Was wondering if any of you guys have experience with this one.. Its for sale at tower for 250.00 plus they have a 25.00 off on the web..!! Seems cheap enough.. I fly 3-d some and also like clean pattern lines.. Love vertical snaps!! Just thinking this would be a cheap giant arf to practice with for my 35%er.. I know its a narrow fit, but have any of you used a light gasser on this bird?? I really dont like the mess, and fuel cost of a big glow-guzzler! Maybe the new brillelli 40cc?? Or the evo/mvvs 35cc?? Let me know, thanks!

I just noticed what Tower was selling it for a couple days ago, and have been researching it ever since. I agree with you...It does look like a pretty good deal for a plane of that size. I also hate the mess, and cost of glow fuel too! [:'(]

I have a MVVS 2.15 & a MVVS 1.60 sitting around that are both in need of a home, but I'm leaning toward putting the MVVS 1.60 with a tuned pipe in the Obsession. I originally bought the 1.60 to put in a OMP 80" Edge, but changed my mind, and decided to go with the 2.15 in that plane. So I've been looking for a plane for the 1.60 ever since.

From everything I've read so far, it seems like an O.S. 1.60 with a pitts style muffler has more than enough power for the Obsession. (although this is based purely on what I've read, and not from my own experience). The MVVS 1.60 with a tuned pipe puts out as much, if not more, power than the O.S. with a pitts (the O.S. 1.60 is a little stronger on a tuned pipe though). So my only concerns are whether you can mount a tuned pipe on this plane, and how difficult will it be to balance the model with the extra weight up front? I've heard that the fuse is pretty narrow, and some are having trouble balancing it with even glow engines! So I don't know if you could fit anything much bigger than the 1.60 in the nose. The MVVS 2.15 is quite a bit bigger, and a lot heavier. I didn't believe it until somebody told me, but the MVVS 2.15 weighs almost as much as a DA-50! [X(]

We still got a little time left to make our decision before the $25 off deal expires, but I'm real interested (as are you) to hear from anybody that has any experience with this plane. I'd especially love to see some videos, but I haven't seen any of those around yet.

Mark

P.S. - I heard that ground clearance becomes an issue with anything over an 18" prop too.

3d romeo.. Thats the only thing that worries me is not being able to do a gas setup on this bird.. If it goes over a .90-120 glow engine, I dont want to pay the fuel bill. Besides I still have to many glow planes left, and only a few gas, and want to make my next ventures gas or electric. Would do an outrunner e/setup on this, but could you imagine the $$$ of the lipoly setup for this one!!!!!!!![X(]. I have been so tempted to just buy the thing recently.. Would like to find out some more info on guys with a gas setup...

I just emailed Carl Goldberg about what they thought about using a MVVS 1.60 (Gas) engine in the Obsession. I haven't heard back from them yet, but I'm guessing they will write back saying that they don't recommend it (since they don't mention gas engines in their specs). I've had similar responses on other Goldberg models.

If I do end up buying the Obsession, and putting it together (which is another problem in itself....I build VERY slowly, and sometimes not at all), I'll definitely write about my experience in this thread. Right now it's a big 'IF' though? For one thing, I've been out of work for awhile, and have to plan out my airplane purchases real carefully. Secondly, the weight is a major concern. Since most people don't recommend going over 11 pounds (12 pounds at the absolute most) with the MVVS 1.60 gas engine. I'm guessing the Obsession will come out some where between 13-14 pounds from what I've read. The only thing that gives me a little hope is that I've read from several people that said it performs nicely using an O.S. 1.60 with a pitts style muffler, and the MVVS 1.60 with a tuned pipe puts out more power than this setup. The only penalty is that the gas setup weighs at least a 1/2 pound more than the glow setup.

If I don't end up buying the Obsession, my only other choice right now for an airframe for my MVVS 1.60 (in the same price range) would be the Hanger 9 FuntanaX 100. It's got 150 sq. in. less wing area, but the projected weight is 2-3 pounds less than the Obsession! It may be possible to use the MVVS 1.60 in the FuntanaX 100, and still come in around 10-11 pounds!

I feel the same as you though...I'd like to get to the point where all my planes are either gas or electric. I don't like having to drive 40 miles to the nearest hobby store to pay $14-$15 per gallon for glow fuel. I don't like having to bring glow plugs, glow drivers, starters, and any other glow related equipment to the field, and most of all...I HATE CLEANING UP AFTER FLYING!!! Right now I still fly some glow planes, but unlike you, I don't like using any glow engine larger then .46 (even though I do occasionally use my trusty old O.S. 90 4-Cycle when the application demands it).

Mark

Mine rocks with an OS 1.6 FX in the nose. There is another very long thread about this great airplane you all may want to take a look at.

Good Luck.

How did it balance out with the 160?? Thanks!

I finally got a reply from the people at Goldberg, but it wasn't really helpful at all.

