The Estes line of flying model rockets have inspired an untold number of children and adults alike, thanks in part to their simplicity. From the design and construction of the rockets themselves to the reliability and safety of the modular solid-propellant motors, the company managed to turn actual rocket science into a family activity. If you could glue fins onto a cardboard tube and stick a plastic nosecone on the end, you were nearly ready for launch.
But what if you’re looking for something a bit more challenging? That’s where the new Estes Scorpio 3D comes in. Unlike the classic Estes kit, which included the fins, nosecone, and other miscellaneous bits of the rocket, the Scorpio kit requires you to 3D print your own parts. Do it right, and the company says you can send your creation to heights of 1,000 feet (305 m).
As several main components of the rocket are 3D printed, the Scorpio is intended to be a platform for fast and easy modification. Estes already provides STLs for a few different variants of the tail fins — this is not unlike some of the old kits, which would occasionally include different shaped fins for you to experiment with. But of course you’re also free to design your own components from scratch if you wish. A twist-lock mechanism built into the printed motor mount allows you to swap out the Scorpio’s fins in the field, no glue required.
While we appreciate the concept of the Scorpio 3D, we have to admit that the $40 USD price tag seems a bit excessive. After all, the user is expected to print the majority of the rocket’s parts on their own dime. According to the manual, the only thing you get with the kit (other than access to the digital files) is a couple of cardboard tubes, some stickers, and a parachute — the launch pad, igniter, and even motors are all sold separately.
Admittedly there’s a certain value in the Estes name and the knowledge that they’ve done their homework while putting this product together. But if you’re just looking to fire off some DIY rockets, we’d point you to the open source HEXA project as an alternative.
Yeah, for $40, I can get the gubbins they’re offering and model my own rocket bits, honestly.
Though, now I might have a weekend project, so hats off to Estes for the idea, I guess?
Which begs the question… why would we give Estes $40 for this “kit”? For a couple of cardboard tubes and a piece of plastic (the parachute)? Yeah, I don’t think so.
Estes was great when they were an affordable entry point for kids into model rocketry. I have many of their kits in my collection. At a certain point, though, most of us branched out and begin deigning our own.
Doesnt really matter if ya do or dont get one, it’s on the market, they won’t be having to make any products and some will buy it even at a 100 buyers they’ve made a few stls that made them some cash, people out here making great money on selling files
Oh I’m sure at least one person will pay. And then less and less people as the STL files will almost certainly just be posted publicly as there’s currently no DRM available for these files as far as I know. They’re essentially charging 40 bucks for a print file and handing you some garbage to throw away at the same time. You might as well just print the whole rocket body with super low infill and thin walls and just disregard the kit entirely.
Once again, a legacy company trying to “get in on the new thing” but trying to use outdated business practices at the same time. This product line will flop hard.
I admit, $40 is high but paying an engineer & draftsman create the product costs a lot. And the truth is that people will print more than a single rocket. Printing 4 would equal $10.00 each… so a lot? It depends if you only print one. Me? I’d print 20 making the cost $2.00 each. Now if they’d make the 3D product of a Saturn 5, count me in. That would be awesome. Who doesn’t want multi-stage rockets?
Yes, so that get get lost up in a tree, or float down a river.
Just a thought, but plastic shrapnel is considerably more dangerous should explosion happen than a cardboard tube with balsa fins…
If you’re close enough to be injured by that plastic shrapnel, You’re Doing It Wrong, and I imagine you’re a lot more likely to be injured by propellant or nozzle fragments.
Are you using M-80s for motors? That’s the only way you’re going to be in any danger of plastic shrapnel.
Estes black powder motors fail via ejection of the nozzle and/or the entire propellant grain most likely due to the failure of nozzle/grain bonding with the case. I have never seen one explode the paper casing which is extremely strong. At most your 3D printed model will melt.
Not even when ‘lightened’, by removing about half of the cardboard.
They did not explode…Until the intended time.
Even then the engine did not explode.
Plenty of existing model rocket kits already have plastic parts, to include the fins. And as previously mentioned, exploding motors is simply not a thing at this scale, unless you’re making your own and doing a very poor job of it.
Estes rocket motor Explosion? That is hilarious! I’ll take things that don’t happen for $500, Alex.
