I'm torn between the Great Planes 40 size Extra kit, Great Planes 40 size Cap232 kit, and GP 40/60 Giles... or am I??? I'm looking for a relatively aerobatic/3D kit, not an ARF, between 40-60 size. I feel that i need to challenge myself with the experience of kit building.

Back to the planes I mentioned above, are these planes equally matched if they have the same engine? I want to be able to have a plane that can hover (3D) along with scale aerobatics. Which plane can do it all?

I'll take things slowly though; I'm not in a hurry. I will most likely save up all the money I can (I wonder where I will work this summer ) and purchase it when I can. By then I'll hopefully have enough for an engine too. I might be thinking too far ahead anyway, but we'll see.

Thanks for your time and input!

-Brian


BTW, which engine is good for what I want to do in the plane you recommend?

If you want to do 3D then don't get the Extra. If you want the best flying plane then get an Extra. In fact, for good 3D you shouldn't be dabbling in 40 size stuff anyway.

ive seen many 40 size planes hover, one of my own in fact, just takes a little more skill, thats all

ANYTHING will hover, given enough power. The GP Cub hovers quite well due to its large surfaces. 3D is much more than just hovering.

ive seen the Great Planes extra 40 size do inverted flat spins, lomcevok(sp?), and nice knife edges... my point is, it doesnt have to be bigger than 90 inch to do 3d...

None of the maneuvers you listed are 3D. I have this plane. It is a great aerobat, but it is certainly not 3D capable if built anything close to stock.

ok heres my take on the subject.
I had a gp 232. I went the bigger is better rout. Put a os 61.fx in it. Well it hoverd at 1/2 throttle but it was real hard to hold in a hover. It did nice waterfalls and the blenders would just stop the plane in its tracks. General flying was ok but definetly leaned towards 3D. It builds easy and light. If i would do it again i would put a good 50 or 53 in it.

The g202 is a 60 size ship and have no ex. with this plane.

the 300s. I am building one right now. It will have a os 50 in it and i am moding it to 3D specs. If you build it stock it comes out a little heavy and does not have the surfaces to do 3D. But they say it is a great flyer.

Basicly if your not use to building and want to 3D i would say build the 232 with a good small motor. not the 60. Keep it as light as possible.

And if you dont mind a none scale plane i would suggest a profile. theres tons on the market and you will learn 3D real fast.
I vote for the OMP 540 profile.
check out my page. it has pics and setup tips on the 540 and what im doing to the 300s. just click on the www on the bottom of this post.

Hope this helps.

As of now I don't have the money to buy a big giant scale plane, besides space is limited where I live anyway. I know that the Extra is a great flying plane, from what I've seen from DGrant when he flys it. I just want a plane that can do it all, and I threw in the Giles because I know it can 3D well. I don't even know if there's a plane on my list that can do it all... it most likely just depends on the pilot I guess? Da King, make sure to tell us how your 3D extra project comes along... and if it's capable of the 3D manuevers you want it to do. These planes all look great, but like I said earlier, if there is a plane, which one of these is the most well rounded for what I'm into - SA/3D

I appreciate your help, and advice; Thanks for the help!

-Brian

Have a look at the GP Ultra Sport 40 +. Although it's not a scale aerobat like the Cap, Extra et al, it is touted as a a plane that can "do it all". It is a brand new kit with none that I know of in the air at this point but it is one sweet looking ship!

There are build photos of one in the "Kits" forum, a fellow is building one with rear-sweept CF gear, looks great!

The Giles will 3d if it is built light. It is definetly a 60 size ship and more like a .90 2 stroke or strong .90-120 4 stroke plane. I have one but built it stoke. If I were to do it again i would make a number of mods to lighten it and use a different engine. It does fly well but the extra is suppose to fly better. I have the .60 size ready to go in the spring.
Jeff

Here's some of my notes on the CAP. I do like the plane. In building the Grat Planes CAP 232 I had been in search of a CONVENIENTLY SMALL true flying acrobat that can fly with a degree of precision and be transported easily with the wing on.

In flight I wanted uplines and downlines to be straight and I wanted it to fly the same inverted as upright. I wanted good vertical power. I did NOT expect it to 3D and you shouldn't either.

I had to change a few things to get reasonable precision out of such a small plane. First I changed the thrustline of the engine. I added right thrust until it tracked great on the upline. Then I added down thrust until there was no elevator trim change between upright and inverted flight. I switched props around until I found the best for my setup and I cut more cowl away on the underside. The .61 FX was getting hot.

When finished with the trimming modifications I had a very true flying plane in a small package. The power to weight ratio and the wing loading is not there for true 3D style or fun-fly type flight. And although the small CAP is a little eager to snap with too much elevator, it was fun to fly. My all up weight on this plane was close to six and a quarter pounds with NO ballast weight.

-Cheech

like i said the plane does 3D but the general flying is ok. Cheech tuned his to fly nice and take away the 3D. Its all in how you tune it. any way you do it, it can do what you want. I took the diehedral out and would not suggest it. the knife edge needed a lot of mixing to get clean. Just keep it light and you will love it.

I looked into this a while ago. I agree with most here that the 300 is not a 3D machine at all if built stock. The 202 and Cap are much more capable. Although 40 size planes are hard to 3D, it can be done! The Cap is a "banger" at heart. It is best at the hardcore stuff. It may be a bit harder ,than the 202 or Extra, to slow down. Some call it the SNAP 232 for good reason. My choice was the G-202 due to the following. It is more neutral in flight than the Cap. It has much better surfaces than the 300. If need be, you can extend them 1 inch too. Wing design looks easy to get a real straight wing. It looks easy to get a 6.25 to 6.5 pound plane. The rear servo for the rudder makes a 91FX or Saito 100 real easy. I'd drop the rod in a tube and install an MK bellcrank for elevator control.
I was all ready to order one, then I found my Su-Do-Khoi. Sorry Great Planes, maybe next year.