Why not a Pica P-40?
10-03-2003, 09:36 AM
#26
My Feedback: (13)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Bremen,
IN
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not a Pica P-40?
ho2zoo,
my Pica P-40 is fiberglassed and painted with exterior grade Latex. Power is a Quadra 52. (I originally powered it with a Quadra 42 and it flew very scale-would have been great for contest flying for the scale speeds, however I do not intend to fly it at contests rather than just IMAA events for fun). I used Robart retracts but I had to extend them (Robart can do this for you) a little over two inches. Don't use 4" wheels-5.5 to 6" would be better. All up weight is 23 lbs.
Best of luck
Chuck
Jeff,
I saw your P-40 fly at Muncie last year (I was parked next to you with my Yellow P-47 - "Little Demon") Holy cow! that was nice. What a brute. That is what inspired me to build my P-40! Nice job Jeff.
Chuck
my Pica P-40 is fiberglassed and painted with exterior grade Latex. Power is a Quadra 52. (I originally powered it with a Quadra 42 and it flew very scale-would have been great for contest flying for the scale speeds, however I do not intend to fly it at contests rather than just IMAA events for fun). I used Robart retracts but I had to extend them (Robart can do this for you) a little over two inches. Don't use 4" wheels-5.5 to 6" would be better. All up weight is 23 lbs.
Best of luck
Chuck
Jeff,
I saw your P-40 fly at Muncie last year (I was parked next to you with my Yellow P-47 - "Little Demon") Holy cow! that was nice. What a brute. That is what inspired me to build my P-40! Nice job Jeff.
Chuck
01-12-2004, 10:59 PM
#27
My Feedback: (193)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Berlin,
WI
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not a Pica P-40?
I have built both ziroli and pica kits.
They are both nice building planes, but for the money the pica kit is way ahead (less time consuming than "kitting your own plane"-the only way to get the costs even close), and to be honest,I havent flown a pica P40, but have the corsair and stuka.
I have flown both the P51(1/5 scale) and spit(also 1/5 scale)from Pica, and can say I have never flown a nicer large scale warbird than the picas.
Pica has very nice detailed constuction manuals, and you will not find better quality of wood in a kit than pica puts out.
As to scale, dont listen to the nay sayers, anyone who thinks any of the ziroli designs are true to scale is foolish,they are stand off scale at best as well.
You get a little bigger plane with the ziroli, but at a greater expence, heavier, requires a larger engine, maybe more robust (expensive ) gear, and everything else that goes along with it.
Just my two cents worth.
FYI- I am in no way bashing ziroli here, I loved my stuka and have a 120" B25 on the boards now.
They are both nice building planes, but for the money the pica kit is way ahead (less time consuming than "kitting your own plane"-the only way to get the costs even close), and to be honest,I havent flown a pica P40, but have the corsair and stuka.
I have flown both the P51(1/5 scale) and spit(also 1/5 scale)from Pica, and can say I have never flown a nicer large scale warbird than the picas.
Pica has very nice detailed constuction manuals, and you will not find better quality of wood in a kit than pica puts out.
As to scale, dont listen to the nay sayers, anyone who thinks any of the ziroli designs are true to scale is foolish,they are stand off scale at best as well.
You get a little bigger plane with the ziroli, but at a greater expence, heavier, requires a larger engine, maybe more robust (expensive ) gear, and everything else that goes along with it.
Just my two cents worth.
FYI- I am in no way bashing ziroli here, I loved my stuka and have a 120" B25 on the boards now.
01-13-2004, 05:37 AM
#28
My Feedback: (15)
RE: Why not a Pica P-40?
Scale new-be - my two cents , I have heard for years that Pica is a good kit and fun to build but one ugly phrase always shows up in every review that I have seen with every Pica kit from the 1/12 combat to the 1/5 P40 -"BIG ON WEIGHT " now I know that can be a result of the builder but its seems that it shows up in every mag or out of the mouths of every owner that i have known on PICA . Has anoone done a weight comparison ? I know the Pica is slightly smaller then the Zirelli but I think it actually weighs more ? Is that because of the fiberglass fuse that is available on the Zirolli ?
