bikerbc

There is absolutely nothing wrong with putting retracts in your plane if you want too go too the extra work to do it .There is a certain amount of fun watching the wheels disappear when you flip the switch .As long as everything works . If you expect a big increase in performance you might be disappointed . I would go with struts instead of wire gear because I found the wire gear bent too easily and you are constantly straightening them ,then adjusting them . It just took too much time away from flying and having fun . That 's just my experience, One of my more talented buddy's put a set in his plane and his worked fine and didn't add much weight .

mustangherb

My Feedback: (6)

As far as an increase in performance, I was not expecting any. I have never built an airplane yet that I installed retracts, so this will be the first. I want my building experience/knowledge to grow, I always wanted to try this type of airframe, so when this kit came along it seemed like the perfect marriage of two things I wanted to do.

thailazer

Nothing wrong with putting retracts in the Tiger. The airplane is already pretty slick so I doubt it would speed up much more, but seeing a Tiger do a low pass with the wheels tucked up would be a pretty neat sight.

My favorite retracts were a set of Kraft electrics I had on a Pica T-28. They would crank up slow and clunky, just like the real Trojan. They weren't the most reliable units but they made that airplane look good.

On another note.... I sold my Tiger 2 last week so am Tiger-less at the moment. Wish I knew how many hours were on that thing as it flew several times a week since 2008, and it was still as smooth as ever.

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

Sounds like as good of a excuse as any to buy a new Tiger kit!

vertical grimmace

My Feedback: (1)

I have a set of these in my Sun Fli V. http://robart.com/collections/retrac...eady-w-air-kit

You can get these ready to accept a Robo strut (spring loaded) or just straight wire. I also have this same retract in a Pica FW 190. I have not had a single failure with either one. It is nice to have the spring down feature. The only thing I do not like about spring down, is it would be nice to transport the wings with the gear retracted, but that can be overcome. One thing I have had happen, are servo failures on the valve. Not sure why, probably because I threw any old servo laying around on them. This was a mistake. You want to have a good servo on the valve.

thailazer

Yeah, I might scratch build one for my Como 40 after I get my Double Scout done. ( http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/scra...s-project.html ) I still have my Tiger 2 plans and found a wood supplier that has me deep in building wood.

vertical grimmace

My Feedback: (1)

Interesting on the Como. My Sky tiger, the original with 63" wing, was powered with a Como .40. Everyone at my flying club then always told me it was under powered and said I needed at least a .45. The problem was, I was a 16 yo kid, and my only income was mowing lawns! The Como was the engine I had from my trainer. That was the only downside of the Sky Tiger then. It was a great 2nd airplane from your .40 trainer, but it did want a more powerful engine to unleash the full potential. I sure have learned a lot since then!

vertical grimmace

My Feedback: (1)

I have a question to those that have flown both the original and the re-release. Which did/do you prefer? I am thinking I may just grab up a kit and sit on it until the time is right. I would want it in a .60 size, as I would throw a 20cc gasser on it.

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

Go with what you love!

thailazer

I flew my Tiger 2 with the OS 35AX and had no problems. I would think that the Como 40 would be about on that same par as the 35, or maybe more powerful. Any idea which engine would be stronger?

Leroy Gardner

If that's the case you would love mine. Size 60 with tube mounted and sheeted wings, enhanced tail surfaces, custom cowl with a DLE 20 hid in it and a tail dragger. Flies on rails or can be uncorked and will hover, it's a blast to fly.

Leroy

Red Raider

My Feedback: (86)

That's a great looking plane, Leroy. I really like the look of the landing gear.
I put 4 flights on my Tiger 3 last night. It gets cold and dark early, so going after work is difficult, but it was worth it. You could take off one direction, turn around and land in the opposite. Wind was calm, temp was about 58. Not bad for December in the Texas panhandle. I really liked all the Tiger 2's I've had over the years, but this one with gas engine on it has to be my favorite. I usually pull my trailer when I go flying, but with only about an hour and a half of daylight and a 20 minute drive to the flying field, I just loaded the plane, my transmitter, and my gas can and took off. Fortunately I didn't have any issues where I needed this tool or that part. Just one 8 minute flight right after the next.

