Plane for 91 4-stroke
#1
Thread Starter
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Auburn, AL
I have the magnum 91 4stroke in a non-3d extra. It needs a new home: Here is what my ideal plane would be, let me know the plane that fits the bill.
Very 3d capable, fairly easy to hover
Pattern like qualities, I.E I can actually fly around with it being precise, quick and go where you point it.
I would prefer it be an ARF, but it can be a kit if its the perfect plane.
Thanks
Very 3d capable, fairly easy to hover
Pattern like qualities, I.E I can actually fly around with it being precise, quick and go where you point it.
I would prefer it be an ARF, but it can be a kit if its the perfect plane.
Thanks
#3
Member
My Feedback: (7)
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Breaux Bridge,
LA
I have had many 3D planes , the most pattern like qualities have to go to the you can do 3D 60 to 90 size. It hovers the best of any thing i have flown. I had a 91 satio with 16X4 APC, and try some 30% heli fuel.[sm=spinnyeyes.gif]
#6
Senior Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Clermont, FL
Are you kidding me?
The U Can't Do 3d a pattern like plane!!!
You mught heve more luck with the H9 Funtana. There are a couple of videos of Zak flying his with a Saito 100 that will take your breath away. I think the site is www.3dbatix.com.
The U Can't Do 3d a pattern like plane!!!
You mught heve more luck with the H9 Funtana. There are a couple of videos of Zak flying his with a Saito 100 that will take your breath away. I think the site is www.3dbatix.com.
#7

My Feedback: (1)
I was thinking of the Funtana. It is a 3D plane designed by a pattern flier.
I did a kit review for R/C Report and it is very smooth. With any 3D plane, I would hesitate going too fast. the extra large control surfaces and counterbalances are asking for flutter. I had a Saito .72 in mine, but a friend has a Saito 100 with a 3-blade prop. His was fairly fast, but never gave a hint of flutter. Of course, he didn't do any power dives, either.
We both used 4-40 hardware and tight servos. I used digitals. I also used the DuBro black clevices with the built-in clip on elevator & rudder. They fit fairly tight. I used bolt-through ball links on ailerons for minimum slop.
I did a kit review for R/C Report and it is very smooth. With any 3D plane, I would hesitate going too fast. the extra large control surfaces and counterbalances are asking for flutter. I had a Saito .72 in mine, but a friend has a Saito 100 with a 3-blade prop. His was fairly fast, but never gave a hint of flutter. Of course, he didn't do any power dives, either.
We both used 4-40 hardware and tight servos. I used digitals. I also used the DuBro black clevices with the built-in clip on elevator & rudder. They fit fairly tight. I used bolt-through ball links on ailerons for minimum slop.
#8
Thread Starter
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Auburn, AL
Ed moorman brings up a good point. With a 3D plane that size, the control surfaces are going to be huge, and I don't have the money to buy digitals for it. Mabye a new engine and the udc 46, and just buy a high torque for the rudder? Any thoughts on that? Thanks
Alex
Also, I was thinking funtana, can I use high torque non-digital servo's on those surfaces. They are absolutly huge. Would the play in the regular servo's be to much? Thanks
Alex
Also, I was thinking funtana, can I use high torque non-digital servo's on those surfaces. They are absolutly huge. Would the play in the regular servo's be to much? Thanks
#9
ORIGINAL: snownskate69
Very 3d capable, fairly easy to hover
Pattern like qualities, I.E I can actually fly around with it being precise, quick and go where you point it.
I would prefer it be an ARF, but it can be a kit if its the perfect plane.
Very 3d capable, fairly easy to hover
Pattern like qualities, I.E I can actually fly around with it being precise, quick and go where you point it.
I would prefer it be an ARF, but it can be a kit if its the perfect plane.
Check out the 65" Extra 300LX.
#10
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Columbus,
GA
Maybe the UCD .46 and the motor you already have. I have flown one with a saito .91 on the front and you would have never known that it had such a large motor on it. However, the magnum weighs more than the saito does and produces less power.
If you go with that extreme flight extra posted above I would put a saito 1.00 or a Y.S. 1.10 on it for true all out 3D performance. I always say there is not use in buying a Jam up airplane if you dont have a Jam up motor on the front
If you go with that extreme flight extra posted above I would put a saito 1.00 or a Y.S. 1.10 on it for true all out 3D performance. I always say there is not use in buying a Jam up airplane if you dont have a Jam up motor on the front



