MouthFull

Hello all, I bought a anniversary audition piper cub (kit k-63). I know there will be many options. I plan on building the clipped wing version.. Would like to know what a good 4 channel radio set up would be, I plan on using a 2 cycle engine .40-.61 is required would like something powerful, I don't really know what brands are good or bad.

DavidAgar

My Feedback: (108)

Radios are like cars, some like Chevy's and some like Fords. I fly nothing but Futaba, which is not to say that the others out there are no good. JR and Spectrum are also quality radios. If you are just learning you may want to contact your local club and see what the instructors are using so then you can do a buddy box system with them. Engines are the same way. I like and only us OS engines. As for the Cub, it is a great flying plane. I would not recommend going over the rated power recommendations. You will also need to learn throttle management with a Cub, especially on take off. Power needs to be feathered in with a lot of rudder use and once the tail is off the ground, you can apply more power. The Cub is not designed to go fast but with the clipped wings it will do limited aerobatics. Good Luck, Dave

bikerbc

I would go with a four stroke engine because they sound so nice seem to suit the Cub so well in my opinion . I also like OS engines and would get one at the top end of the recommended power scale . I would not recommend a four channel radio because it really limits you as to what you can do with it in the future . I would not go with anything less than a six . I prefer Spektrum .

jester_s1

So I'm inferring that you are a beginner in RC. That being the case, welcome to the hobby, and don't start out with a Cub. They are very satisfying planes once you have some piloting skills, but everything requires more skill with them. They will ground loop on takeoff if you don't know what you are doing and also can be lifted by a headwind before you are ready, they require decent rudder skills in turns, they get tossed around a whole lot by wind turbulence, they don't self-correct at all, and and they don't weathervane into the wind like most sport planes and trainers do. I've watched a couple of guys at the club working with good instructors be frustrated to no end because they just had to learn how to fly using a Cub. Get yourself a trainer and build your piloting skills with it, then when you're good and competent finish the Cub and enjoy it.

Also, there's no reason to buy less than a 6 channel radio. The Cub will require at least 5, and going with 6 gets you the computer features that are so very handy to have. You can do ok with a 4 channel radio with a trainer, but you'll just be buying something new when you move on to another plane because it won't have the ability to store multiple models.

Hawk131

I agree with the cub choice being too early, I have a Goldburg cub and they are a handful on the ground. I flew a Sensi, Stick and a tower Kaos before I tried a cub. It took several tries to get the hang of taking off.
Jester had a point about the Tx, a 6 channel will get you a couple of years in this hobby until you go to warbirds.

jester_s1

It's not just the takeoffs either. Cubs tend to turn away from a side wind and then stall, which beginners don't have the technique to prevent. Add to that the sensitivity to wind turbulence that Cubs are so known for and it's a recipe for crashes and frustration that are totally preventable.

bikerbc

I am a cub lover and tend to forget sometimes just how difficult it was for me when I first started flying them . What has been said is absolutely true . They are not a beginners plane . They can be a handful to get in the ait until you learn how and then its easy .

jester_s1

Agreed bikerbc. I really enjoy mine. It's such a pure flying experience with no training wheels so to speak. But you have to know what you are doing.

Hawk131

I just wanted to mention that the more power on a cub can make the ground looping even worse as well as the extra weight made it harder to land.

MouthFull

i I see alot of people like os engines, any one ever used asp engines? Im an auto mechanic by trade so I know you get what you pay for. I found them on hobbypartz.com there are good reviews but seem almost too cheap. as far as the radio goes I was just going to get a 4 channel because it only needs 4 servos but some one said you can fly more then one plane with the same controller?

bikerbc

I have three asp engines now and so far they seem great . I have the OS 160 Gemini that I absolutely love . I also have it's clone the ASP 160 Twin and so far it is proving to be a fantastic engine . The ASP's are cheap compared to the OS engine's but so far as I can tell they work great . I would not bother with a 4 channel radio myself . If you are planning on staying in this hobby you are going to need a radio with at least 6 channels . My advice would be ,Don't cheap out on your radio system or you will just be buying another one very soon and you will have a hard time selling your old one .. I would get a 7 or 8 channel 2.4 system . Its hard to know what you want when you are first starting out and every body will have a different opinion of what's best . I like my Spectrum DX8, because I find it easier to programme than my Aurora 9 also it will hold a charge much longer . The DX8 holds 30 different model memorys so you can have 30 different planes stored in it memory and all you need to do is switch from one to the next and you are all set and ready to go . All your trims and control surface deflection direction is set etc. . If you are on the wrong plane it will not work at all .

