I have both the Venus II and the Excelleron 90. Both have the OS 1.20 AX engines. Both fly much better than I am capable of flying them, at least right now. I seem to use the Venus II more lately, but don't have a reason for doing so. As I said, both planes fly just great and I don't really have a preference.

Now with regard to setting up the CG on the Venus II, since I am fairly new to all of this, I was happy to see that it was nose-heavy, but probably would not know the difference if it was less nose heavy (not neutral, but slightly nose heavy). I put all servo's in the servo compartment using Sullivan 4-40 carbon composite rods to the rear for both elevator and rudder setup.

The Excelleron, however, used all pull-pull system for all tail control. I am using Sullivan Kevlar cable but they tend to fray after a while. I have some of the new vinyl coated kevlar which may make a big difference when it comes to this fray business. I am going to replace all lines with that vinyl coated as soon as I have the time. Probably won't fly the Excelleron 90 again until I swap it out. I am just afraid of that fraying business. now that I think of it, perhaps that's the reason for my current preference, eh?

Meanwhile, back to the Venus II. Since I am running a pair of 1200mah NiMH batteries (over kill.. way over kill, but I had them and they fit just fine) perhaps I could move them back somewhere to shift that CG a bit? What is the overall effect with a more neutral CG?

Thanks.

DS.

PS. I like the OS 1.20 AX so much that I bought one for my current build, which is a play plane, the new Goldberg Tiger 120. I am searching RCU for a forum on the Tiger 120.