IMAC Discuss IMAC style aerobatics in here

GP Extra 300s .60 vs. CG Extra 300 .60

Reply

Old 02-21-2003, 04:15 PM
  #1  
james04
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: brent, NM
Posts: 42
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default GP Extra 300s .60 vs. CG Extra 300 .60

I would like to hear some opinions regarding the aerobatic capabilities of these two planes. Also any modifications/suggestions you could recommend would be nice.

Thanks,
James
james04 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2003, 11:08 AM
  #2  
EXCAP232
My Feedback: (12)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Frederick, MD
Posts: 1,319
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default Re: GP Extra 300s .60 vs. CG Extra 300 .60

Originally posted by james04
I would like to hear some opinions regarding the aerobatic capabilities of these two planes. Also any modifications/suggestions you could recommend would be nice.

Thanks,
James
James,
Both planes are capable for aerobatics. The Goldberg was designed by Dave Patrick when he was the VP. This goes back a way and much before 3D flying came on the scene. It is a shoulder wing (mounts from the top) so it doesn't look like a 300 but more like the 230 and 260 designs. Nice flying plane and a good choice if you don't want 3D flight capability.

The great planes was probably designed by the team however Michael Cross is the one that seems to design most of their planes (including the instant classic UCD-3D). I would personally choose the Great Planes since it would not require any modificaton for complete flight capability. Just build anything light.

EXCAP232
EXCAP232 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2003, 03:46 PM
  #3  
LuvBipes
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
 
LuvBipes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Toronto, ON, CANADA
Posts: 1,226
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default GP Extra 300s .60 vs. CG Extra 300 .60

With all due respect to the Moderator, the ORIGINAL Extra 300 was, in fact, a mid or shoulder wing design. The later 300S and 300L model had the wing located lower in the fuse.

I've flown both planes extensively and both are great choices. The decision will rests laregly on the engine you have available. For competion level vertical performance the GP kits needs a 91 two-stroke or 120 size four-stroke. The Goldberg being slightly larger/heavier requires a 120 two-stroke or 150 four-stroke.

Of the two, the GP kit is slighty more easy to tumble/snap, while the Goldberg is a little more forgiving in slow speed flight.

FWIW, the 120 size Extra 300 ARF World Models sells is a dead copy of the original Goldberg kit.
LuvBipes is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2003, 04:40 PM
  #4  
james04
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: brent, NM
Posts: 42
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default GP Extra 300s .60 vs. CG Extra 300 .60

Thank you both for the posts. The information about the engines was the key as I have purchased a Tiger Shark .90 2cy. I hope it is up to the task. Any more opinions/advise out there?

James
james04 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2003, 08:35 AM
  #5  
EXCAP232
My Feedback: (12)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Frederick, MD
Posts: 1,319
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default Engine choice

Originally posted by james04
Thank you both for the posts. The information about the engines was the key as I have purchased a Tiger Shark .90 2cy. I hope it is up to the task. Any more opinions/advise out there?

James
The engine will fly the plane well. It might do some 3D however that may be limited. I have flown the Goldberg version with an OS 1.08 and it has plenty to hover the plane. The control surfaces are a bit small for 3D so if you built this plane you would want to increase the elevator and rudder size. I have had one encounter with a Tiger Shark engine (0.52) and it was a very plesant one. Lots of power, ran smooth and easy to start. It is on a trainer one of the students had. It has enough power to roll the plane to inverted just after take off and climb out inverted (this is with a flat bottom wing).



LuvBipes wrote:With all due respect to the Moderator, the ORIGINAL Extra 300 was, in fact, a mid or shoulder wing design. The later 300S and 300L model had the wing located lower in the fuse.


This is true however when most of us into aerobatics think of the Extra 300 we think of the low wing models. Very few were built with a sholder wing. For additional information about the Extra visit their site at: http://www.extraflugzeugbau.com/

EXCAP232
EXCAP232 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2003, 09:19 PM
  #6  
baronbrian
My Feedback: (13)
 
baronbrian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Posts: 884
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default GP Extra 300s .60 vs. CG Extra 300 .60

I had the goldberg for years, and my Dad currently has two. IMO Dave Patrick designs the best flying kits I have ever seen. I also built the GP .40 extra, but it was a little small for comparison. The goldberg is a great start to pattern and IMAC. Mine had a Super tigre .90- 14X6 prop. 8 lbs, 4 oz.
baronbrian is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2003, 04:14 PM
  #7  
james04
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: brent, NM
Posts: 42
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default GP Extra 300s .60 vs. CG Extra 300 .60

Brian,

Did the Super Tiger leave you wanting more power? How was the vertical? Unlimited or at least decent?

Thanks,
James
james04 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2003, 03:11 AM
  #8  
baronbrian
My Feedback: (13)
 
baronbrian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Posts: 884
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default GP Extra 300s .60 vs. CG Extra 300 .60

Originally posted by james04
Brian,

Did the Super Tiger leave you wanting more power? How was the vertical? Unlimited or at least decent?

Thanks,
James
James, the planes vert was definatly good, esp. if you entered at speed, but was not unlimited. My Dads has a 91FX and there is definatly more there- But wont really pull out of a hover. You got to remember what the plane was designed for- and when. remember it was designed for a .61, which will fly this plane very well!
baronbrian is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2003, 07:26 PM
  #9  
SunDevilPilot
 
SunDevilPilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 2,025
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default My Opinion

I really like my GP Extra. I put the OS 1.20 in it and to me it seems the perfect powerplant. Unlimited vertical and excellent downline braking. If you have that 91 2-cycle I would definatly go with the GP kit. It is a little smaller and will take to that size engine a little better. You really cant go wrong with either choice but I really like how the GP kit looks when compared to that of the CG.

Good Luck, Phil (Mesa, AZ)
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	60845_8231.jpg
Views:	42
Size:	39.7 KB
ID:	35780  
SunDevilPilot is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2003, 09:49 PM
  #10  
james04
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: brent, NM
Posts: 42
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default GP Extra 300s .60 vs. CG Extra 300 .60

SunDevilPilot


I agree with you on the looks and the weight factors. The GP has a lot more finesse to it in general. I have have both models now and am going to build the CG first since it is a mid wing and I am new to this stuff. When I get better Ill get a bigger engine and build the GP. So far I think the quality of the Balsa and laser cut parts are better on the CG. Ill let you know how things go. The CG is definitely a bigger plane.

James
james04 is offline  
Reply With Quote

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy