Seagull Extra 300S Review and CG???
03-09-2006, 12:45 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Seagull Extra 300S Review and CG???
Last weekend I went by the local hobby store to find a new plane. I ran across the Seagull Extra 300S for $149 and was really impressed with the quality of the components and the build. I like the fact that it used pinned hinges and they were already installed and pinned as well. It only took a couple of hours to put the major components together and have it don't to the point of installing the engine and radio gear.
The main thing I didn't like about the build was the belly pan. The fit of the wing to the fuselage was perfect. unfortunately the fit of the belly pan to the wing was not as good. The belly pan was warped to were there was about 1/4" of a gap at the rear when the front was held in place. I'm sure it's due to the way the belly pan is constructed. However, a little trimming and clamping got it attached adequately.
The only other minor issue is the instruction manual. Although nicely put together, there are several steps missing, but anyone that has build kits and other ARFs shouldn't have a problem.
One of the reasons I picked this plane up was that the box indicated that the engine range was up to a 1.00 for a 4-stroke. And, since I had a Saito 1.00 that needed to be broke in for my P-47, I though this would be a good plane to put it in. (however I now might purchase a new Saito 1.25 for the P-47
) To install the Saito, I had to move the firewall back 1". I'm actually glad I had to do this. As I found, the existing firewall wasn't adequately installed. All I had to do to remove it was cut out the soft balsa tri-stock reinforcements, and the slip my knife between the fuselage and firewall and pop loose the glue connection. After moving it back, I used 30 minute epoxy to mount it and the tri-stock bracing. I also drilled and installed dowel pins to further secure the firewall.
Some of the hardware included with the kit it good, and some is not. It's your prefence wether to use what's in the kit or replace it. The one thing that in my opinion really needs replacing is the included fuel tank. It is only 8 oz. That mean much less than 10 minute flights with any large motor. I replaced mine with a 14oz Sulivan flex tank, which is almost the same dimensions as the included tank...only longer. That meant that it fit perfectly into the existing tank location with no modifications. One of the good pieces of hardware is the landing gear. It seems very sturdy and provides more than enough clearance for the 15X8 prop I'll be using on the Saito 1.00.
The one question that I have that I hope that someone can clarify is the location of the CG. The instruction manual indicates that the CG is 4cm from the leading edge of the wing. Obviously 4cm from the leading edge at the fuselage is wrong as that is WAY too far forward based on the chord of the wing. Either they meant 4cm measured at the wing TIP (which I've NEVER seen before) OR it should really be 4" instead of 4cm. Based on my experience, it would appear that 4" would be correct, but I'd like someone else that has maybe flow this particular ARF before to confirm that. If this is correct, then it is balanced perfectly with no additional weight added.
The main thing I didn't like about the build was the belly pan. The fit of the wing to the fuselage was perfect. unfortunately the fit of the belly pan to the wing was not as good. The belly pan was warped to were there was about 1/4" of a gap at the rear when the front was held in place. I'm sure it's due to the way the belly pan is constructed. However, a little trimming and clamping got it attached adequately.
The only other minor issue is the instruction manual. Although nicely put together, there are several steps missing, but anyone that has build kits and other ARFs shouldn't have a problem.
One of the reasons I picked this plane up was that the box indicated that the engine range was up to a 1.00 for a 4-stroke. And, since I had a Saito 1.00 that needed to be broke in for my P-47, I though this would be a good plane to put it in. (however I now might purchase a new Saito 1.25 for the P-47
) To install the Saito, I had to move the firewall back 1". I'm actually glad I had to do this. As I found, the existing firewall wasn't adequately installed. All I had to do to remove it was cut out the soft balsa tri-stock reinforcements, and the slip my knife between the fuselage and firewall and pop loose the glue connection. After moving it back, I used 30 minute epoxy to mount it and the tri-stock bracing. I also drilled and installed dowel pins to further secure the firewall.Some of the hardware included with the kit it good, and some is not. It's your prefence wether to use what's in the kit or replace it. The one thing that in my opinion really needs replacing is the included fuel tank. It is only 8 oz. That mean much less than 10 minute flights with any large motor. I replaced mine with a 14oz Sulivan flex tank, which is almost the same dimensions as the included tank...only longer. That meant that it fit perfectly into the existing tank location with no modifications. One of the good pieces of hardware is the landing gear. It seems very sturdy and provides more than enough clearance for the 15X8 prop I'll be using on the Saito 1.00.
