Which Stik do you guys prefer:

Great Planes Big Stik 40
Hangar 9 Ultra Stik 40
I am moving into basic aerobatics and my PT 40 don't cut it anymore.

I plan to use a Saito 65 four stroke

The Hanger 9 Ultra Stick is hard to beat, but I think the .60 Ultra Stick size flys better. Flown them both and IMO the bigger one has much better flight characteristics.
If you have made your mind up on the .65 Saito, go with the .40 size.

CCRC1 has the right idea. I have the ultra stik 60 and it is great with a 91 4 stroke on it. If I were buying one I would get the 60 size.

Rick

The absolutely best EVER stik is the

SPAZ-STIK

Only ever seen one fly.
At the flying field there was a guy flying his Stik.
He always shaked when he flew anyway.
Then he moved a little from his spot and stepped directly
in the middle of a fire ant mound.
About 10 seconds later he noticed his error.
That plane did every stunt in the book.
Almost hit the ground 3 times.

Ever since then we all call him Larry spaz-stik

If I didn't already have the Saito 65 I would be looking at the 90 size.

CCRC1 so which do you like best.
One is hard to beat and the other flies better ?????

Like I said before, I think the .60 sized Ultra Stick is you best choice. But, if you are trying to match the plane to the Saito .65 you already have, I would choose the .40 sized Ultra Stick over the Big Stick.
I flew a .40 sized Ultra Stick right after they were introduced for almost a year with an old Webra .40 Blackhead motor. It flew great and while it wasn't a hot rod with that motor, it performed just fine. I ended up giving the airplane minus the engine to a teenager in my club who needed to move up from his Sig Kadet. He installed an O.S. Max .46 FX on it and it really came alive. He put almost 100 flights on it before he went away for college. He still flys it when he comes home for visits. Its a good, solid, predictable airplane that flys well in almost any condition.
I have had some stick time with a friends Big Stick and I think the Ultra Stick is just a better quality product. The Big Stick is set up as a tricycle landing gear and the Ultra Stick is a tail dragger (which I prefer). The covering on the Big Stick was very poor and was difficult to keep stuck down.
You now have a choice of several covering schemes for the .40 size Ultra Stick which is kinda nice and its Ultracote. I will revise my original statement, If you are staying in the .40 sized catagory, the Ultra Stick .40 is a great choice for a quality sport airplane.

Are you set on a Stik specifically? I ask because I just did one, for the same basic reason you want (a throw-around plane with some pep). The photo below shows where it is now.

CCRC1 is right in that the H9 Ultra Stik is probably the best of the available ARF Stiks out there today. However...

A Stik used to be THE choice for a second plane. Times have changed. There is a whole raft of aerobatic ARFs out there, some suitable for a new pilot, that fly better than Stik, IMO.

I won't take up any more of your time, in case a Stik is what you want.

Thanks for the replies guys !!!

Here is my dilemma:

I already own a Saito 65 and don't really want to buy another engine.
I am not necessarily set on a Stik. I need a good stable aircraft that will perform basic aerobatics.
I started in RC many years ago and I guess the Stik preference is showing my age. I have gotten back into the hobby after several years of down time. I have been flying an older PT40 for a while and it's getting pretty mundane.

I welcome recommendations for my next plane but I do prefer a tricycle gear.

Well, If you want the tricycle gear set up, that leaves out the Ultra Stick unless you modify it. I tend to agree with Steve Campbell about several other good "second" airplanes but most of my suggestions are tail draggers. One of the profile 3-D airplanes on low rates make a great second airplane in my opinion.
* Sig's Somethin Extra
* Goldbergs Tiger2
* Sig's 4 Star .40
* Kange's SK50 Funfly
All of these are decent ARF "second" airplanes but the only one with a tricycle gear is the Tiger2. The Tiger2 is a good quality ARF and is a very good airplane to start to learn pattern maneuvers with. The Saito .65 you have would fly the Tiger2 with no problem.
By the way I discovered this afternoon that my friends Big Stick was an early version that had the sticky back type of covering. Great Planes has changed the covering to Monokote on all of the later models so the covering problems I mentioned should not be a problem with one of the current ARF's.

CCRC1

I appreciate the feedback. This will provide me some research material. I may wind up with a tail dragger, I just need some experience to keep it from ground looping. Guess it's time to load up G2 again.

