RCU Forums - Best first KIT PLANE???

RCU Forums (https://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/)

- Beginners (https://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/beginners-85/)

- - Best first KIT PLANE??? (https://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/beginners-85/10248436-best-first-kit-plane.html)

RE: Best first KIT PLANE???

Quote:

ORIGINAL: scooterinvegas

Quote:

ORIGINAL: rrragmanliam

Quote:

ORIGINAL: scooterinvegas
In my opinion, there is NO advantage to building a 40 over a 60.

I can think of one. If all you have on hand is a 40-46 engine !

Your looking at it all wrong. If you only have a 40-46 engine, the advantage to building a 4*-60 is you are completely justified for buying a new 95AX for it! :D

:) I like the way he thinks!! Although both the 4*40 and 4*60 are similar it is generally acknowledged the 60 flies a bit better. IMHO

RE: Best first KIT PLANE???

thanks for the info everyone

RE: Best first KIT PLANE???

Quote:

ORIGINAL: OzMo

Quote:

ORIGINAL: scooterinvegas

Quote:

ORIGINAL: rrragmanliam

Quote:

ORIGINAL: scooterinvegas
In my opinion, there is NO advantage to building a 40 over a 60.

I can think of one. If all you have on hand is a 40-46 engine !

Your looking at it all wrong. If you only have a 40-46 engine, the advantage to building a 4*-60 is you are completely justified for buying a new 95AX for it! :D

:) I like the way he thinks!! Although both the 4*40 and 4*60 are similar it is generally acknowledged the 60 flies a bit better. IMHO

Granted, the 60 "flys better", but that goes without saying that any of the 60 "upgrades" fly better than their smaller counterparts (Goldberg Tiger II and the Tiger 60, for instance), and that's not necessasrily because it's a better flying plane, it's mainly because it's larger, more visible, and handles a bit more smoothly and a bit less reactive than their smaller counterparts. And, as Gray Beard said, it has good visibility, important to us old codgers and for those recently solo'ed pilots looking for a second plane to hone their contol. It's great to see what the plane is doing when fed input from the transmitter.

I've owned the Four Star 40 and the Tiger 60 as well as a Tiger 120. The Four Star 40 was more agile than the Tiger 60, but again, that was due to the size and weight differences. BUT, I will say this: these are fine flying planes for anyone seeking a good, solid second plane.

My Tiger 60 originally had an OS 62, then later on I put on a Super Tigre 75 with a tuned pipe. Personally, I think the OS .95 two stroke is a tad much for that plane Based on the performance of my OS .75 on the Skylark 70, I'd opt for that engine. But, if a 90 size engine is desired, I'd go to an OS four stroke, which i've also flown on a Tiger 60 and it was very reactive, even for a 60 size plane!! Nice flyer, in other words. Very capable.

CGr.

RE: Best first KIT PLANE???

Quote:

ORIGINAL: whoareyou310

I've built several ARF's and I would like to build a nice first kit with very easy instructions. Any recommendations? A .40 size would be ideal, probably a trainer just for simplicity sake. thanks for the suggestions.

Well, if you've (assembled) several ARF's I assume you have some flying experience.

I would recommend the Sig "Somethin" Extra with a .46 size engine on it. It almost falls together, easy to follow instructions and is fun to fly.

Unfortunately, I lost mine after only 25 flights in a mid-air collision where 2 other planes were flying the oval the opposite way.

big dan

RE: Best first KIT PLANE???

I have the Little Something Extra that I converted to electric. It is a real performer!! Nice plane, good handling qualities too.

CGr.