Admiral052

So I am looking at building and flying a new plane since I am bored with my trainer. The plane that seems recommended and good for the next step is the GP Stik. The few questions I have are these:

1. .40 or .60? My trainer is a SIG LT-40 and that plane is pretty big. I feel that maybe the .60 is a better fit since I am used to that size already
2. What engine should I use? I know the 2 stroke is the standard but I would like to try the 4 stroke. Also what size engine would be best for the 2 and 4. I have read conflicting reports about various sizes so I did look around the Forum but I am looking for a no-nonsense look at the two
3. Does this plane really handle winds and is a excellent flyer as everyone says? Is this a good next step?

Thanks everyone

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

1. Sounds like you'd be more comfortable with a 60

2. OS 91 Surpass (or the new 95) They are the best running right-out-of-the-box with little or no break-in needed

3. Yes and yes

DenverJayhawk

i only had the 60 stik. So that's what I will recommend. I'm sure the 40 is nice too though.

Over power it with a 90 sized two stroke. Cheap and easy to setup and tune. I had the OS95AX and that combo is a blast.

Stiks tend to come out nose heavy, especially with a large engine up front. I mounted the elevator and rudder servos in the back of the fuse by the stabs. I still needed a few ounces of lead in the tail after that. I glued them inside the fuse where the vertical stab opening is. Quick and easy and you don't have unsightly lead squares affixed to the outside of the fuse.

A Stik will be your best friend. You'll fly it on windy days that has everyone packing it up and heading home. I recently heard a new complaint about the stik that I found funny. The stik flies so well and easy that it can spoil you and comprise your landing skills. I never thought of this, but in a sense, it could be true. To land, just line it up and pull back on the throttle. It's probably the one model that is actually easier to land in real life than on the Simulator

Gray Beard

My Feedback: (-1)

The stick is a very old design but there is a reason they are still so popular. They are a perfect flying machine. I'm a big fan of the 60 size planes but I have flown some very small and some very big sticks. All sizes flew great. The OS .91 is also my engine of choice. To date I haven't gotten to do any real testing of the newer .95 but I have never met an OS four stroke I didn't like. I did use the SK .91 two stroke on one I assembled for a friend and that was also a great combo and at $100.00 with a muffler it's a great deal. My first choice is still the OS though. No one can ever go wrong with a stick!!

opjose

I agree with all of the above...

Can't you just feel the love around here!


I ended up putting BIG 3800mAh 6v battery packs behind the wing on a small tray I built for the stick to help balance things out.

I also moved the engine as far back as I could to help further.


The Stik will spoil you.... and it will do things like hover, harrier, etc. W/O problems.

I used to think they were ugly until I owned one.... boy was I wrong.

HighPlains

My Feedback: (1)

It kind of boils down to a couple of thoughts. If you want to use the engine from your trainer or buy another. Also consider the fuel bill with the larger engine. You have already established a good track record when you started with the LT-40, and picking a Stik for a second airplane nearly puts you into the genius class.

If you get the 4C engine, I would advise you to also buy a tach to set the needle with. While I personally prefer 2C engines, setting the engine back 300-500 rpm from peak seems to make a world of difference when operating 4C engines (your mileage may vary).

DenverJayhawk

HighPlains makes a great point about fuel. With the OS95AX, i was going through glow fuel like it was cool aid. Factor that into your cost. If i did it again, i'd probably go with a big electric setup. But if you just want to much mindless holes in the sky 15 minutes at a time, this is your answer:

Man, i should just get another one of these.

ratshooter

I have owned a couple of the Midwest Little Stiks, a Sweet Stik, several Tiger Stiks and flew a friends Big Stik quite a bit and everyone was a fine flying plane. If you are wanting to buy a new engine then maybe the Big Stik is for you. If you want to use the engine from your trainer then the 40 size makes sense.

I like 25-40 sized planes for my own taste. A little easier to store and transport and easy on fuel. My first RC plane to build was a Little Stik with a 48" wingspan. Thats what I really learned to fly on. I flew and crashed the first one until it just wasn't repairable any more. So I built a second Little Stik. Same thing. I just flew the wings off it. Then I built the slightly larger Sweet Stik with a 54" wingspan and it was the best. I used to go by myself and just do touch and goes all day long. Wind didn't matter. Wind was a challenge. Most of my own designs were just modified Stiks with a cabin added. They were allthe plane I ever really needed.

