mxaexm

Hi all,

I have been flying for a few months now (I'm loving it!!!) I started with Hangar 9 Easy Fly 40. I'm about to move up to my second plane, SIg Four Star 60, that I bought ready to fly.
Over the winter time, I would love to build my first kit and my questions is which kit would be best...

here is the list of airplanes that I'm currently considering...

Sig Mid-Star 40... (I like the way it looks and that would be relatively inexpensive project and airplane to fly, I would install OS .40 in it.)

Carl Goldberg Tiger 60 (I like the way it looks...its big...I was thinking of .60 engine size)

Sig Somethin Extra (I like it although the windspan is not that big...., I think that at least .45 engine)

Great Planes RV 4 Sport 40 (once again its not that big but it really looks ok, at least .45 engine..)

Thanks a lot in advance.

dignlivn

FWIW

My second build was a Tiger2, but that was back in
the 80's.

Bob

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

Any of those would make a great first build. So the choice is more "What you want to fly"

Mid-Star will be similar to your 4*. but due to the smaller size, it will be a lot more responsive.

The Tiger will also be similar to the 4* but more smooth and stable

The SE is sort of a 3-D trainer

And the RV-4 I can't comment on as I have never flown one, but being a GP kit, it should be a nice build.

mxaexm

I'm interested in aerobatics not so much in 3D.

I'm afraid that those airplanes listed my be, are too similar to my Sig Four Star therefore they might be boring after a very short period of time....

I just want to have some nice flyer that will be capable of aerobatics.

foodstick

You will find alot of positive comments on the ultra sport 40 and 60.. I have never flown them, but I have seen them fly...nice planes. Years ago I built one for a guy and he always liked that plane as much as any other he had owned. From what I have seen they probably fly cleaner ,smoother than the 4* which is very floaty and stable. Both great to build and fly, both also lend themselves to kit bashing or customizing ...

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

I was just about to recommend the Ultra Sport

It's the best plane ever put in a box! And it comes in a 40 or 60 size:

http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...?&I=LXJ583&P=7

http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...?&I=LXJ584&P=7

However, although the manual is excellent and it guides you step-by-step, it may not be the best "First" building experience. There is a good deal of sanding involved (But you CAN omit the wing fillets which can be a pain to do for the novice builder)

Here is a thread I started on MY Ultra Sport 60 build:

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_6822225/tm.htm

hogflyer

You may want to look at some other Sig kits - the Kavalier, Kougar, King Kobra (both the Kougar and King Kobra have foam core wings), and if you want a real building experience, the Astro Hog.

Hogflyer

Rcpilot

My Feedback: (78)

How about a larger model? Classic building techniques. Classic lines. Classic pattern aerobatics.

Prices ain't half-bad either. [8D]

http://www.bridiairplanes.com/hangar/bigchaos.html
http://www.bridiairplanes.com/hangar/bigdirtybirdy.html
http://www.bridiairplanes.com/hangar/killerbee.html

mxaexm

For now I would like to start with something that doesn't require engine bigger than .60. (max .75). Since I'm using 2 stroke engines, they do use a lot of fuel...

Thanks guys for your help.

Rcpilot

My Feedback: (78)

Thats the rub, isn't it?

I was new to this hobby about 10yrs ago. I started out with a 40 size trainer. Just like everyone else. Built a 4*60. Built a Kadet Senior and modified the snot out of it. Bought bigger planes. 60 size motors. 90 size motors. 1.20 size motors. Bigger and bigger. Bought 150 and 180 size glow motors. Bigger and bigger. Bought the 2 cubic inch and above glow motors.

Got tired of the expensive fuel and the crude/rudimentary carbs. Sold all the big ones. I keep nothing but 40-50 size 3D planes or bigger gasoline powered planes now. The mid range stuff, for me, became more cost and trouble than it was worth. The engines are expensive and they use a ton of fuel at $15-$20 per gallon.

You're smart to avoid the larger glow motors. It took me 6yrs in the hobby to figure that out. []
My list of glow motors now:
1 - Magnum XLS .46
1 - Magnum XLS .52
1 - Aquacraft .46 (Tower .46 clone. It's all Hobbico)
4 - Tower Hobbies .75

They are all sitting idle, except for 1 of the TH .75 engines.

The rest of my planes are gasoline powered.

mxaexm

RCpilot,

Thanks for your input.

How about 4 stroke engines? Are they much harder to adjust, etc?

As far as the planes go, what was your airplane after the 4* 60 that you had?

If you want to get rid of your glow engines...maybe we could work something out.

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

4-Stroke engines burn considerably less fuel than a comparable 2-stroke. I own one 2-stroke that is bigger than a 46 and that is my OS 75AX. Aside from that, everything I have larger than a 46 is a 4-stroke (Or a gasser).

Better torque, less fuel, and MUCH less mess.

And they are no more difficult to tune than a 2-stroke is. As far as I am concerned, there is only ONE disadvantage of a 4-stroke and that is that they are more expensive than a 2-stroke. But you'll save the difference in one season with the savings in fuel.