"We have never tried a gas engine in the Obsession. Good Luck. The fuselage has no hole for a tune pipe but modelers have called us that have put a pipe in."

All I know is that time is running out on the $25 off at Tower, and I still don't know whether I'm going to buy the Obsession 3D, or the FuntanaX 100 for my MVVS 1.60? []

The strange thing about it, is that it is too long to meet the 2X2M pattern rules and very heavy at around 12 lbs. I don’t understand why they did that way?

I built one of these over the winter and have had several flights with it. I have a YS140DZ in there, and it will hover at about 1/3 throttle. All-up weight is 11.5 lbs, which is amazingly light for a plane this size. Speaking of size, it is HUGE, especially the length of the fuse. Be sure you have a way to get it to the field.
At about $250 at Tower, I think this is probably the best bargain out there. The plane will LOCK into a hover, and fly graceful pattern moves as well. Unlike a UCanDo, it will spin and tumble nicely. You can do an inverted flat spin that stops and hovers. I'm thinking that Goldberg is dumping these at $250, so I plan to buy a spare in case they discontinue them.

I just noticed the Funtana reference, 3D Romeo. I have an H9 Funtana 90 (the yellow one) with a YS120. It is a good plane, but has a few flaws in my opinion. I think they improved the landing gear with the new Funtana 100, so that may no longer be an issue. But mine has a tricky tipstall if you push your luck too much. After being used to the more forgiving UCanDo and the Obsession, this almost cost me the plane. Overall, IMHO the Obsession is more impressive to look at and more fun to fly than the Funtana 90. Hope this helps with your decision.

I have a Saito 180 in mine and it's NICE!

John

John,

Do you recommend the Saito 180 or the 150? That is where I am stuck. I have heard various opinions between the two and don't want to under power it. Also, are you running a pump?

My thoughts are to absolutley go with the 180. When I go straight vertical from take-off, you will need that extra power. Plus there are many more options with a 180 after the obsession in long gone. No pump on my 180. It runs flawless without it.

Put the 180 in it and have a blast.

John

Thanks for the info Snowmass...but it came just a little to late.

It was a hard decision, but I ended up buying the new Funtana X 100 a couple days ago. I found a place that had it in stock, plus free shipping. So it only cost me $220 (which is what the Obsession will cost you with the new $30 off special they have going at Tower right now).

I agree that the Obsession will probably gather allot more attention on the flight line, and I was really impressed with it's size considering what it weighed. If I was using an O.S. 1.60 it would have been a no-brainer, but with an MVVS 1.60 gas engine I was scared that it would come out to heavy. So rather than take a chance I decided to go with a plane that I knew would come out within the weight requirements of my engine.

As for the Funtana X 100, it sounds like they did address both of your major concerns. They lengthened the landing gear, and made it carbon fiber too. They also redesigned the airfoil of the wing to make it more stable in high alpha-flight, and added side-force-generators to help knife edge maneuvers. I just read a review on one, and it came in at 9-1/4 pounds. So I should be able to come in somewhere around 10 pounds with the gas engine. That's about 3-4 pounds less than what I'd guess an Obsession would come in at with the same gear.

For $220 the Obsession is still pretty tempting though.

I was stuck between the Obsession and FutanaX 100 as well but weight is always proportional to size so comparing the two on weight alone is not an not apples to apples comparison. I decided to crunch some numbers and thought I would post my findings.

The Obession is much larger (really a 27% size) than the Funtana 100X with 155 sq. in. more in wing area not to mention the larger span and length. The Obsession might be better compared to H9 27% Extra 260 ARF but the Obesssion is still lighter, bigger (especially in length), cheaper, and has 129 sq. in. more in wing area than the Extra 260. The FutanaX 100 example in Model Airplane News had a weight of 9.23lbs with a wing loading of 19.22 oz/sq. ft. At 10 lb the Funtana X 100 wing loading is 20.79/ sq. in. A 12lb Obsession would have a wing loading of 21.89oz/ sq. ft. I don't think I could tell the difference between the two unless I was at an expert level of skill. At 11.5 pounds that drops to 20.97 oz/sq. ft. A wing loading of roughly 24 oz/sq. in. at 13 lb is pretty darn good for a 27% airplane. There have been 11.5 lb versions of the Obsession and that was without replacing the aluminum wing tubes or LG with carbon fiber, lighter wheel, etc. so 11 lbs (20.07 oz/sq. in) might be possible with some work (hmmm...). The few I ask about the weight though say not to waste my time trying to lighten it up so that is a good sign. I did crunch some numbers for a better comparison of size and the H9 27% Extra 260 has a wing loading of 26.41oz sq/in at 13lb, which is notably (2.41 oz/sq. in.) higher than the Obession given that their Extra is 11 inches shorter.


