight question, what is considered heavy?   "Billy G"

I would consider 10 lbs on the heavy side.

[Randy Powell]

>>I wish I was skilled enough to take advantage of the tremendous amount of feedback one gets with a super lite handle. To be able to twitch my fingers and groove inverted laps like a walker cup champion...<<

Yep, it's a shame you can't do that.

[catdaddy]

>>I wish I was skilled enough to take advantage of the tremendous amount of feedback one gets with a super lite handle. To be able to twitch my fingers and groove inverted laps like a walker cup champion...<<

Yep, it's a shame you can't do that.

Not a shame at all there are plenty of us that can't...right

[Bill Gruby]

 Right -- and it don't even matter cause I really don't think I would know the difference..

  "Billy G" 

[Steve Fitton]

Well, I happen to fly Expert and I really like the new Brodak handle.  I've flown with light and heavy handles in the past, and I don't pay much attention to the weight.  I'll probably switch to the smaller version when it comes out, but I had suprisingly little difficulty adapting to the big one to start out with.  The hard point handle was one of those few changes that, from the first flight with it, you can honestly tell yourself "Yes, this is better" rather than trying to convince yourself it must be better because you have the latest trick thing.

[Steve Helmick]

I'll whole heartedly agree with the hard point handle being a huge improvement. While trying to get a narrower handle spacing this weekend, I first borrowed a cable handle, which seemed to absorb too much line tension or somethin'. Like springs...tho, it would seem that a model with a lot of line tension wouldn't be as severely affected. Next borrowed a "Ted" from Da Dirt and liked it. I normally fly with a Tom Morris handle, but the spacing can't go narrow enough without mods, which I haven't done yet. No cables, thanks... Steve

[Randy Powell]

I'll admit that I fly with a handle that I made. It weighs about 7oz and is a hardpoint setup. It was an enormous improvement over the previous one that weighted a lot more (also a hardpoint setup). You can really tell the difference in areas where touch is important. But to each his own. Use what makes you happy.

[Bradley Walker]

I do not notice handle weight myself...  I always thought it was curious when other flyers would talk about it like it was a critical path to success to have uber light handles.  Doug Moon handle makes the Rock Crusher look like a lightweight and he prefers it over the balsa handles (and he has tried them), and I consider Doug one of the best flyers in the country.  Geiseke flies handles so light and sharp that they cut of the circulation in my fingers, I did not see that they improved anything.

Feel free to take Dremel to the handle (at your own risk of course).  There are many areas where skeletonizing or removing thickness can be done to make the handle very light weight.  We are simply not going to do it for you due to liability concerns.

Being light weight was about fifth on my list of things to worry about when I designed the handle after ruggedness, safety, ease of use, longevity, etc etc

[Ward Van Duzer]

All this conversation, and no pics?

w.

[Randy Powell]

Brad,

I thought it was a nice design. It's too heavy for my tastes, but as you point out, not everyone feels it's a big deal. Certainly not a determining factor, It if works for you, use it. I get into these same conversations when talking about forward cant in a handle. There are just as many agruments that say it's a good thing as to say it's a bad thing. I say, use what works for you.

[catdaddy]

All this conversation, and no pics?

w.

Here you go

[Jim Kraft]

Handles seem to be a very personal thing. I make all of my handles from aluminum sheet and lath for the wood part. I started making my own when I could not find any handles with very little overhang in a hard point that was not to heavy. My handles all weigh less than 2 ounces with the thong, have very little overhang, and are hard point. I love the way they feel and now I can hardly fly with any thing else.

[Bill Gruby]

All this conversation, and no pics?

w.

 Not to take away from the Brodak handle but here is the one I made.

[Paul Smith]

  While on the weight question, what is considered heavy? My custom comes on at 6.1 ozs and is fully adjustable. I have no problems what-so-ever with it. I have a 4.5 inch grip. Big paws.  LOL

  "Billy G"

On the subject of handle mass, I like the Tom Morris handle.  It costs only $20 and you have to finish it yourself.  My latest one came in at 3.9 ounces.  It will fit a big hand and both the updown and spacing is adjustible.  I added a #8 wingnut to make the updown air adjustible.

[Balsa Butcher]

FWIW I tend to try a few different handles with each airplane.  What usually happens is  I settle on light handles for the smaller planes, the larger planes that pull more end up with a heavier type handle.  Sometimes w/cable, sometimes direct connect depending on works best-no one size fits all.   I like the feel of the Brodak handle, conceed the heaviness, haven't flown w/one yet, plane to purchase one and continue experimenting.

[Steve Helmick]

Regarding the Brodak handle, where is all the weight, i.e., in the plastic bits or metal bits? If plastic, I would suggest using "structural foam".

I once worked at a place that made molds for various products that were made from structural foam...one being waterskiis (Kidder and O'Brian). Another product was an in-ground...in ROAD...utilities box (wiring or whatever). The "manhole cover" was about 30" diameter, and foam. Maybe weighed a pound or two. You could drive an 18-wheeler over it, beat the puddin' out of it with an 8 lb sledge...no problems. Amazing stuff. Dunno if it'd be "fuel proof", but tend to think it'd do fine.

We did have some problems with the usual "ball check" filler valves for this mold, because of the size of the main case mold. The boss was "away", and the customer said the teflon check balls just came squeezing out of the filler neck. I looked at the problem and made a "blade valve" from some scraps of UHMW plate and a block of aluminum. I had no idea if it would work, but them was desperate times. It did work, and the customer was wildly happy.... Steve