The one question that I have that I hope that someone can clarify is the location of the CG. The instruction manual indicates that the CG is 4cm from the leading edge of the wing. Obviously 4cm from the leading edge at the fuselage is wrong as that is WAY too far forward based on the chord of the wing. Either they meant 4cm measured at the wing TIP (which I've NEVER seen before) OR it should really be 4" instead of 4cm. Based on my experience, it would appear that 4" would be correct, but I'd like someone else that has maybe flow this particular ARF before to confirm that. If this is correct, then it is balanced perfectly with no additional weight added.
03-09-2006, 05:01 PM
#2
Senior Member
RE: Seagull Extra 300S Review and CG???
I had two Seagull models planes, the Extra and the Edge. Both are very heavily built for their small wing area and can becoming snapping nightmares if your not careful. There are allot of lighter built planes that size that will have much lower wing loading and perform so much better, for just a little more money.
I have seen several others buy these and become very disappointed in their performance and flight characteristics.
Good luck.
I have seen several others buy these and become very disappointed in their performance and flight characteristics.
Good luck.
03-09-2006, 06:09 PM
#3
RE: Seagull Extra 300S Review and CG???
Like Mikeboyd I too have owned the Edge and Built and flown the extra. I can tell you just to balance the Extra upside down on the main spar. They are a heavy plane but with tuned down throws they can be flown smoothly.
03-09-2006, 10:23 PM
#4
Senior Member
Thread Starter
RE: Seagull Extra 300S Review and CG???
This one must be a newer design or something as my AUW is only 6lbs. And with a Saito 1.00 4-stroke on it there will be no shortage of power.
Edit: Wow, reducing the size of those pics really ruined the quality. IRFanview doesn't normally do that.
Edit: Wow, reducing the size of those pics really ruined the quality. IRFanview doesn't normally do that.
03-10-2006, 04:17 PM
#5
Senior Member
My Feedback: (8)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: fitchburg,
MA
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Extra 300S Review and CG???
i would recommend using an apc prop. i had a master airscrew 14x6 on my pacific area edge w/os 91 fs w/pump. going to apc definitely gave it more power and speed. i am interested in your experience w/this aircraft, i'm thinking of buying one myself. is it a standard bolt on wing from the bottom? is the wing in two pcs, glued together w/a joiner? my pac aero edge is supposed to be 6 lbs, but came in @ about 7 1/4 lb (w/os 91 fs), still flies fine, just keep speed up on landing. i'm building a GP .60 size extra w/os 120 fs (i have the 120), i will come in a little over 8 lb. this extra is supposed to be a little over 6 lb, w/the same wing area as the GP.
sure is a nice looking aircraft, let us know how it flies.
jon b
sure is a nice looking aircraft, let us know how it flies.
jon b
03-12-2006, 11:51 PM
#6
Senior Member
Thread Starter
RE: Seagull Extra 300S Review and CG???
Well I had hoped to fly her this weekend, but it was too windy both days.
Jon, yes, it is a standard two piece wing with joiner that bolts to the bottom of the fuselage.
Jon, yes, it is a standard two piece wing with joiner that bolts to the bottom of the fuselage.
03-13-2006, 04:32 PM
#7
My Feedback: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chandler,
AZ
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Extra 300S Review and CG???
i JUST GOT ONE OF THESE LAST fRIDAY. i AM PLANNING AN OS .90 2CYCLE SINCE i HAVE ONE OF THOSE NOT DOING ANYTHING.
I AM VERY INTERESTED IN HOW YOURS FLYS.
GOOD LUCK NEXT WEEK.