MouthFull

ok cool so you can have a bunch of planes with one controller. Yea im thinking im going to get a asp engine. are the fly sky radios any good? Ive been looking like i said on hobbypartz.com

jester_s1

On the ASP and Fly Sky question, yes, you get what you pay for. The ASP engines are a good design (same product as Magnum) so if you get one that's manufactured right you'll have a good engine. The reason they are cheaper is quality control. Duds do come out of the factory that will give you fits. So with ASP you are rolling the dice, whereas with OS or a few others you are getting a good design along with good QC and a motivated service department. Myself, I go for Thunder Tiger. They are a bit cheaper than OS and still have good enough QC to be trustworthy.
On radios, solid state electronics are ridiculously cheap to make, therefore a number of Chinese companies are putting out really inexpensive products. Again, you get no QC and not much service. So if you get a good one, you'll likely be able to trust it for years. But if you get a bad one, it may be a real ordeal to get it fixed. You also will notice a cheaper build quality on the transmitter hardware. You'll get flimsy plastic where other brands use a heavier grade of plastic or even metal, the gimbals won't be as smooth, you don't get the nice grippy material on the sides, etc. I generally recommend buying from one of the quality manufacturers on radios simply because it's an item you are going to put hours and hours of use into. Futaba, Hitec, Airtronics, and Spektrum make proven radios and have good service departments.

bikerbc

I can't say much about the fly sky radio's because I haven't used one but I agree with Jester . I would stick with either Futaba Hitec , or Spectrum .

TomCrump

I suggest that you don't make purchases with economy in mind. These items may need replacement sooner than quality equipment.

If money is an issue, buy quality and used , instead of new and cheap.

Like others have said, the Cub is not a suitable trainer. An over powered Cub is worse. The Anniversary Cub will fly well on a .40 2 stroke, or a .50 4 stroke. Anything more changes the flying characteristics, and turns a nice flying bird into a "ho hum" sport model. Some say that throttle management can cure this, but it is seldom employed, and your model is heavier with the added weight of the too large engine.

Gray Beard

My Feedback: (-1)

Agreed, buy quality, the radio will be with you for a lot of years so get the best you can afford. I tell my students to never buy anything until after they solo and have a good idea if they will stay in the hobby for a long time. Most club instructors have a good radio and buddy box so there is no reason for a student to buy anything except there own fuel, the instructor will tell you what brand to buy if your using his trainer and engine.
The Cub is a nice plane but like everyone else said, it isn't a good trainer at all. Last one I built was the anniversary Cub like yours. They don't lend themselves to mods for the most part but your plans will show you the clipped wing version if you want one that is more of a stunt plane. I used an OS 91 four stroke on the last one. I built it for a friend and that was the smallest engine he had for it. It is also used as a float plane. In flight it never gets more then 1/4 power. Any good .46 two stroke is just fine with the plane.
The plane comes out tail heavy so during the build lighten up everything aft of the CG. In my case the big four stroke helped out a lot with that problem. A .60 is over kill but in the future that .60 will be used a lot more then a .46.
ASP, I haven't used one so I don't really know, no one I know has one in a two stroke but there are a lot of Magnums in my area. You either get a good one or you don't, I have seen them total junk out of the box and I have seen some that were very good? If I was buying new I would go with OS just because they are pretty much good right out of the box and user friendly for a new pilot. They also last a lot longer.
Buy the best you can afford and you won't go wrong, buy cheap and it will come back and bit you in the butt. I use Futaba and Hitec, most the people I fly with use JR and Spektrum. It's just one of those choice things but I like the programming in Futaba so that's what I use.

eddieC

My Feedback: (2)

I love Cubs, and they're great trainers. A Magnum 52 4-stroke is ideal in the CG Cub.

I agree with Futaba, Spektrum/JR or Hitec. Check with the local club and see what they use, so a buddy box will be easy to set up. Get 2.4 Ghz, or a good used computer radio that takes modules.

