AU flyer

My Feedback: (2)

Has anyone tried the new Extra 300 -72" sold by GiantScalePlanes. I am thinking about putting a gas engine on one, possibly a G-26. Anyone else running a gas engine on this plane? Any thoughts or comments?

Bobby

Ric Herber

My Feedback: (62)

I've been flying this Extra with a ST2300 for about a month. The weight came out at 13# with nothing special for equipment. It balanced on the recommended CG without any additional weight. I was dreading the flight characteristics because of the weight but I'm happy to say this is a great flying plane.

I think you'll find that a gas engine is going to be too much weight for the plane. My 2300 weighs 39 oz. with the stock muffler. I'ld hate to see how much tail weight you would have to add to get it to balance.

This is a great plane for a ST2300 or an OS 160 but not for a gasser.

That's my $.02.

rkingmanila

My Feedback: (1)

I'm also about to order a 25% plane and had my eyes set on the gsp extra 72. Does the ST2300 mean that the displacement is 23cc? how would a Zenoah G38 fair in this type of plane?

scottfl78

yep the ST 2300 is a 23cc or 1.4 cu.. Glow though so more umph than a G-23 or G-26 of equal size and lighter.. I got one that needs a home.. I know already that GSP have a bad rep for both quality and customer service but for the price it may be a good throw around plane.. Right now I have all my eggs in one basket with an EF Yak-54.. This thing probably needs an OS 160 but I may get one to put my ST in... To bad that you would need a real expensive small light gasser to keep this thing from stalling bad..

Volfy

My Feedback: (23)

I am putting together both the GSP 72" Extra 300 and Yak 54 right now. I went ahead and got them despite the negative reports and all the Irwin bashes. Well, I am very impressed with the quality of both of these models from GSP, particularly the Yak 54.

I have several different Extras about this size go through my hands over the past couple of years. The GP Gene Soucy Extra and Sig Extra 300XS are better built (in some ways) and more scale, but they also sell for $350-375. For $199, the GSP Extra has them all beat on value. I like the fact that the tail feathers are all airfoil shaped, and the horizontal stabs are designed to be either removal or glued in permanently.

Interesting note: many folks have concerns about the rather small wing area of 806 and 837 sq. in. (GSP 72" Yak and Extra, respectively). I found out that those numbers are of the two removable wing panels. Most other manufacturers calculate wing area to include the area occupied by the fuselage between the wing panels, thus reporting closer to high 900 to low 1000 sq. in. I have a GP 1/4 Giles 202 and so I put a GSP Extra wing panel on top of the Giles wing, as installed on the fuselage, and they are roughly identical in area. GP lists the Giles as having 973 sq.in. wing area. When I calculates the GSP wing area, taking into account the area under the fuselage, it came out to about the same as the GP Gile - roughly 960-970 sq.in.

I like the fact that GSP reports the 'actual' wing areas on their models, but that puts them at an advertising disadvantage against most other manufacturers. That is unfortunate.

Anyhow, I don't think the G26 or G38 would be good choices for these 72" models. This is true for almost all 1/4 scale aerobats. You can do it, but you'll have to learn to like the handling attributes that come with a heavier wing loading airplane. You'd be better staying glow. OS 1.60FX or Saito 1.80 are popular choices. I'll be powering mine with MVVS 1.60 glow or MDS 1.48, as I have several of both.

tIANci

The GSP Extra 72" flies nice with a 1.60 sized glo engine. Seen one on an MVVS 1.60 and it has sufficient power for anything but unlimited verticals and prop hanging. As for gassers ... you need nothing less than a 40cc to make it worth your while, 26 cc gassers are almost pointless in terms of power to weight ratio.

SJN

How would a saito 150 4st do with this plane guys ?

malcolmm

They don't do that for all of their planes. I have the Katana, which is listed at just under 1000 sq. in. It is only 1000 sq. in. if you include the fuselage area. The Katana is very similar in size to the Extra 300, so what you say makes sense.

I'm surprised that you like the Yak, it has a very bad reputation where I fly. Way to heavy, although it looks nice. I guess it depends on your flying style, to me any Extra, Yak or Katana should be very capable flying 3D, at best these planes are so-so at 3D.