DON
I AM VERY INTERESTED IN HOW YOURS FLYS.
GOOD LUCK NEXT WEEK.
DON
03-15-2006, 09:55 AM
#10
Senior Member
Thread Starter
RE: Seagull Extra 300S Review and CG???
Well, I was able to do the maiden, although it was a little windy. Take off was nice and smooth with only a little right rudder required to keep it tracking straight. Needed 5 clicks of up elevator and 3 clicks left on the ailerons to get it tracking straight. It looks like the balance point at 4" is right on the money. The Saito 1.00 with a 15x8 prop pulled it with no problems, I flew it around mostly on half throttle, but at full throttle the vertical was unlimited. I kept it on low rates with 40% expo for the first flight, but it still responed well. Not as quickly as I'm used to, but it was adequate.
Suprisingly though, I ran through 14oz of fuel in less that 10 minutes, so obviously I was still running too rich. I had to dead stick the landing, but it was uneventful. I didn't want to risk it again with the increasing wind, so I packed it up for the day. Next flight will be on high rates with 60% expo, so she should be a bit more responsive.
Suprisingly though, I ran through 14oz of fuel in less that 10 minutes, so obviously I was still running too rich. I had to dead stick the landing, but it was uneventful. I didn't want to risk it again with the increasing wind, so I packed it up for the day. Next flight will be on high rates with 60% expo, so she should be a bit more responsive.
02-19-2012, 04:58 PM
#12
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Newhall, CA
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Seagull Extra 300S Review and CG???
I am looking at this kit as well and have a Magnum XL FS1.20 that I want to fly it with. Can you show your firewall mod? I am pretty sure I am going to have to do something to make it hold up.
ORIGINAL: Connery
Last weekend I went by the local hobby store to find a new plane. I ran across the Seagull Extra 300S for $149 and was really impressed with the quality of the components and the build. I like the fact that it used pinned hinges and they were already installed and pinned as well. It only took a couple of hours to put the major components together and have it don't to the point of installing the engine and radio gear.
The main thing I didn't like about the build was the belly pan. The fit of the wing to the fuselage was perfect. unfortunately the fit of the belly pan to the wing was not as good. The belly pan was warped to were there was about 1/4" of a gap at the rear when the front was held in place. I'm sure it's due to the way the belly pan is constructed. However, a little trimming and clamping got it attached adequately.
The only other minor issue is the instruction manual. Although nicely put together, there are several steps missing, but anyone that has build kits and other ARFs shouldn't have a problem.
One of the reasons I picked this plane up was that the box indicated that the engine range was up to a 1.00 for a 4-stroke. And, since I had a Saito 1.00 that needed to be broke in for my P-47, I though this would be a good plane to put it in. (however I now might purchase a new Saito 1.25 for the P-47 ) To install the Saito, I had to move the firewall back 1". I'm actually glad I had to do this. As I found, the existing firewall wasn't adequately installed. All I had to do to remove it was cut out the soft balsa tri-stock reinforcements, and the slip my knife between the fuselage and firewall and pop loose the glue connection. After moving it back, I used 30 minute epoxy to mount it and the tri-stock bracing. I also drilled and installed dowel pins to further secure the firewall.
Some of the hardware included with the kit it good, and some is not. It's your prefence wether to use what's in the kit or replace it. The one thing that in my opinion really needs replacing is the included fuel tank. It is only 8 oz. That mean much less than 10 minute flights with any large motor. I replaced mine with a 14oz Sulivan flex tank, which is almost the same dimensions as the included tank...only longer. That meant that it fit perfectly into the existing tank location with no modifications. One of the good pieces of hardware is the landing gear. It seems very sturdy and provides more than enough clearance for the 15X8 prop I'll be using on the Saito 1.00.
