The thread on the over-weight and poorly designed Phoenix Katana got me to thinking... is it wiser to stay with a model expressly designed for electric power, or go ahead and slap a system in one of the numerous "designed for both" ARFs? I have two of those NIB sitting on the floor of my shop; a Katana 50 and a Saratoga, both from Hangar 9 (and both discontinued).

From what little bit I have learned since deciding to try e-power (ordered my trash yesterday), the Katana 50 seems to be well thought out in regards to e-power. I have another one with an OS 91 Surpass that is simply a spectacular flyer; easily capable of the Sportsman IMAC schedule. The manual devotes several pages to the electric power installation, and the kit even provides you with a special extended motor box and templates for drilling same.

The Saratoga manual, OTOH, takes an "Oh, by the way..." approach to the job.

My question is, despite the Katana's apparent better suitability, the model comes out tail heavy even with a bigger-than-called-for four stroke in it. That 91 Surpass weighs a bit over two pounds, and I had to put the receiver battery up alongside the fuel tank to make balance without adding nose weight. There was a guy who made his into an electric on the Katana thread; guess I'd better go back and read his findings.

Then I see a jewel like the AeroWorks Extra 260 QB. That model is a bit smaller than the Katana, though. But even though the Katana is a SUPERB kit (as the Extra appears to be), that Extra was purpose-built for e-power. Such as, only one elevator servo in the tail, etc. (the Katana has two).

Sorry for the rambling. I'm not looking for a specific answer to anything... but I would like to read your thoughts on this.

I'm already looking forward to my next e-model... perhaps I should grab myself by the neck and wait until I figure out what's going on in this aspect of the hobby, eh? I have much to learn...

.