Malcolm

Volfy

My Feedback: (23)

You are right about the Katana's wing area calculated differently, which is the case with their older designs (Sukhoi, Edge, etc.). I just notice the difference in several of their newer ARFs.

As for 3D, I understand that is all the rage these days. Personally, I think there are much better ARFs that are designed specifically for that kind of flying. I wouldn't label a 1/4 aerobat a bad design, simply because it does not 3D well. I could be wrong, but I don't remember "3D" was ever mentioned anywhere in the advertisement or on the box. I have not flown them yet, so I'll reserve judgement until then.

It all comes down to expectations. If you pay $199 thinking you're buying the exact equal of a $375 airplane, you'll for sure be disappointed. Likewise, expecting perfect 3D performance out of a machine that makes no pretence to be such an animal is likely to be met with disappointment also.

freeflyer99

Volfy,

Since you have GSP extra 72", I want to know is there any thread on its build and fying review. I want to read all about this plane before I decide whether to go for it or not. I am very much interested in this plane with MVVS 1.6 gas.

One of the guy at our local club advised to go for GSP Katana instead of Extra, what are your thoughts.

Thanks,
Imran

jsenicka

My Feedback: (79)

Nearly finished building mine.
Very nice quality work overall.
Covering not the best quality (real low temp stuff) but the work done with the covering is superb.
The bird is gorgeous.
Glue joints looked good.
Included hardware is just ok. I went with all Dubro stuff
Mine has an ST3000 and ST Pitts muffler.
Need to install the wheel pants and rear linkages and final balance, but it is pretty close now.

Overall, I rank the build quality and covering/trim better than my Powerline Edge, and as good a deal.
I would gladly buy another GSP Extra



jim

freeflyer99

Jim,

Once you have finished your plane can you post your final thoughts with some pictures on this thread and also its flight performance.

Thanks,
Imran

mugenkidd

My Feedback: (94)

Ok I should chime in, I'm on my second GSP 72in extra, well 3rd if you count the original one that was the rainbow color with out airfoiled flying surfaces and came out about 2-3 years ago(creek hobbies anyone). All I have is praise about this current extra. One warning do not use the stock hinges that come with the kit, there is a warning in the kit saying this but I did not read it until after the plane was done, long story short both ailerons came off on the maiden flight, but fortunately I managed to save the plane.

As far as quality is concerned I am very impressed, the plane is built with very high quality, all of the wood parts fit flawlessly no gaps in any of the wood and the covering on both models was flawless as well as very high quality paint on the cowls. The plane goes together very easily with not much more required than drilling the holes for the alignment pins in the wings, mounting control surfaces, and mounting the engine and radio equipment. I used all stock hardware except I change the pushrods to 4-40's all the way around. And power is from an OS 160 fx my first newer extra weigh in at 11.5lbs and the current one is 11.9lbs. And both of them fly nearly identical which shows a lot for quality control.

As far as flight characteristics is concerned the plane has several pattern type qualities, it goes exactly where you point it, rolling on its axis it looses very very little altitude. Knife edge is a splended requiring very little if any correction to fly a nice and straight knife edge pass, so little in fact that I will not try to tune it out with my radio. Knife edge on number on was slightly better than number 2, number one required absolutely no elevator corection, number 2 only a very slight amount. The plane can go from a knife edge pass to a vertical knife edge climb and back down again, I think it may be lacking a little to complete a knife edge loop (then again it may just be me). Vertical lines are crisp and clean, and the 160 fx with an 18x6w APC has truely unlimited vertical. Snaps are clean, and loops require a little rudder correction (never straight winds in Oklahoma though).

for 3D the plane does an EXCELLENT blender, strait out of the book. I've only tried a couple of elevators but it seemed like there was quite a bit of wing rock, I will have to try this some more to verify. I have not hovered it too low, but from hovering up high it seems like it is solid in the hover at about 60-70% throttle, but when it falls out, it is out. I lost number one to a deadstick so I lost some confidence in my engine, however I believe all of the problems are worked out (new ring and richened up the low end runs like a champ now) so I will get the hovers down lower as my confidence picks up. Finally note on 3D. this plane does not like to fly too slowly it feels a lot more in its element at a good pace which I consider somewhat of a negative for a 3D plane, when it does stall it will drop a wing and drop it quick.