01-13-2004, 11:30 AM
#29
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 1,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not a Pica P-40?
My Pica P-40 is sheeted and ready to be glassed and painted. I also have CJM retracts in her. I'm planning on a Moki 2.10 with a three blade prop. I would like to know if the Moki can be vonverted to run on gas as the cost of glow fuel is not exactly cheap and Moki's tend to get thirsty. I also have "Doc Miller" from Blue Box Toys chomping at the bit to fly her. I have a Pica P-51 waiting to be built also.
"Keep 'Em Flying!"
Flak
"Keep 'Em Flying!"
Flak
01-13-2004, 01:39 PM
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A salty piece of land,
CT
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not a Pica P-40?
Flak, you might want to check out Jerry Nelson's ignition system.
http://www.nelsonhobby.com/ignition/samples/samples.htm
I used one to convert a .90 Super Tigre several years ago and it ran great!
You have to check with Jerry as the only real factor to consider is the type of silicone used in the carb and needle valve seals. Some will be damaged by gasoline, others are OK.
GOod luck!
GY
http://www.nelsonhobby.com/ignition/samples/samples.htm
I used one to convert a .90 Super Tigre several years ago and it ran great!
You have to check with Jerry as the only real factor to consider is the type of silicone used in the carb and needle valve seals. Some will be damaged by gasoline, others are OK.
GOod luck!
GY
01-13-2004, 01:45 PM
#31
My Feedback: (13)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Bremen,
IN
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not a Pica P-40?
LDM,
I too have heard the Pica heavy thing. However, after building my Pica P-40 (see post above) see came out at 23 pounds! For a 1/5 scale aircraft with full house thats pretty darn good. I did not go to any extremes to lighten it however I didn't go heavy on glues, resins and such.
Chuck
I too have heard the Pica heavy thing. However, after building my Pica P-40 (see post above) see came out at 23 pounds! For a 1/5 scale aircraft with full house thats pretty darn good. I did not go to any extremes to lighten it however I didn't go heavy on glues, resins and such.
Chuck
01-13-2004, 02:26 PM
#32
Senior Member
My Feedback: (54)
RE: Why not a Pica P-40?
Chuck,
I am just starting to build the Pica P-40 and am wondering about your comment on the Robarts. Did you extend the struts to accommodate larger wheels or were the stock struts too short even with 4.5" wheels? Also, do you happen to have any pics of the mounts for your Robarts? I'd like to get some more tips, if you have the time. Thanks.
Rein
I am just starting to build the Pica P-40 and am wondering about your comment on the Robarts. Did you extend the struts to accommodate larger wheels or were the stock struts too short even with 4.5" wheels? Also, do you happen to have any pics of the mounts for your Robarts? I'd like to get some more tips, if you have the time. Thanks.
Rein
01-13-2004, 04:17 PM
#33
My Feedback: (13)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Bremen,
IN
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not a Pica P-40?
Rein,
I extended the struts for the proper angle of attack when it's on its feet. With stock set-up it was a ground hugger. The 4.5" wheels are too small for scale on a
1/5 scale P-40. I made my gera rails from 1/4 aircraft ply and I did have to remove the spar where the gear retracted into. However, I made a cap out of 1/4" ply to tie in the upper and lower spars to together. Think of a "U" shape that lets the strut run through the "U" and the spars are glued to the top and bottom of the "U". Good Luck.
Chuck
I extended the struts for the proper angle of attack when it's on its feet. With stock set-up it was a ground hugger. The 4.5" wheels are too small for scale on a
1/5 scale P-40. I made my gera rails from 1/4 aircraft ply and I did have to remove the spar where the gear retracted into. However, I made a cap out of 1/4" ply to tie in the upper and lower spars to together. Think of a "U" shape that lets the strut run through the "U" and the spars are glued to the top and bottom of the "U". Good Luck.
Chuck
01-13-2004, 04:44 PM
#35
Senior Member
My Feedback: (54)
RE: Why not a Pica P-40?