The one question that I have that I hope that someone can clarify is the location of the CG. The instruction manual indicates that the CG is 4cm from the leading edge of the wing. Obviously 4cm from the leading edge at the fuselage is wrong as that is WAY too far forward based on the chord of the wing. Either they meant 4cm measured at the wing TIP (which I've NEVER seen before) OR it should really be 4" instead of 4cm. Based on my experience, it would appear that 4" would be correct, but I'd like someone else that has maybe flow this particular ARF before to confirm that. If this is correct, then it is balanced perfectly with no additional weight added.
Last weekend I went by the local hobby store to find a new plane. I ran across the Seagull Extra 300S for $149 and was really impressed with the quality of the components and the build. I like the fact that it used pinned hinges and they were already installed and pinned as well. It only took a couple of hours to put the major components together and have it don't to the point of installing the engine and radio gear.
The main thing I didn't like about the build was the belly pan. The fit of the wing to the fuselage was perfect. unfortunately the fit of the belly pan to the wing was not as good. The belly pan was warped to were there was about 1/4" of a gap at the rear when the front was held in place. I'm sure it's due to the way the belly pan is constructed. However, a little trimming and clamping got it attached adequately.
The only other minor issue is the instruction manual. Although nicely put together, there are several steps missing, but anyone that has build kits and other ARFs shouldn't have a problem.
One of the reasons I picked this plane up was that the box indicated that the engine range was up to a 1.00 for a 4-stroke. And, since I had a Saito 1.00 that needed to be broke in for my P-47, I though this would be a good plane to put it in. (however I now might purchase a new Saito 1.25 for the P-47
) To install the Saito, I had to move the firewall back 1". I'm actually glad I had to do this. As I found, the existing firewall wasn't adequately installed. All I had to do to remove it was cut out the soft balsa tri-stock reinforcements, and the slip my knife between the fuselage and firewall and pop loose the glue connection. After moving it back, I used 30 minute epoxy to mount it and the tri-stock bracing. I also drilled and installed dowel pins to further secure the firewall.Some of the hardware included with the kit it good, and some is not. It's your prefence wether to use what's in the kit or replace it. The one thing that in my opinion really needs replacing is the included fuel tank. It is only 8 oz. That mean much less than 10 minute flights with any large motor. I replaced mine with a 14oz Sulivan flex tank, which is almost the same dimensions as the included tank...only longer. That meant that it fit perfectly into the existing tank location with no modifications. One of the good pieces of hardware is the landing gear. It seems very sturdy and provides more than enough clearance for the 15X8 prop I'll be using on the Saito 1.00.
The one question that I have that I hope that someone can clarify is the location of the CG. The instruction manual indicates that the CG is 4cm from the leading edge of the wing. Obviously 4cm from the leading edge at the fuselage is wrong as that is WAY too far forward based on the chord of the wing. Either they meant 4cm measured at the wing TIP (which I've NEVER seen before) OR it should really be 4" instead of 4cm. Based on my experience, it would appear that 4" would be correct, but I'd like someone else that has maybe flow this particular ARF before to confirm that. If this is correct, then it is balanced perfectly with no additional weight added.
07-13-2017, 06:28 AM
#15
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Connery
I wonder what you finally did. You use centimeters or inches? How far did you decide to put the CG?
I wonder what you finally did. You use centimeters or inches? How far did you decide to put the CG?
Last weekend I went by the local hobby store to find a new plane. I ran across the Seagull Extra 300S for $149 and was really impressed with the quality of the components and the build. I like the fact that it used pinned hinges and they were already installed and pinned as well. It only took a couple of hours to put the major components together and have it don't to the point of installing the engine and radio gear.
The main thing I didn't like about the build was the belly pan. The fit of the wing to the fuselage was perfect. unfortunately the fit of the belly pan to the wing was not as good. The belly pan was warped to were there was about 1/4" of a gap at the rear when the front was held in place. I'm sure it's due to the way the belly pan is constructed. However, a little trimming and clamping got it attached adequately.
The only other minor issue is the instruction manual. Although nicely put together, there are several steps missing, but anyone that has build kits and other ARFs shouldn't have a problem.