Speaking of which, the next day after I lost number one do to an engine stall at a bad location. I had my LHS order another one from GSP, because I loved the way the first one flew so much. For $199 I don't think there is a better deal out there and the plane looks a lot more impressive in person than it does in any magazine or online add. I don't have any decent pics or video of the plane yet but since there is such an interest now I will try and get some this weekend.

BTW a G-26 would be a horrible choice for this airplane, it would cause it to weigh even more and have a ton less power than the 160 fx I couldn't image how marginal this plane would fly with that set-up, I say go with a decathalon or cub if your stuck with the G-26. Some of the newer gas engines may work, but judging by the stall characteristics of this plane at under 12lbs I don't think it would be the same plane with too much more weight on it. Hope this helps any more questions/comments please feel free to post.

freeflyer99

Mugen,

Thanks for your input. Apart from changing few things did you reinforce any part on plane?

G26 is from Zenoah, weighs 3.68 lbs where as MVVS weighs 2.5 lbs. I have not bought the engine yet but looking at all the options. Here nitro fuel is quite expensive than gas, knowing how much thirsty 160FX is. How much flight time you get with your set up?

Waiting to see your plane photos.

Thanks
Imran

tIANci

If you want power and yet have an engine that is not that thirsty try the YS140 or YS160. My YS110 sips about 6oz for each 7 mins flight. The YS160 is only just over 2 lbs, 33oz to be exact.

jsenicka

My Feedback: (79)

freeflyer,
send me a PM with your email

mugenkidd

My Feedback: (94)

The 160 fx is just as fuel efficient as a YS 160 (maybe cheaper) and it will run fine on 5% fuel which is a lot cheaper than the 20% fuel the YS likes, plus the 160fx is about $300-$400 cheaper. As far as the 160fx fuel economy my 160 uses maybe 8 oz for a 10 minute flight I know a gallon last me 4-5 flying sessions making quite a few flights per session. FYI it uses the same carb as an OS 91fx and has about the same fuel efficiency. If you want the exact fuel use, check the engine section as it has been gone over several times, I think the OS 160 may be more fuel effiecient the the ST 2300.

freeflyer99

jsenicka,

What do you mean by PM? sorry for my ignorance.

bb

tIANci

Mugen - the price of wanting a fine piece of workmanship and being able to turn a nice 20x8 prop! Hehehe ...

jsenicka

My Feedback: (79)

private message on the board.
Not good to post email on the board itself, as the web crawlers pick it up.

Sturtz

My Feedback: (20)

I've watched Mugenkidd do a WOT knife-edge pass over the tarmac at or around 9 inches off the deck with his Extra. Very impressive plane. Very fast as well with the OS 160FX.

freeflyer99

jsenicka,

Grat looking plane, have you flown it yet or not. With ST3000 isn't it over powered?

Imran

mugenkidd

My Feedback: (94)

Ok, here's the video not exactly what I wanted to show, my girlfriend is new at video taping so some of the manuevers didn't show up too well so I cut it out, so you won't see the entry of the blender or a few of the other manuevers. The landing is a little bouncy but I was coming in hot and wanted to get it down. You do have to concentrate to get a good landing out of this plane, but once you get used to it landing aren't too bad. Enjoy

http://members.cox.net/mikey1979/extra300.wmv

freeflyer99

Mugenkidd,

Good effort on video and nice plane. Finally I have bought the plane and ordered mvvs 1.6 gas engine from Pe in Holland. Also I am going to change all the stock hardware with Du bro and Robart hinges. Lets see how it goes.

Since the teperature is touching 43 deg C these days here, so its good time to build plane slow and steady for next 2 months.

Thanks,
Imran

Sturtz

My Feedback: (20)

I think Katie did a great job of filming Kidd. Nice work with the music and editing on your vid !!!!!

There's nothing like being there and seeing someone fly a plane in real time. Few videos capture the sights, sounds, smell of fuel and the major pucker factor everyone gets when you take that Extra in low and fast .
Thanks for the credits at the vid's trailer. Hitting the tarmac everytime is great landing practice. Plus it's nicer than rolling on muddy grass eh ? Your a fantastic RC pilot dude. I'm learning alot from ya.

Below: Katie and the Mugenkidd.