I’ve had one explode on my i launched it and it didn’t even try to take off just boom I did everything right because my second one was fine and I did everything the same it just blew tf up
The traditional kits are much less expensive and fly higher. I love my rockets, but not sure why you’d want to print one.
You are missing the big picture,
Printing rocket fins allows better balance and set up for remote guidance and video platform. It brings a whole new level to pov rocketry.
We had a team design, print and launch a 3d printed model rocket as part of our Space Apps event in 2016. The model is free to download. https://2016.spaceappschallenge.org/challenges/tech/print-my-rocket/projects/on-site-printable-modular-rockets
❤️
Did I miss a download link on that page?
It’s not easy to find. On the right side below the member avatars is a “How They Did It” text with a link embedded in the github logo.
https://github.com/team-rocket-tampa/3DPrintedRocket
Seems like they’re asking people to pay full price for the groceries, and ring them up and bag them as well! And here I thought they’d be making money on the obvious consumables. Good for them for having the gall to ask, but I fully expect it to be a miserable business failure, considering the literal scores of rocket designs on thingiverse, the ready availability of cardboard tubes, and none of them are making money selling engines!
For $40 I would like some paper towels wrapped around the tube, or maybe some saran wrap.
Maybe some toilet paper rolls with the to still attached.
Oh, God the trouble you can get into with Estes engines. Yeah, if you light the backfire charge first the motor goes kaboom. We would glue two Estes engines together back to back, and make really good fireworks. The statue of limitations is long gone now. But it worked fantastically well.
Bologna.
“StatuTe”
Anybody working yet on 3D-printing rocket-candy engines?
Pretty sure you can skip the 3d printing part too.
Something that costs $40 today would have cost only about $5.18 back in 1972, demonstrating how much purchasing power the dollar has lost over the past 53 years due to inflation.
Your “only” compares current dollars with then dollars which is an extremely common mistake. The US national minimum wage was $1.60/hr in 1972 while its is now $7.25 and in many states it is double that or even more. The problem is that, even so, wages haven’t kept up with the price of real assets like land and homes which are cases of specific asset inflation, not just dollar inflation. For instance, insane college costs rising much faster than dollar inflation have been shown to be nearly completely due to government backed/guaranteed loans which can’t be discharged in bankruptcy allowing loans without lender risk to anyone who can fog a mirror for any useless degree. The price of any product or service will rise to what the customer is willing to pay and with loans they can pay MUCH more than in the past.
“The government is good at one thing. It knows how to break your legs, and then hand you a crutch and say, ‘See if it weren’t for the government, you wouldn’t be able to walk.’” – Harry Browne
Forgot to add that the “crutch” in the case of college loans is college loan debt “forgiveness” which is NOT “forgiveness” of the loans, but merely the transfer of the payments for those loans to everyone who ISN’T responsible for making them. Yes, our “leaders” think we’re stupid enough to not realize that and in too many cases that’s true.
Right now on Amazon, an Estes beginner kit including rocket and launch pad and igniter box thingee is $40, shipped free. Three pack of body tubes is $10.
Not sure how they arrived the pricing structure for this DIY kit, but I agree- it is ballzy.
The real crime is that a 2-pack of E16-4 engines is $29.99 USD.
If you’re looking for an alternative that goes beyond the basic Estes kits, try Apogee Rockets at: https://www.apogeerockets.com
This is neat, it’s a way to get someone who is interested in rockets exposed to 3D printing.
The other way around seems more likely, right? The cost to own a 3d printer is higher than that of a model rocket + launcher.
Thanks for the fireworks idea, the lecture, the positivity and the negativity! All I really know is model rockets are super cool and Estes introduced me to them. Plus, everyone makes mistakes. And bored people with disposable income need something to buy. 🤐
When I first saw the article, I said to myself “oh boy! I would happily pay 20 bucks for an STL file with rocket parts were all the fins were lined up perfectly!” at $40 I will pass on this one, but I look forward to more offerings in the future! I have always loved the Estes company and all the fun stuff that has put out over the many decades. I am pleased with them getting their feet wet in this new technology.
A science class could a have a ready-to-go lesson plan for $40 for as many kids as they have or pay $15+ per kid. Find a few other schools and the data can be pooled by using a common platform.