Chuck,
Thanks much for the pics. This is my first warbird after lots of sport kits, but first retract installation. If you use the stock Robarts, do you just mount them so the struts lay across the spar? Seems like a tall mount would be required but then again the wheel cover is a big bump of plastic. One more question....Do you glass the wing first, then glue all the various plastic lumps and bumps on before painting? Again, all replies appreciated.
Rein
Thanks much for the pics. This is my first warbird after lots of sport kits, but first retract installation. If you use the stock Robarts, do you just mount them so the struts lay across the spar? Seems like a tall mount would be required but then again the wheel cover is a big bump of plastic. One more question....Do you glass the wing first, then glue all the various plastic lumps and bumps on before painting? Again, all replies appreciated.
Rein
01-13-2004, 04:56 PM
#36
My Feedback: (13)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Bremen,
IN
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not a Pica P-40?
Rein,
You will remove the bottom spar (after the wing is framed up) just were the strut falls. the gear sits lower into the wing than you think. The "U" shape cap is actually a type of shear web to capture the top and bottom spar where you have to cut the bottom spar for the strut to fit into. (I hope that's clear enough.)
Yes, glass the wing first and give it a couple of coats of primer and sand it all off. Then, fit your bumps and blister before the final prime.
Chuck
You will remove the bottom spar (after the wing is framed up) just were the strut falls. the gear sits lower into the wing than you think. The "U" shape cap is actually a type of shear web to capture the top and bottom spar where you have to cut the bottom spar for the strut to fit into. (I hope that's clear enough.)
Yes, glass the wing first and give it a couple of coats of primer and sand it all off. Then, fit your bumps and blister before the final prime.
Chuck
01-14-2004, 08:39 PM
#37
My Feedback: (15)
RE: Why not a Pica P-40?
Chuck , good advice I may try my luck at a pica p40 . I am in the process of bashing a Sportman Avation P40 . Put in Century as opposed to mechanical p51 style gear that is included in the kit . Reworked the tail to more scale outline , adding interior and Offers and gentleman piolt and sliding canopy . Still need to add split flaps, recover and paint cowl to match covering . Will post pictures soon . I just love the P40 !
01-15-2004, 03:37 PM
#39
My Feedback: (13)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Bremen,
IN
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not a Pica P-40?
ho2zoo,
Yeah the bottom spar is gone where the strut falls. However a 1/4" shear web is glued to the Top and Bottom spar (with a "U" shape cut out for the strut to fall into.) in its place. It is VERY srtong. I've Flown this aircraft for two years now with no problems at all.
Chuck
Yeah the bottom spar is gone where the strut falls. However a 1/4" shear web is glued to the Top and Bottom spar (with a "U" shape cut out for the strut to fall into.) in its place. It is VERY srtong. I've Flown this aircraft for two years now with no problems at all.
Chuck
01-15-2004, 06:06 PM
#40
My Feedback: (193)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Berlin,
WI
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not a Pica P-40?
Heavy?
Well let me say this has a lot to do with the building,
I admitt I know nothing of Picas P40, but have built there P51 and Spit 9.
My 51 is 89" in span, had a supertigre 3000 in it scale cockpit, full retracts with aluminum wheels, and other small stuff, it came in at 22 pounds if I remember correctly.
My spit I have now is 88" wing century jet retracts, moki 1.8 scale interrior she weighs in at 23 pounds.
Looking at them, you would think the spit would be lighter as it looks slimmer but.............
Ok here is the deal,
pica gives you a fair amount of blocks, and all the ribs are light ply, a builder can save considirable weight by carving out the interrior and putting a few lightning holes in pieces.
But who cares? The weights listed above are totally reasonable for planes this big, try getting a Byron 51 in at that weight, you wont do it.
The top flight stang can get in around there but it is less scale looking than Picas, and doesnt fly as well to boot.
Dont fret a 25 pound Pica will fly better than a 20 pound top flight.
Heck a word models giant scale 51 ARF , spaning only 80 ", will come out 18 pounds with a moki 1.8, and those fly well also.
I guarentee you, if your used to the small top flight birds at 8-10 pounds these pica kits will seem a welcome relief.
Well let me say this has a lot to do with the building,
I admitt I know nothing of Picas P40, but have built there P51 and Spit 9.
