ICE_MAN

Hey guys,

I'm an ARF guy but really like building things.. I have plenty of exp. rebuilding ARF's and have built a C/L P-51 (but It was WAY to Easy)

I would Like to build my first "real" Kit.. I Fly advanced aerobatics but want this kit to be A Sort Of work Horse. So I'm thinking Either A Sig 4* 40 or 60, A tiger 2 (I have a 60 sized arf), A sig Somethin' Extra, A GP Pt-60, Or A GP Cub..

Lots of choices I know but I like (And will build all eventually) all of them and that all seem like they could be flown every weekend.. I'm plannin on using this plane to just mess around with and to break in/ test new equip. or engines.. Thanks Guys!

RICK2682

My Feedback: (22)

Go with a Sig 4-star. It is a very easy build,reasonable price,and cool plane.I had a ARF.60 size and it was a great plane.Had a Saito 91 in mine,If i was going to build another one I would go with a Saito 100.Aslo if you do it, clip 1 bay of each wing end makes it even better.It is a trick I learned from a guy on here by the name of JJ FRESTYLE.

Rick S.

carrellh

I built a PT-60 for my first kit. It has really good instructions and it went together really well. It's a pretty docile plane for an experienced pilot but I think it's great as a first build.

saramos

I will second the choice of the 4 *. I built the .40. I'ts a straight forward build with good instructions, and a good flier. Only item that I would have liked to see included in the kit would have been a servo/receiver tray. I also upgraded the clevises to ball joints. I use an OS .50SX in mine. Lots of fun!

Good luck on your build, whatever your choice.

Scott

Safebet

My Feedback: (12)

Look at a Top Flite Contender. Read the reviews on it. Ck them out at Tower Hobby.

jagnweiner

My Feedback: (1)

Iceman-

I'll differ a little bit from the others and recommend the GP Cub. You say you already fly advanced aerobatics, so I wouldn't bother with a 4* or similar plane. A PT-60 would be just another trainer. A Cub would be something completely different for you. Despite the fact that they look sort of like trainers, Cubs aren't trainers.

I built a GP .60 Cub for my first kit. Although it took me a while to build, it was just because I took frequent month-long breaks. They have excellent instructions and are not particularly difficult for a first build. You will also learn a lot of good building skills. I fly mine with a Saito .90, which is plenty of power and sounds beautiful. The only thing to consider is that, even though it is .60 size, it is HUGE. Wingspan is 90" (7 1/2 feet).

-Scott

ekrcflyer

I would recommend SIG Something Extra. Very nice kit with good instructions. The "end product" is well known and pretty reliable "bird" too.

wascamp

My Feedback: (1)

As q first kit I would reccommend the T-rex from Mosqutio bite planes. It is big and flys very well. they call it a trainer, but with a larger engine it would be quite a performer. Plus, not everyone has one. The contruction is straight forward and it goes together fast. Their customer service is top drawer. Check it out. They are at www.mosquitobiteplanes.com.

The plane pictured below was build by another builder, It sure is pretty.


P.S. I don't work for them. But I really like their kits. See my TriPacer build in this forum.

Gravityisnotmyfriend

My Feedback: (2)

I'm building my first kit, a Great Planes Dazzler. So far, I can recommend it as a first kit. I've had a couple of screw-ups, but nothing that couldn't have been prevented if I had read the instructions more carefully. As it turns out, 1" and 1 1/8" look alot alike, if I had used a ruler I wouldn't of had a problem. Assuming that all GP kits are the same quaity, I would recommend any of their kits.

TexasAirBoss

My Feedback: (22)

I second the Cub Idea.

It is nice to have a broad range of airplanes in your fleet to choose from.


They are slow, but they ain't always easy to fly.


And there is nothing, I mean nothing more fun then landing a Cub in a crosswind. I'm not being facetious either. Crosswind landings are a hoot and nothing is prettier than a Cub on one wheel leaning into the wind tracking straight down the runway. You just have to do it to understand what a thrill it can be.

And build a big one !

carlbecker

My Feedback: (3)

I would third the Cub. I have not built the GP version but have built the Balsa USA and Sig 1/4 scale. The BUSA was my first kit. Lots of stick! Cubs are very different and fun to fly!

ICE_MAN

Well guys... I just got my dad an O.S. SF for his X-mas present(joint owner ship of my old trainer) which leaves My ST G-51 out of commision... I like both the 4* and Cub the best, but which one between those two?

jagnweiner

My Feedback: (1)

Well, since I voted this way once, I'll vote again: Cub. You don't have a Cub yet. You essentially already have a 4* (your Tiger 2). I haven't built a 4*, but I think the Cub would be a little bit more interesting to build and a little bit more of a challenge. Also, someone above recommended that you build a "big" Cub. The GP .60 Cub is big, but still uses normally .60 size equipment. The only thing I did was use a high torque servo for my elevator. I probably didn't need to, but decided to be safe. Everything else is standard equipment. How many other planes are IMAA legal, have a 90" wingspan, but use standard servos and a .60 engine (although you will want a .91 4 stroke).

-Scott

edit: Here's an idea. You can go to Tower Hobbies website, find the GP Cub, and download the instruction manual. Take a look through it and see what you think.