Hi all,

I am returning to the hobby after a few years of not flying. Before the break I flew a few different trainer type planes for a few years. After coming back I have found that it did not take long to remember all that I had learned. I am interested now in a low wing type plane. I am considering also building my first plane from a kit. My previous building experience include 1 RTF, 2 ARF and 2 SPAD aircraft. I am quite interested in the SIG 4 Star and the SIG Astro Hog. I am wondering two things. Which of these two kits would be better for a beginner on his first kit build? ....and the other.... Which of these two planes would be the better "second" plane for someone just returned to the hobby?

Thanks in advance for your input.

Mark

The answer to both is the same plane, the 4-Star. Both as a kit and how it flies, this plane is a great next step from what you have told us. It's a good kit to biuld (with plenty of help here on RCU of course  ) and when it's time to fly it a great first low wing airplane. It doesn't have any bad flying habits and will do nicely for you.<div>
</div><div>In my opinion you can't go wrong with the 4-Star</div><div>
</div><div>Hope this helps</div><div>
</div><div>Ken</div>

RCKen is right on. Go with the 4 Star. Go to Sig's web site and check. I believe the 4 Star ARF's are back in stock. And they have improved them so they are even better than before. Welcome back.

Todd

+1 I think the Astor Hog is a bit more of a builder...and would make a GREAT second plane....

you cant go wrong with a four star.Dont know how old you are but my only recomandation would be to build the sixty size, easier too see. Remember to use bright colors also. This was my second plane 12 years ago, still have it, on the second engine, and three recovering jobs, love this plane!

+1 more for the 4 * take your time building and sanding it will be a real floater  when landing my next one will have one bay shaved off each wing.

I love my 4*40

That thing could be used as a trainer, and a hotrod.

G'day

I have all the planes you are talking about. I have the Four Star in 40, 60 and 120 sizes and I have two Astro Hogs, one "normal" one built from a Sig kit and another which is 80% the size of the Sig original.

All fly well though my favourite would have to be the Four Star 60 as it is just that bit bigger than the 40 and I find it easier to fly.

The Astrohog is more complicated to build and has a higher wing loading due to its relatively complex structure. Remember, it was designed back when RC was in its infancy and the average plane had a life expectancy of ten flights. (I know that the Sig kit is not the same as the original 1957 Hog and that the Sig version has been simplified but it is still a tough little bird and so a little on the heavier side).

My favourite 60 started with a Saito 72 in it and it flew well with this engine but I later put a Saito 100 in it and it flies better with the larger engine.

The 120 is particularly nice to fly (mine is an ARF though I have built the kit for a friend) but it is quite large and as a result, it does not get that many outings. If you have a large vehicle you will love it.

You might also like to consider Bruce Tharp's Venture 60. Bruce designed the Four Stars when he worked for Sig. He is on his own these days and his Venture 60 is a Four Star with its problems fixed. One glaring fault of the Four Stars is the position of the undercarriage. It is forward of the ideal spot and as a result, the Four Star must be slowed down until it goes nose high or it will bounce back into the air. It just loves to fly.

Hope this helps a bit and does not add too much confusion.

Mike in Oz

PS, that is my Four Star 60 on the left when it had the Saito 72 in it.

I love the Astro Hog but, like the others, wouldn't recommend it as a first build. It is a definite 'old style' kit. A review I saw a long time ago suggested getting your chainsaw sharpened before starting the build. After reading the manual I paid someone to build my Astro Hog, and bought a traditional high wing trainer kit for my first build.

Thanks to everyone...it looks like you all got together and agreed before you responded. I think that I will get the 40 size as I already have an engine to use. I have been looking for a good build thread to study, but I have not found one that has the detail that I was looking for. I have noticed that folks like to "mod" this kit with either shorter wings or rounded wingtips or both. What are you thoughts on that? I think I really like the rounded wingtips. Is there a good thread to study that demonstrates the "how to". I don't think it looks that hard to do. Is it as simple as gluing a big enough block of balsa to the end of the wing and then shaping with sand paper? I have been flying around a Hangar 9 PTS mustang on a limited basis. Not too afraid of the low wing. I am mostly interested in a good first build experience with a "nice" flyer as a byproduct.

The wing tips can be a carved block. There is a mention of doing it on page 16 of http://manuals.hobbico.com/gpm/gpma0177-manual.pdf but not much detail.

One of the guys in our club cut flat plate wing tip ribs for hid four star that were about a half inch bigger than the stock rib all around and I thought they looked really good. I do not have a picture.

I'm kind of partial to the Sportster series of planes. NOTHING wrong withe the Sig planes though.

Ken

Sportster series? Who makes them?

Great planes makes the sportsters series. Very nice planes to fly. I know the 60 size can be bought in a kit. The 40,60 and 120 can all be bought as ARF's. They are alot like the 4 star. When it comes to building a kit I would prefer a 4 star. The build is more straight forward. As an ARF it makes no difference to me. They are all nice flyers. Good luck.

Superfli

http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...?&I=LXJ576&P=0

I've built and flown both the 4 start and the sportster. Can't go wrong with of them. I really think the 4-star is a easier build. Dennis

Are you folks suggesting that the Sportsters are basically Four Stars slicked up a little bit?

Always loved the 4* I built the 60 first then moved up to the 120 size for a gas engine both flew wonderful. That carbon fiber Ultracoat sure made the cockpit look neat on my 120.