My 51 is 89" in span, had a supertigre 3000 in it scale cockpit, full retracts with aluminum wheels, and other small stuff, it came in at 22 pounds if I remember correctly.
My spit I have now is 88" wing century jet retracts, moki 1.8 scale interrior she weighs in at 23 pounds.
Looking at them, you would think the spit would be lighter as it looks slimmer but.............
Ok here is the deal,
pica gives you a fair amount of blocks, and all the ribs are light ply, a builder can save considirable weight by carving out the interrior and putting a few lightning holes in pieces.
But who cares? The weights listed above are totally reasonable for planes this big, try getting a Byron 51 in at that weight, you wont do it.
The top flight stang can get in around there but it is less scale looking than Picas, and doesnt fly as well to boot.
Dont fret a 25 pound Pica will fly better than a 20 pound top flight.
Heck a word models giant scale 51 ARF , spaning only 80 ", will come out 18 pounds with a moki 1.8, and those fly well also.
I guarentee you, if your used to the small top flight birds at 8-10 pounds these pica kits will seem a welcome relief.
01-15-2004, 07:29 PM
#41
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Sedona, AZ
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not a Pica P-40?
ORIGINAL: thehoker
Heavy?
Well let me say this has a lot to do with the building,
I admitt I know nothing of Picas P40, but have built there P51 and Spit 9.
My 51 is 89" in span, had a supertigre 3000 in it scale cockpit, full retracts with aluminum wheels, and other small stuff, it came in at 22 pounds if I remember correctly.
My spit I have now is 88" wing century jet retracts, moki 1.8 scale interrior she weighs in at 23 pounds.
Looking at them, you would think the spit would be lighter as it looks slimmer but.............
Ok here is the deal,
pica gives you a fair amount of blocks, and all the ribs are light ply, a builder can save considirable weight by carving out the interrior and putting a few lightning holes in pieces.
But who cares? The weights listed above are totally reasonable for planes this big, try getting a Byron 51 in at that weight, you wont do it.
The top flight stang can get in around there but it is less scale looking than Picas, and doesnt fly as well to boot.
Dont fret a 25 pound Pica will fly better than a 20 pound top flight.
Heck a word models giant scale 51 ARF , spaning only 80 ", will come out 18 pounds with a moki 1.8, and those fly well also.
I guarentee you, if your used to the small top flight birds at 8-10 pounds these pica kits will seem a welcome relief.
Heavy?
Well let me say this has a lot to do with the building,
I admitt I know nothing of Picas P40, but have built there P51 and Spit 9.
My 51 is 89" in span, had a supertigre 3000 in it scale cockpit, full retracts with aluminum wheels, and other small stuff, it came in at 22 pounds if I remember correctly.
My spit I have now is 88" wing century jet retracts, moki 1.8 scale interrior she weighs in at 23 pounds.
Looking at them, you would think the spit would be lighter as it looks slimmer but.............
Ok here is the deal,
pica gives you a fair amount of blocks, and all the ribs are light ply, a builder can save considirable weight by carving out the interrior and putting a few lightning holes in pieces.
But who cares? The weights listed above are totally reasonable for planes this big, try getting a Byron 51 in at that weight, you wont do it.
The top flight stang can get in around there but it is less scale looking than Picas, and doesnt fly as well to boot.
Dont fret a 25 pound Pica will fly better than a 20 pound top flight.
Heck a word models giant scale 51 ARF , spaning only 80 ", will come out 18 pounds with a moki 1.8, and those fly well also.
I guarentee you, if your used to the small top flight birds at 8-10 pounds these pica kits will seem a welcome relief.
01-20-2004, 10:22 AM
#42
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 1,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Why not a Pica P-40?
Gerry,
I recently learned the Moki will run fine on go cart fuel, which is almost as cheap as gasoline, thus eliminating the cost of the ignition system. Tally Ho!
"Keep 'Em Flying!"
Flak
I recently learned the Moki will run fine on go cart fuel, which is almost as cheap as gasoline, thus eliminating the cost of the ignition system. Tally Ho!
"Keep 'Em Flying!"
Flak
