Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > Profile and Fun Flying Planes
Reload this Page >

Kat 40 looks good, but?

Community
Search
Notices
Profile and Fun Flying Planes If you're a profile fan or into fun flyers than this is the forum to discuss those topics.

Kat 40 looks good, but?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-15-2005, 09:29 AM
  #1  
stdun
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Fort Bragg, CA
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Kat 40 looks good, but?

Is there anything better out there now? Looking for a stable, fun flying 3D for my os61fx.
Old 05-15-2005, 09:44 AM
  #2  
Woody218
My Feedback: (24)
 
Woody218's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bismarck, ND
Posts: 751
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Kat 40 looks good, but?

The OS 61 is going to be a tad too heavy for a Kat 40. OS lists the weight at 23 oz with muffler, you would end up hanging lead on the tail to balance it. I have a Saito 82 on mine, I had to put a 5 cell 1500 mah NiMh pack as far back in the wing as I could to balance mine for good 3D (5.5" back from the leading edge).
Old 05-15-2005, 11:38 AM
  #3  
basmntdweller
Senior Member
My Feedback: (9)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 1,752
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Kat 40 looks good, but?

Mojo 60 would be my choice. Your 61 will be a bit marginal on pullout from hover but it will still be fine. The Mojo is a much more stable plane than the Kat 40 in all attitudes. The Kat tends to be rather twitchy in hover but the Mojo is very steady and moves a bit slower giving the beginning 3Der more time to think and react. It also has the carbon tube that makes the fuse unbelievably strong. The biggest problem with most profiles is that the first time they are turfed, they break the fuse at the trailing edge of the wing. The carbon tube virtually eliminates this problem. The only downside to the Mojo is it's a kit you have to build. It is a very easy and fast building kit though. I have built both Mojo 40 and 60 and put together both the Kat 40 and Kat 70. The Kat 70 is an excellent flying plane but I'm not impressed with the build quality. The Kat 40 is similar quality but it has the wing permanently attached. The detachable wing on the 70 needs better structuring IMO.
Forget about putting the 61 on the Kat 40! You'll end up with a pig that doesn't fly anything like it was intended. My Kat 40 flys very well on a Saito 56 but it is somewhat anemic on pullout from hover and emergency power you sometimes need. But I still like it,more for the tumbling stuff than down low hovering and harriering.
Later,,,Matt
Old 05-15-2005, 10:37 PM
  #4  
IowaSilvia
Senior Member
My Feedback: (97)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Billings, MO
Posts: 921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Kat 40 looks good, but?

Dude. the mojo was designed for .602strks. I had an old os .60fsr in mine and it was a rocket out of hover. Get the Mojo 60. hands down awesome.
Old 05-15-2005, 11:53 PM
  #5  
majortom-RCU
Senior Member
My Feedback: (40)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Merrimack, NH
Posts: 1,597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Kat 40 looks good, but?

I will pile on in favor of the Mojo, assuming you are willing to build. Not a hard build, but it did take some care to get my wing to come out straight. Other than that, it is hands down awesome for sure.

http://www.swanyshouse.com/mojo60/mojo60.html
Old 05-16-2005, 07:55 PM
  #6  
stdun
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Fort Bragg, CA
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Kat 40 looks good, but?

Not going to build a kit. 3 business, 3 kids, 3rd wife and WAY over due for a vacation. Even the arf's take way too long to get in the air. Plus I have 2 combat planes to re-build after last weeks combat. The Kat 40 is looking good. Arf, that is.
Old 05-17-2005, 02:15 AM
  #7  
Spacey
Senior Member
 
Spacey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Pretoria, SOUTH AFRICA
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Kat 40 looks good, but?

You can try the Katana. I know there has been some people who has in the past put .60 size two strokes on the .40 sized profiles and they flew well. But please remember that you are putting alot of unwanted weight on the nose and the wingloading will go up. For some folks it might not be a big deal but you will be messing with the planes performance so keep that in mind.
Old 05-17-2005, 09:01 AM
  #8  
stdun
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Fort Bragg, CA
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Kat 40 looks good, but?

I bought an os46ax yesterday. I'm over the 61, at least at this point.
Old 05-19-2005, 05:08 AM
  #9  
Spacey
Senior Member
 
Spacey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Pretoria, SOUTH AFRICA
Posts: 1,885
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Kat 40 looks good, but?

Great now all you need is a Katana!
Old 05-19-2005, 08:55 AM
  #10  
stdun
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Fort Bragg, CA
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Kat 40 looks good, but?

My new Katana 40 was ordered 3 days ago. [8D]

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



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.