I don't think you will have a problem with ground looping the Ultra Stick! For that matter, any of the ones I listed. The wider track gear helps them track better. I can drive my .60 size Ultra Stick around better than an R/C Car!

If you're looking at a stick, take a look at the World Models Super Stunts .40 and .60 size. I've got the 40 size with an os 46 fx in it and it's one of my favorite planes. It's covered in ultracoat, it's the same size as the ultra stick 60 (64-inch wingspan), but much lighter, and it's cheaper. It comes as a tricycle gear, but it's easily converted to taildragger. The 60-size is much bigger -- 80-inch wingspan, two-piece wing, etc. Just be sure to replace the fuel tanks! My stopper popped out during flight and soaked the inside of my fuselage.

That's a cool looking plane CCRC1. That's one of the best I've ever seen. Let me know if you ever plan to put it in the classifieds.

Thanks, but I am going to hang on to it.
It really isn't that hard to recover you know. I used white, gray and Neon Red (I think it looks orange) Ultracote on the top that you see in the picture and the bottom of the wing is corsair blue. You can see this airplane coming from a mile away! That picture shows an Enya .80 4 stroke I had on it last year. I currently have an MVVS .77 2 stroke on it and it has plenty of power to spare. I use this airplane as my test bed and workhorse.
Thanks again for the compliment.

Great minds think alike... the Tiger 2 is exactly what I was thinking of.

Until I remembered this; I seem to recall a caveat in the manual about NOT using a four stroke on this particular ARF. Remember how the old Sky Tiger kit used two maple beams, that ran the length of the nose from the front of the wing saddle forward, to support the nose and mount the engine on? Well, this Tiger 2 ARF doesn't have those beams, and uses a radial mount flush against the firewall.

My pal built this ARF several years ago, so memory is fuzzy, but I definitely remember him being annoyed about this because he had planned to use a YS 63, and ended up having to buy a new head and carburetor for a .46 two stroke heli engine he had lying around.

So, OldCoot, if you are contemplating this one, I'd call Lanier and ask them about using your Saito 65. Hopefully, they won't charge you for the answer...

I have the Red White and Blue Ultra Stick with a .72 4 stroke, this makes for a great flying set-up. It is my first "stick" type plane and I can see why they are so popular, they fly great. The color scheme on this version is nice, and good quality.

Just curious, are the Stick type planes slow in general? I saw a thread yesterday that the person complained that they were too slow. I'm not looking for a fast plane just something that I can try to learn some airobatics with.

This is kinda a matter of opinion, if you are a guy who prefers Jets and Pattern airplanes, then yea I guess they would be considered slow. Mine gets around the field pretty good, but I don't have to land it at 70 mph like some guys do! The MVVS engine I have on it now is not really a high RPM engine, it likes larger props and pulls like a mule. If you put a hot, high RPM engine with the right prop I am sure the airplane would hang on for the ride. You gotta remember what this airplane is, a box with a big fat wing.

Thanks for the info CCRC1. That's what I'm looking for then. I soloed in Sept. and just started flying a 4*40 that I built from a kit. I would like something a little slower though to learn a little more with. Sounds just right. Hmmmm...... maybe I'll get a Saito 72 for it.

CCRC1.

Speed is more dependant no how you prop the airplane than the amount of power the engine produces. A smaller diameter 8 pitch prop will give you a lot of speed, while a larger diameter 4 or 6 pitch prop will give you more thrust for better acceleration and vertical climbs, but less speed. You can usually play with pitch and diameter to keep an engine at the rpm you want.

For example, my pattern planes like speed, so I run 8 pitch props. My Ultra Stick flies best at moderate speeds, so I use a 6 pitch there. I have a friend on his second Funtana 90. The first had a wing failure due to flutter, so he is running a 4 pitch prop on the new one to insure the speed stays down.

Greg

It also depends on the engine. The MVVS .77 that I have on my stick is timed and tuned for lower RPM's and larger props. Putting a smaller prop with more pitch to increase speed (and proportionally RPM's) does no good because the engine is not timed to handle the higher RPM and gives poor performance. It is ported to give its best performance in its midrange not at max. RPM.
Thats why I said " a hot, high rpm engine with the right prop".

Thanks everyone for the information.
I will let you know what I decide on !!

Dan