ORIGINAL: mjfrederick
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.
The statement about CG made here is only correct for extreme variances from the recommended CG. The same can be said for the incidence... Half degree positive is an excellent starting point for incidence on modern pattern aircraft. I've seen both in practice and know that what flyincajun recommends works. Of course, it might be easier to help if we understood what kind of airframe we're working with here, as well.
I'd say moving the CG 1.0" forward, as suggested, qualifies an extreme variance. I'm not debating Bryan's methods, mjfrederick, I'm pointing out a fact of airplane life. The further forward you run the CG and the higher the wing incidence goes, the worse its going to dive when inverted. More than one person in the RCUniverse has worked out trim issues before.
Thanks,
Jim W.