One of the reasons I picked this plane up was that the box indicated that the engine range was up to a 1.00 for a 4-stroke. And, since I had a Saito 1.00 that needed to be broke in for my P-47, I though this would be a good plane to put it in. (however I now might purchase a new Saito 1.25 for the P-47 ) To install the Saito, I had to move the firewall back 1". I'm actually glad I had to do this. As I found, the existing firewall wasn't adequately installed. All I had to do to remove it was cut out the soft balsa tri-stock reinforcements, and the slip my knife between the fuselage and firewall and pop loose the glue connection. After moving it back, I used 30 minute epoxy to mount it and the tri-stock bracing. I also drilled and installed dowel pins to further secure the firewall.
Some of the hardware included with the kit it good, and some is not. It's your prefence wether to use what's in the kit or replace it. The one thing that in my opinion really needs replacing is the included fuel tank. It is only 8 oz. That mean much less than 10 minute flights with any large motor. I replaced mine with a 14oz Sulivan flex tank, which is almost the same dimensions as the included tank...only longer. That meant that it fit perfectly into the existing tank location with no modifications. One of the good pieces of hardware is the landing gear. It seems very sturdy and provides more than enough clearance for the 15X8 prop I'll be using on the Saito 1.00.
The one question that I have that I hope that someone can clarify is the location of the CG. The instruction manual indicates that the CG is 4cm from the leading edge of the wing. Obviously 4cm from the leading edge at the fuselage is wrong as that is WAY too far forward based on the chord of the wing. Either they meant 4cm measured at the wing TIP (which I've NEVER seen before) OR it should really be 4" instead of 4cm. Based on my experience, it would appear that 4" would be correct, but I'd like someone else that has maybe flow this particular ARF before to confirm that. If this is correct, then it is balanced perfectly with no additional weight added.
The main thing I didn't like about the build was the belly pan. The fit of the wing to the fuselage was perfect. unfortunately the fit of the belly pan to the wing was not as good. The belly pan was warped to were there was about 1/4" of a gap at the rear when the front was held in place. I'm sure it's due to the way the belly pan is constructed. However, a little trimming and clamping got it attached adequately.
The only other minor issue is the instruction manual. Although nicely put together, there are several steps missing, but anyone that has build kits and other ARFs shouldn't have a problem.
One of the reasons I picked this plane up was that the box indicated that the engine range was up to a 1.00 for a 4-stroke. And, since I had a Saito 1.00 that needed to be broke in for my P-47, I though this would be a good plane to put it in. (however I now might purchase a new Saito 1.25 for the P-47
) To install the Saito, I had to move the firewall back 1". I'm actually glad I had to do this. As I found, the existing firewall wasn't adequately installed. All I had to do to remove it was cut out the soft balsa tri-stock reinforcements, and the slip my knife between the fuselage and firewall and pop loose the glue connection. After moving it back, I used 30 minute epoxy to mount it and the tri-stock bracing. I also drilled and installed dowel pins to further secure the firewall.Some of the hardware included with the kit it good, and some is not. It's your prefence wether to use what's in the kit or replace it. The one thing that in my opinion really needs replacing is the included fuel tank. It is only 8 oz. That mean much less than 10 minute flights with any large motor. I replaced mine with a 14oz Sulivan flex tank, which is almost the same dimensions as the included tank...only longer. That meant that it fit perfectly into the existing tank location with no modifications. One of the good pieces of hardware is the landing gear. It seems very sturdy and provides more than enough clearance for the 15X8 prop I'll be using on the Saito 1.00.
The one question that I have that I hope that someone can clarify is the location of the CG. The instruction manual indicates that the CG is 4cm from the leading edge of the wing. Obviously 4cm from the leading edge at the fuselage is wrong as that is WAY too far forward based on the chord of the wing. Either they meant 4cm measured at the wing TIP (which I've NEVER seen before) OR it should really be 4" instead of 4cm. Based on my experience, it would appear that 4" would be correct, but I'd like someone else that has maybe flow this particular ARF before to confirm that. If this is correct, then it is balanced perfectly with no additional weight added.
