rosbertos

Have been doing a lot of reading and have narrowed my search down to three planes...

1) Sig 4 Star .40
2) Tower Kaos .40
3) H-9 Pulse .40

I currently fly electric warbirds and have owned two glow planes before...a Goldberg Eagle II trainer (good plane, but became bored with it) and a Florio Flyer .60 (kitted by a local guy, got a good deal on it but was wayyyy too fast for my second plane). I am now looking to get back into a glow plane but don't want a "screamer", just an all around fun plane that will do some basic aerobatics without a lot of Tx mixing/butt clenching [X(]. I fly from a short grass field that can get pretty rough in the spring. Will any of the three planes mentioned suit? Any opinions would be appreciated. Thanks!

Bob Laine

My Feedback: (91)

They're all good kit's but I personally would choose the "Kaos" from the ones you've named. Bob

Woody 51

The Kaos or the 4 * 40. Whichever you can get the best deal on.
Both are good, tried and proven models that have been around for many years.

khodges

My Feedback: (1)

My vote is for the 4-Star. Flies fast, flies slow, docile, great performing, nice all-around plane.

aussiesteve

Having a lot of personal experience on rough grass strips, I would go for 4* as my first choice and the Kaos as my 2nd choice. All 3 are excellent planes but I think the two above are just that litle bit stronger.

da Rock

I'd go for a Tiger2.

Yeah, I know it's not on the list, but a 4* 40 is and the Tiger2 looks better and flies better yet looks somewhat like the 4*.

I fly both a 4* and a Tiger and the 4* is really more of a trainer type. The Tiger will do just about everything but still lands nice and slow and handles wind better.

Cyclic Hardover

My Feedback: (3)

4 Star but go with the 60 size

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

I agree with darock, Get a Tiger II

If you want to stick to your list, take a serious look at the Pulse. I saw it in Toledo and was very impressed!

Bob Laine

My Feedback: (91)

I'll only say this in regards to the Kaos. Although it's and older design true, It has WON more pattern type contest than the other three combined. The plane was designed by, Ed Kismirski, back in the late sixty's-seventy's, so it must have something. I suspect that most of the comments that you're getting about the Tiger, 4-Star, Hanger9 plus, et their owners have never had an opportunity to fly a Kaos. I really think that if some of the older pilots in this hobby, read this thread, they would agree with me in regards to the "KAOS".

Jake Ruddy

My Feedback: (40)

This is exactly what I was going to say. I built a 4 star as my 2nd plane and first kit and was later told I should have gotten a 60. The 60 is easier to see ad flies better. Its not even that much more money.

THe 4 star actually has less wingloading then the Kaos although both are extremely light anyhow.. 18-24 Koas being 22-24 range.

rosbertos

Thanks for your input guys.....between the Kaos, Tiger II, and 4* which do you feel are made of higher quality components?

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

I would have to say that the 4* probably has the best quality, but the Tiger is the easiest to build

Bob Laine

My Feedback: (91)

rosberto.......... I have owned the 4* 40, 60, and 120. It was excellent. I have owned the Tiger 60. It too was excellent. As to the flying characteristics between the 4 star, and the Tiger, I liked the Tiger better. Perhaps because it was a low wing plane. However, if I were a relatively new pilot, then I would probably choose the 4*. I haven't flown the new Kaos, but I have flown the older one that was built from a kit. I have only heard the reports from those that have bought the new ARF, and they've all been positive. Even though it's not a "Flat" bottom wing, it never the less is a very good flying aircraft, without any bad tendencies. The flying prowess of the "Stick" type planes are legendary, and they aren't flat bottom wing either. Good Luck with whatever you decide to buy. You can't miss with any of the 3 that you've named, or those that others have mentioned. Bob

TideFlyer

Concerning the 4*s, please be advised that they are well known for their ability to float forever on approach when carrying much airspeed at all.Just wanted to add that since you said you fly off of a short field. Having said that, they`re fine planes and RC classics for sure.

catracer343

I had a Four Star 40 that I built from the kit. (well two of them actually!) This is a great flying plane! If I was to build another, I would add a counter-balance type rudder and shorten the wingspan by 4-6!QUOT! to help it roll a little faster. The only weak point that I found after dumb-thumbing both of mine is that they tend to snap in half directly behind the wing. I'd be willing to bet that if you add some carbon fiber or fiberglass to the inside of the fuse right in that area, there should be no problems. I used a Magnum Pro .46 and an OS .46SF on both of mine and I think for everyday flying that they were fine. If you are looking for 10-15' take offs on a grass field and more vertical performance, you may want to consider a .50 size motor for it. All in all, I do plan on owning another one some day! Good luck with your decision. -Craig

Zippi

My Feedback: (10)

rosbertos,

I have a friend at the field that has the H-9 Pulse .40 with an OS .46 AX and it fly pretty good with plenty of speed and it lands really slow. It lools like a very nice ARF and if I was into small planes thats what I would go for.

suitcase

My Feedback: (1)

I think you're looking to build from a kit but if not, the Pulse is only $10 cheaper than the Sig Mayhem. It's a great looking plane and since I'm flying the 60 size myself, I can attest to the quality of it. It builds light, unlike the H9 planes which always seem to come out heavy for me. It will do anything you want it to and land like a trainer. I consider it a great second plane. http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...?&I=LXJKE3&P=0. I used all the supplied hardware, with the exception of ball links on the servo arms. A OS 46AX will fly the heck out of it. I personally don't like planes with wire gear and nose wheels[:@] The wing is built just like a stick and they fly great and float in for landing. Give it a look.

skorman

My Feedback: (3)

I saw a H9 Pulse today at my field and it is a surprisingly good looking plane in person. Flies nice on an OS 46AX.

Tcat1000

My Feedback: (34)

Hmmmmm......Tough choice...........I have both the Tower Kaos ARF & the Goldberg Tiger 2 ARF. The Tiger 2 will be a little more docile in the air (take off & landing too) than the Kaos. The Tiger will take less runway & also land a bit slower. The Kaos is a bit hotter plane also. The Tiger is also easier to see in the air. I have a OS 50 SX on both of them, so it's a good comparison! The Tiger also uses a two servo setup with hatches on the under side of the wing. It's a little different setup. 5 servos for the Tiger........4 servos for the Kaos. I would recommend the Tiger 2.....

Barry

s. wallace

My Feedback: (24)

Sorry Bob but the Kaos series was designed by Joe Bridi. I agree though that they are a great airplane, but my experience is with the 60 size, not the 40 size ARF of today.

Ed Kasmirski designed the Taurus (and earlier Orion).