My main concern with the Funtanax 100 is that knife edge is great with the SFG's but that assumes they survive "every" landing and transit to and from the field. I am leaning towards the Obesssion just because at 12 or 13 pounds it will still do everything without CFG's and the size and look are pretty impressive. That rudder is massive (roughly a foot). They did make some changes in design to the FutanaX wing to improve stall characteristics and high alpha. Also, to me the SFG's are a band-aid that addresses the knife edge ability versus fixing the overall design. That said, the downside to the Obesession is that engine selection/weight is more critical due to the narrow cowl and balancing, it is not legal for most competitions, and if you want a four stroke engine it is going to cost a lot more but you don't need a gasser. I also found it interesting that there is only a $60 difference between a Saito 125 and 180. For the power folks out there, there is only a $160 difference between a Saito 220 and 125. I only state this obvious info on the engine prices because with Towers current price of $220 on the Obsession, that is exactly $160 cheaper than the H9 27% Extra 260 ARF which covers the difference in the cost of the engines.

I think I just made my final decision. Obession and Saito 180 (or 220 if someone talks me into it) and eat the difference in what I will have to spend on larger servos which I can use in another plane down the road anyway. I think a 220 would be too much but if anyone feels different please speak up. The 220 weighs 7.5 oz more so balancing might be an issue but I could opt for two large rudder servos and move the battery back to help with that since it has spots for them. The 220 would be nice for a future plane but I am afraid flying around at 1/3 throttle wouldn't be any fun or as reliable. Also, a 20 inch prop on the Saito 220 is only going to leave about 1 inch of clearance (aggh!) John, what throttle setting are you at most of the time on the 180? What size prop? Is it mounted inverted? Just curious ! Thanks for the feedback on the 180 John. That helped with my decision.

Thanks for your observations rustypep, along with all your wing loading calculations, but weight IS a real issue where 3D flying is concerned. True, the size and design of a airplane will make it better suited for some maneuvers. But if your engine won't hang it on the prop for maneuvers like a torque roll, or give you adequate vertical pull out power, you could have a wing loading of 1 and it still wouldn't be of any use. I'm not one of those pilots that require my airplanes to blast out of a hover like a rocket, but there is a certain safety in being able to pull out when things go awry down on the deck. This wouldn't be of any concern to those of you just doing lazy circles around the field, but for those of us that are into 3D flying this is a major factor when deciding on an airframe.

Also, while there is no arguing that a big 4-Stroke would be an excellent choice for the Obsession. Just as several people have mentioned that the O.S. 1.60 is a great match for this airplane. The original thread starter (taildragger21), as well as with myself, were more interested in whether a gas engine could be used on this airplane with any success? We both don't like big Glow engines, and are looking for something to put a Gas engine on.

The Funtana X 100 review I was referring to was indeed the one in Model Airplane News (Sept 2006), and something you brought up about the SFG's was also one of my major concerns. They do look dangerously close to the ground in the only photo they show of it on the ground! I was wondering whether they could even be used off of a grass field, like I fly off of? I guess I'll find out when the plane arrives later this week.

It sounds like we both agree that the Obsession is a very impressive looking airplane though! I just wish it was a little better suited to my MVVS 1.60 engine, or any other gas engine for that matter. []

I think you missed part of my point on weight but overall I think our concerns are the same on both planes, which is what makes the decision so hard. The Obsession won't take a gasser without a re-build so it needs a messy and hungry glow engine and the SFG's on the FutanaX are going to be trying but you need them to get the max out of the plane. You also will need to run a pump in the Obsession if you want to run a two stroke. I also prefer Monokote but I lose on both with that one.

That said, if he wants a true practice plane for his 35% and must run gas than it might make more sense to get a true 25%-27% plane setup for that. I think it would be difficult to put a gasser in a FutanaX 100 at 10+ pounds and get the same performance out of the plane, which was designed for the Saito 125 at 9 or so pounds or less. The original Futana was already on the heavy side, not as stable, and for many not the ideal 3D plane. They did correct the stability issues though and the others are still to be decided. I also have two H9 planes in my hanger so I had to warm up to the Obsession but it is growing on me. My only concern is it is going to get cut from the Goldberg lineup and parts will be hard to come by. Good luck either way.

Well I bought one (6 months ago) , and got it together last weekend...GMS 1.20 2-stroke off of E-Bay, looks like a real low time motor, I left the factory tank mounted over the wing center section, but the needles were a little sensitive to the long distance fuel draw (no pump), so I moved the tank up behing the firewall, the original tank is too thick to squeeze into the area, so I picked up a DuBro 20 oz. Fit perfectly. Fuel draw is good, 16x6 APC and after experimenting with several props a 3 Dead Stick landings...she is a real floater but comes in a little fast when deadstick. My fourth flight today was perfect, landed like a butterfly with sore feet. Tracks nice, reminds me of old pattern plans from the 70's just bigger. She has a really long fuse, that tracks like an F3A bird. I am not into 3D that much, but it is a great buy at $249.00. Mine has Harley-Davidson Custom made graphics on it, so it looks a little different. Fun plane!!!