Does anone know whatthe differences between the Great Planes Piper J-3 Cub 40 kit and the Great Planes Goldberg Anniverserykit are?

Thanks</p>

The GP is a much easier build then the CG kit. For the most part it is the wing in the CG kit that takes a lot more work. Other then that the parts count and the use of light ply in the CG kit is a bit more. It's been a while sense I built the GP kit so I have forgot quite a bit of the details. I just finished the CG kit last week. If I was going to build another one I would do another GP kit but that could just be because of the really poor die cutting I ran into with the CG kit. Flight wise there isn't a nickles worth of difference.

To add a bit of clarity, Great Planes and Carl Goldberg used to be separate companies. Several years ago Great Planes purchased Carl Goldberg Models and added their model to the GP lineup. Thus he two different Cub kits in the GP line.

I believe the Goldberg kit has strip ailerons and GP kit has built up "barn door" ailerons, which should be a little more scale.

I have built one GP Cub and 2 CG Cubs and have to agree with GrayBeard, the GP Cub builds easier and more scale like and the kit is much better. If your going for scale go with the GP Cub. The fuse has more of a scale look and the tailfeathers buildnicer. The wing is easier to buid too,and out of the 2 cubs , would be the best for scale. BUT!
. I prefer the GB, just because you can turn it up with a Saito .72, clip the wings, max the throws and have a blast with it. The GP Cub does not respond to this as well, stilll nice flying plane, but you can not pound on it likethe GB.
If you go with the GB Cub, reinforce the landing gear and the cabin wing mount areas. The supplied platic cowls in both kits are junk.

Thanks for the info. I was looking at the tower hobbies site and wasn't sure what the diff was but then I went to the Great Planes site and it became clear that GP had acquired CG like Tarasdad had said.

I'm thinking of the GP kit because you all agree it's easier and I haven't built a plane in at least 10 years and just getting back into it. The last one I built was the GeeBee Line Sea Hawk. Things sure have changed, there aren't as many kits available ( at least in the tower catalog) and boy have the prices gone up. I was digging thru my junk and found an invoice for the 40 size great planes floats from 2000 for $39.99 now they are $79.99 and they don't offer the smaller ones anymore.

Any way back to the cub. I want to put a 4 stroke in it what do you recommend, ideally this will also fly on floats:

Magnum xl52 (very inexpensive compared)
Saito 56
Saito 62
OS 56
Thunder Tigre 54
or something else

From what I'm reading the 70'sare a bit much.

Thanks,

If you were just flying off terra firma I would agree that a .70 is more than you need, but since you want to fly off water, I would go for the larger displacement. I have an O.S. .70 Surpass in a Goldberg, and it is much more than is need, but I do not fly on floats.

The one I just finished is a float plane, the CG Cub. The owner bought the fiberglass specialty's glass cowl, very cool, built in engine on one side, all molded in. He also bought the one piece LG. It's heavy but it isn't going to bend or break on rough landings. I built this plane with two servos for the elevator and ailerons. I used the knock outs on the bottom to make hatches in the fuse for these servos plus the servo for the rudder. I installed a pull/pull system. The owner didn't have a .70 FS so he had me install the OS .91FS. Way over kill but it's what he had on hand. By installing everything behind the CG I was able to get the plane CGed and it's just a little nose heavy. When he adds the floats he should be able to get the CG nutral.
After the pilgrim mentioned the built up ailerons I flashed on that, he is correct. The main thing I noticed was the wing though, the CG wing is really over engineered and strong as a any I have seen. The wing isn't going to break unless it is a total crash, it's stiff as a board. The build on the CG Cub isn't really hard, there is just more work to it and it takes longer. The CG is a much stronger plane. I did make some mods because of the engine used and it being a float plane.

The gp cub i built had no problems with handling my rough landings, but i did use oak instead of the landing gear braces that were in the kit... it went together good, looked good and flew good. Easy build. Great quality kit.
dan