I'm not sure what that's all about? Cubs can be challenging, but remember; they were the main full-scale trainer for many years. They earned that by being cheap, reliable, and easy to fly.
The main thing I see folks do that get in trouble with taildraggers is they add power way too fast. This gets the nose to movin', the tail a-swayin', and yer off to the races (in the weeds) before you know what happened.
Just add power s-l-o-w-l-y. Count slow to 6 before you get to full throttle. You have to get some air over the tail feathers in order to prevent the groundloop.

The Cub will make you a better pilot. Maybe even an Aviator.

jester_s1

What I meant by turning away from the side wind is that since Cubs have such a small vertical stab and such big wings, the drag up front is more than the drag in the back. Therefore, the plane will naturally nose away from a side wind and then go into a sideslip stall. At least that's what my Hangar 9 Cub does. Trainers and most sport planes have a bigger stab to wing ratio, so they tend to weather vane into the wind and not stall that way.
I have to disagree about Cubs being good trainers also. Yes, they were pretty standard for pilots learning to fly back in the 1940's. They were among the easiest planes to fly at that time, but that doesn't necessarily translate to them being easy models to fly now. Between the ornery ground handling characteristics, the aerodynamic issues, the enormous wing that wind gust just love to grab and toss, and the lack of any self-righting characteristics, Cubs are not trainers. We had a pilot a few years ago in club training who insisted that he was going train on a Cub. The instructors advised against it, but agreed to teach him. I would estimate that his time to solo was extended by 3-4 months due to his plane choice, because the frustrations of a new pilot flying a Cub kept him from learning basic technique.

Top_Gunn

My Feedback: (6)

No. Except for gusts, the only wind relative to a plane in coordinated flight is from straight ahead. The wind does not blow against a plane from the side. For the same reason, a plane with a large vertical tail surface does not tend to weathervane into the wind in flight. (This has all been discussed at astounding length in the "downwind turns" threads. It is not controversial.)

Like others, I agree that the Goldberg Cub, though a fine plane, is not a good beginner's trainer. In addition to the disadvantages already mentioned (mainly ground handling), it's a floater, and so can be hard to land, especially if you have a small field. On days without much of a headwind, I had to slip mine to get it down onto a small field.

MouthFull

so I said screw it and started buying some things from a local place, its really not much more money,its better stuff and if something fails I can go to the store. I bought the wheels,fuel tank,monokote(yellow),fuel line and 4 futaba servos to start with.. 3 are a basic servo they were like 11 bucks each and one has metal gears and was like 35 bucks. one person said to use the metal gear servo for the rudder because of the extra strain from the tail wheel but the other guy said to use it for the ailerons any thoughts? Like I said before I am an auto mechanic by trade so naturally I would want to install the biggest engine I can get my hands on lol but if the smaller engine would make it fly better I will stick with that. I plan on finishing up the wings this week if I have time. Next thing I plan on buying is a radio and battery, I looked at some radios they said this would be good for me Spektrum DX6i DSMX 6channel any thoughts? What battery pack should I go with?

bikerbc

I think you are going to be happy with your Radio .. Do you have two servos for your ailerons ? If your ailerons are sharing one servo I would use the MG servo . If you have dual servos then I would use matching servos and use the metal geared on your rudder . As far as your engine goes I still would go with one on the upper end of the recommended size .

MouthFull

Been a few years had a lot on my plate, moved and no room to build. Well I now can get back to building the piper. Ok now before I go and start buying stuff again, now if I run a 4stroke what fuel will I be running? the 4strokes do sound nice there w little more money but if fuel is cheaper that seems like a good idea

MouthFull

Or maybe 4cycle is better on fuel?

52larry52

My Feedback: (1)

Yes, a 4 stroke is easier on fuel than an equivalent 2 stroke but in small size glo engines is isn't a big deal. Neither will run you broke on fuel. If you do go for a 4 stroke for your cub, something in a 52-60 size will be plenty(Magnum 52/OS 56). If you use a 2 stroke, a 46 will be right.(OS 46 AX) Magnum brand engines are out of production but can still be found new on Ebay or swap meets. For fuel I run 10% Omega on my 2 strokes and 15% Omega on my 4 strokes. See what your LHS sells.

TomCrump

Larry, I think there is a law stating that Cubs must be powered by 4 strokes.

The reasoning is that those high pitched, high revving, 2 strokes just don't sound right in a Cub.