I liked the Sweet Stik so much I just found the plans with a template sheet on Ebay. I bought a copy and I plan on scratching out a new one. I may make two while I'm at it. There are no bad choices when it comes to stiks.

HighPlains

My Feedback: (1)

I absolutely agree that the Midwest Sweet Stik was the best of the Stiks I have flown. Too bad it is no longer in production. Like you, I acquired a set plans, so one of these days...

I'm just finishing up a GP Big Stik 60 with a ST 75 for power. Maybe not the best job of kit engineering, but not the worst either. Wood was somewhere between balsa and oak (honestly, some of the balsa wood was 18 lbs/cu. ft.). Yet it is going to come in at about 7 1/2 lbs when finished, giving a wing loading of about 19 oz/sq. ft. This will be my 4th or 5th stik since 1970, and I built it because I wanted a no bother, easy to maintain, cowl-less model for a change.

Gray Beard

My Feedback: (-1)

Jose, I disagree with you, your first impression was correct!!!!!!!!! Friends should never allow friends to fly ugly planes. But if it's a stick it's allowed!!!!

ratshooter

Hello Highplains. Yep the Sweet Stik was sure a nice flying plane. Just the right size and I think its a little lighter in weight than the GP Stik. I am going to have Staples make a copy of my plan so I have a pristene copy on hand. I may build the fuse on mine with stick woodistead of solid balsa sides to save a little more weight. Plus make built up tail surfaces. I also like a little dihedral instead of a flat wing. Dual aileron servos instead of the bell cranks. One poster called bellcranks slop enhancers. He was dead on with that.

I can't wait to get started. I am already getting a wood list together for Lone Star Balsa. When it gets built I will post pictures.

mike109

G'day The Stick (Stik) is a great plane and they fly really well. Bigger is generally better than smaller but I think both the Big Sticks fly well.

My first was a Thunder Tiger ARC (almost ready to cover) which I used to teach myself to land. As someone else said, the Stick is one of the easiest planes to land. Point it at the strip and it does most of the work for you.

The World Models Super Stunts is a good stick IF you get a straight one. I had one with twisted ailerons and elevator. It only lasted one flight as it was so far out of trim. A good one is really good as they are lighter than the GP ones. They are also cheaper and are available as a 40 size and a 60 size. A friend used to fly 3D with one with a Thunder tigre 46 with a Jett tuned muffler. Not the best plane for 3D but it did a pretty good job of it for basic stuff.

Until recently I had two 40 GP Big Sticks. Sadly I lost my old Super Tigre 51 workhorse when I forgot to pull the antenna up. Too much flying 2.4 gig radios. It was probably repairable but I don't think I will bother. My other one has a Jett SJ 46 in it and goes like a scalded cat. It really is fun.

The one that died recently started with an ASP (or it might have been a Magnum) 61 four stroke which suited it really well too. It also had an Irvine 40 diesel (very nice) and an old Magnum 46 converted to diesel which really hauled it round well.

You won't go wrong with a good Stick.

Have fun

Cheers

Mike in Oz

DGUY

My Feedback: (9)

I have the 60 size GP it is easy to see.
Have a Super Tiger 90 on it
Yes it handles the wind and it flies great, easy to land with no surprises. I think it may even be easier to fly than my 60 size trainer.
You will not be disappointed.

Ed_Moorman

My Feedback: (1)

I've had many Sticks in my years of RC flying (over 41), Sweet Stick, Little Stick, Joss Stick, Big Stick, Ultra Stick, Wild Stik, Giant Stick, Bipe Stick, Twin Stick and several home built Sticks with any number of wings. In my opinion, it is the best overall design in RC history. You cannot go wrong with one.

The basic design of a rectangular, symmetrical (or nearly) airfoil, shoulder mounted wing with a simple box fuselage with reasonably good sized control surfaces, hits the sweet spot of sport flying. It can be set up to be as easy to fly as a trainer and also set to fly like a wild fun fly plane.

The power can be anything, 2-stroke, 4-stroke, electric, gas, it doesn't, the plane will fly and fly well. They handle overpowering very well, but can cruise along with a small engine.

