hi Todd,
Personally, I think you should run the least amount of positive incidence you can - somewhere between 0.25 and 0.5 deg +. Too much positive incidence can double-cross your trim efforts and especially for evaluating inverted flight. I'd go with Bill's suggestion and reduce the incidence for starters, and reset the stab to zero. Down thrust is not a crime and you may end up with a little bit when you are done.

Here is a link to the best trim article I've read, written by Peter Goldsmith. http://www.mini-iac.com/Portals/57ad...20trimming.pdf

Regarding CG, give his method a thought...

This is off of the IMAC website and I hope he doesn't mind the plug. His methodology flat kicks the pants off the "trim-chart", in my opinion, and offers great insight and reasoning into how to get you model flying "right" with an eye towards the complete sequence, versus singled out elements.

Its possible to get combinations of exaggerated incidences or CG settings and still end up with a mildly mixed out model. However, the closer you get to a "stable" model that still carries a tad of the great flying qualities of a near neutral plane, the better you are going to fly. IMHO. You really don't want a plane that flies great upright, then dives like hell towards mother earth when inverted, because no matter how much you play with expos or throws to make it "manageable", the model will still have a setup flaw that will bite you some time. Simply said, the further forward you run the CG, and the more positive incidence you run, the worse the "dive" tendancy is going to be when inverted.

This is a great internet topic because opinions and experience vary so much.
Thanks,
Jim W.