I just ordered the 60 size Cap 232 from Kangke , and need some advice on engine choice. I want it to have excellent vertical, and to hover if possible. Also, I would rather use a four stroke.

I was thinking of a Saito 100 or 120, or an OS FS 120 with pump. I was leaning towards the Saito 100 because it is lighter, but I'm not sure if it will have enough power. Which of these do you think would be best for this airplane?

Thanks!

I have flown this plane with a magnum 91 fs, with a saito 100 and with a saito 120. All flew well but the saito 120 was astonishing. This is a very good plane and I think you'll like it with any of your choices.

I have a Saito 100 in mine, and it flies great. Like Outcast said all will work fine, but I think the 1.20 is a bit too heavy, the 100 seems to be a perfect match. Daz...

I have one with a OS91FSR 2-stroke. Plenty of power but it is just too fast with a 14x6. I'm going to try a 15x4W and see if I can slow her down a little. I think a 120 4 stroke would be the hot ticket.

Which CAP are you talking about? They have a sport version [longer tail moment] And thats the one I have. Reply if thats it. MJS

mjs,

I ordered the regular CAP.

Dazzler and Outcast,

How is the vertical performance with the Saito 100? Also, looking at a picture of the Saito 120 it looks like the exhaust exit is more to the rear of the cylinder head and the 100 looks like it is more on the side. Is there an advantage (or disadvantage) to either one of these configurations as far as fitting it under the cowel?
Thanks for the input!

Dk, the Saito 100 exhaust routes right out of the bottom of the cowl, you will need an extension to get it fully out of the cowl. I'm quite sure the 120 can be routed the same though. On the Kangke Cap I would definetly recommend replacing the fuel tank, with a dubro 14 oz square which fits right in the existing opening even though the opening is round. My kangke fuel tank just split the other day, it split right in front by the stopper, if you really want to use the existing tank, dont tighten the stopper screw to tight, that will help.

The Vertical performance with the Saito 100 is excellent, I couldnt ask for any better, I am very pleased with this setup. Daz...

Daz is right on. the performance with the 100 was excellent, but acceleration from vertical was MUCH better with the 120. The 91 had enough power for sport aerobatics and would hang on the prop but thats about it. The extra weight of the 120 didn't seem to effect the plane, but the extra fuel consumption shortened the flights. I have not had the problem with my tank, but I have seen this before with seamed tanks from a number of manufactures. The Dubro is probably a good idea just for peace of mind. :^)

Thanks for the advice!! I think I am going to go with the Saito 120 (and get the Dubro 14oz tank).

DK

Kangke (Super Kraft) does a great job building their arfs and the draw back is they are a little heavy which is not a problem in my book. We have a lot of Super Kraft models from Caps to Extra's Texas Hurricanes and Staudeckers (sp) and they are all great models but they need a little more motor than they call for in the manuals. One of the guys that has their cap not the sport version has a GMS 1.20 in his and performance is outstanding. We have been flying Super Kraft planes in our club for three years and no one has had any complaints except for the hardware but everyone of them is powered way past the specks in the manual.

If you have the Saito then go for it! If you have not bought a motor, consider the 91FX or 108. The 108 provides killer vericle with 15X6 APC. The 91 will come in just under the 108 in power. Between 3 of us we have the CAP(friends), Staudacher(friends), and the Extra(mine), the Cap has the 108 the other to have OS 91's. Have not seen any of these that flew poorly yet! What ever you chose, you will not be disapointed. You might consider upgrading the hardware though.

I have a OS 1.08 on mine. Flies pretty good but in my opinion, its just a little to heavy. I do agree with upgrading the hardware if you plan to use 3D throws. The landing gear are also weak. Has anyone found a good replacement for them?

Haven't ordered the engine yet. A guy at the field was saying that a YS .91 may be a good choice. He said that the fuel tank could be located further back on the CG because of the pump and that this engine has more power than a Saito 100. Anyone have any thought on this engine? Thanks.

DKflyer, the YS91 would be a very nice choice of engine for this plane. I'm not sure of the weight of the YS, but I can tell you with the Saito 100 I had to add some weight to the front to get the proper balance.

Chris100, I too am looking for some stronger landing gear for the Kangke Cap, and the Kangke Gs300. They are both very weak, I'm gonna call TNT landing gear tomorrow to see if they have something stronger that will drop right in, here is a link to their site: http://www.tntlandinggear.com/


Daz...

Hey Guys!! I even went so far as to try and get the plans for the Sport version of the Superkraft cap [the one with the longer tail] so i could blow them upscale and make a bigger plane for a gasser engine, But they are a closely guarded secret like everything else in China. Saito 100 with a 15-6 zinger gives me excellent vertical here in Logan, Utah. Elevation 4,500 feet

Just curious where you'se guys have yor Caps balanced? Mine is the regular non-sport version.

Its still best upside-down and I dont know the specs for the standard length CAP. If you fly the long tail version, you wont go back to the standard one

I can't remember the exact number but it was at the rear of the factory spec. A big mistake many people make with this and other planes like it is to balance too far back. The plane will become very twitchy and will snap too easily once you get past 30% of the MAC. It flies very well anywhere in the factory range with no bad habits.

One more question,

What type of servos do I need for the CAP? Do I need any high torque servos (and if so, what do you recommend), or will my standard Futaba 3004's work? Thanks,

DK

The 3004's will be fine for the ailerons, but for the rudder and elevator it really needs 60 oz or better such as the Hitec 605BB or 625MG if you like metal gears.

Dkflyer, like Outcast said, std servos are fine, I used futaba 3004 servos on elev, I installed dual elevator servos, and I installed pull/pull on rudder with a Hitec 625MG. Daz...

What he said. I have standard bb 43 oz. for ailerons and 605's on pull pull rudder and arrow shaft elevator.

I'm trying to find the instructions for recommended cg. All I have is a couple of sharpie dots on the fuse. It only takes a tad of elevator inverted so I imagine it's close.

Hey Cabane, what are you doing with my plane Daz...

Cabane,

I just recieved mine today, and checked the instructions for the CG. It says the limits of the CG are 3" and 3.5" from the leading edge.

Later in the manual under "Advanced Flight Trim", it says for CG fine tuning, "roll inverted, neutral elevator to two clicks of down trim. If the model descends, move the CG aft. If the model climbs move the CG forward. CG movement should be no more than 1/4 inch at a time." I'm not sure if that means that you can go outside of the 3" to 3.5" limits or not.


DK

Kangke is known for consertive C.G. locations.
They use 26-27% of the MAC. Its a good place for the test flights, but over time you'll move it back.
DKflyer, I followed that advanced trim section and can tell you it works. In fact save it cause it works on any plane. :^)