I used a Big Stick 40 for an engine test and break-in plane once. I had 16 different engines on it before I wore it out and gave it away. The Great Planes, fiber filled engine mount looked like Swiss cheese.

Sticks handle any kind of weather: calm, windy, gusty, sprinkling rain and dark, if you put some lights on them.

OS engines are great, but expensive. I have several which I love. I also have had other brands on my Sticks. Magnum engines run well. In the .46 size class, the JBA .56 is a sleeper (built in a .46 case). It turns props as well as an OS .55AX, at least on my test bench, and costs a lot less. For the 60-sized Sticks, I like a .75 or .91 2-stroke. .91 4-strokes do not have the same pull as a .91 2-stroke or even the Tower .75.

Both size (.46 & .61) are great airplanes. I would shoot for more power and learn the throttle back until you can handle it. It's hard to beat taking off, rotating 90 degrees and climbing straight up with your .91 powered Stick. Mount the servos in the rear and balance on the main spar or a little behind. The ARFs do come out nose heavy.

mambarider

How does the ultra stick compare to the GP stick?

AA5BY

The only plane in my hanger that stays on float charge is an Ultra Stick Lite 120 because it is the goto plane for windy days or a short flying session. It sets up very quickly and because it is gas powered, needs no support field box or clean up stuff and the fuel is cheap.

The plane is important enough to have a spare in the box (fortunate because it was discontinued).

Viva la sticks!

Pylonracr

As I have posted several times, I have never been without a stick in my hangar. I fly an ultrastick 40 with a modified OS61 on it now. FUN. I agree with all of the above, you can not go wrong with a stick. Get one and start flying it. It will soon become your go to plane, just like it has with everyone else who has flown one.

Have fun.

Scott

ec121

My Feedback: (2)

TexasRCPlanes.com has a selection of stick type planes. I bought a trainer from them that was like a stick/trainer cross. It was a trainer with a sort of stick type wing(almost straight with a semi-symmetrical airfoil). Just another source to look at.

scooterinvegas

My Feedback: (1)

Gas Sticks!! Love them....

dignlivn

I have the GP 60 size with an OS 120 4 stroke.
It's a fun plane to fly.

Bob

StevL

Had a GP 60 size stik with a Saito 100, most fun to date with a stik! Then a built the GP Giant Stik with a Zenoah 26ei, flew great but was slower to react than my 60 size, it just felt slower in rolls, etc. probably to the airspeed difference.

I'm now building a AMR Stick with a DLE111.... should be a monster

Ditto all the above post, you need to have one in your hangar.


Steve

padlock

My Feedback: (1)

Coming up on my third year with a Great Planes Giant Big Stik with a dle30. The slow flybys with half flaps are amazing. This is one great plane to fly and the combo makes a great 1st plane to get into gas power with.

Here is a picture of my Grandson hugging my Stik
sbdwag

cutaway

The Ultra's have a fully symetric airfoil, no dihedral, no washout. Traditionally, the commercial Ugly's format has modest dihedral and a semi-symetric airfoil, and I've never noticed washout on them. The original Jensen kit Phil Kraft Das Ugly Stick had fairly generous dihedral, a semi-symetric airfoil, ~3/16" washout in each tip, and used 30 degree differential aileron bellcranks.

The Ultra, although its general format is looks similar, is a less forgiving design than a commercial stick or the Kraft DasUS. The original Jensen kit Kraft design should be the most forgiving of the bunch.

opjose

My Big Stick .60 has NO dihedral and uses a symetrical airfoil.

The Ultra Stiks of this size also have flaps.

I haven't found ANY need for them what-so-ever with my Stik.

I also have crashed my Stik nose first in a power dive into the ground, which shattered the fuselage in four places, ripped out the firewall, tail, and central section.

Because of the simple design I was able to rebuild and recover the broken fuse, and fix the torn off wing mount in 2-3 hours... most of the time was spent waiting for the glue to dry.

The solid red covering is easier to work with than the transparent coverings on the Ultras IMHO and makes for quicker repairs.

I do like the wings on the Ultra's however.

OzMo

My Feedback: (3)

Couldn't say it any better myself! +1 0n the stick[8D] everyone should have one