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

Now that is a worthwhile trip to the field Red Raider!

Red Raider

My Feedback: (86)

Thanks, Okie! It was so worth it, that I'm considering doing it again this afternoon.

vertical grimmace

My Feedback: (1)

Yah Leroy, you did a great job on that one! I am thinking I will keep mine 100% stock, other than being a taildragger, as I prefer that configuration. I may even paint it brown and gold like my original. It would seem the DLE 20 would be a perfect match. I have one installed in a Pica FW 190 and love it.

thailazer

Here's what I've been working on. Started with the dimensions doubled from a Craftair Scout plan but now that it is coming together, it is looking much more like a scaled up Tiger than anything else. (100 inch span with a 16 inch chord.) Even used my old Tiger 2 tail I replaced when I converted it to the Mooney style tail. Extended the tail's span and beefed it up and it should serve well here. Maybe I should have called it the Tartan Tiger rather than a Scout Aero-Gas.

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/scra...s-project.html

Mjet

Query: For total wingspan of 70 inches , the left wing is slightly bigger (90 cm) as compared to left wing (88.5cm). I feels that there is an error in the drawing or it an error or deliberate to compensate for the engine rotation? Expert comment please and what about your wing , both are same same wing span or has this difference

Red Raider

My Feedback: (86)

Just throwing this out there - Valley View sells a 20 and a low-profile 21 gas engine that is absolutely wonderful. I have one in a P-40 and it is rock solid. $199 unless you catch it on sale. With Valley View's unsurpassed customer service I really don't buy from anyone else unless they simply can't get it.

vertical grimmace

My Feedback: (1)

I agree, I think I have purchased 5 engines from them this year. I bought my DLE 20 several years ago before the rear exhaust/ angled plug version came out. Otherwise I would have gone with that one. My 190 has a 65" wing, but much less area than a Sky tiger. Spinning that 16-8 or 17-6 prop, would be plenty I think. I am guessing an almost perfect combo really.

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

You must be speaking about these:

http://www.valleyviewrc.com/estore/v...as-engine.html

http://www.valleyviewrc.com/estore/v...as-engine.html

vertical grimmace

My Feedback: (1)

Well, actually I am talking about the DLE 20. I have no experience with the VVRC engines, although I have not heard of a complaint. THE DLE is more expensive, but the rear exhaust and angled back plug are a big deal for me, as I mostly fly warbirds.

vertical grimmace

My Feedback: (1)

Ok, kind of excited, I got myself an original!


http://www.ebay.com/itm/321611797208

Add it to the stack of stuff.

thailazer

Nice score!

spaceworm

Hi new to this site, but I have a question. I built and flew to destruction a CG Eagle and converted in into a low wing. It flew great. I have a NIB CG Eaglet kit. I saved it to convert to a Jr Tiger. I know the Tiger wing is semi- symmetrical, and the Eaglet is not, but I thought it would still be fun to fly. Should I keep the Eaglet original and/or sell it and buy a Tiger? I am not into small planes anymore, but I do have grandkids becoming interested in RC. Thanks.
Merry Christmas to All and to All a Good Flight.

Sincerely, Richard
Cub Brotherhood #187; Sig 1/4 (Koverall/dope), H9 100 inch (Gen 1) (Solartex/?), CG Anniv Cub (NIB)
Club Saito #635; Saito 56, 100, 120abc, 130T, 180
Kadet Brotherhood #96; Mk 1 Kadet, Kadet Junior,
Sig Kougar, Sig 1/4 Cub, Sig 1/4 Spacewalker II
YS F 120

FlyerInOKC

My Feedback: (6)

Richard go with makes you happy, its as simple as that!