Aw crud! Where were you a couple of days ago Mike It will have to go side or upside down because I'm not about to re-drill the firewall but that is really awesome!

Rangerman...........performance wise mounting the engine sideways is much much better. Mike went half way and it works for him. The majority of Ultimate owners mount the engine on its side. I think you're worrying too much, just build it and fly it. You'll be better off with the engine sideways, as most of the guys suggested to you. My Funtana Saito .72 4/s is mounted sideways, and my lateral balance was only off a fraction. Mounting your Saito sideways, is much easier to reach the glow plug, your high/low speed needle.

I also have a 3D profile (Burrito) again it has a Saito .72. and it is mounted sideways. Excellent performance.
My Waco bi-plane the Saito .91 is mounted vertically. The cylinder sticks out just a little, and when it is up there you can't even notice it. I just went with my feelings. The safety of the aircraft and performance is more important than cosmetics. If I wanted to install it sideways or inverted, I would have had to modify the engine mount railing to keep the same engine trust line. Inverted my engine trust line was going to be out by 1/4 of an inch. It was important for me to build it as shown on the plans. The mods I did to have two servos on the wings instead of one servo and bell crank which I eliminated. Other Mods interplane and cabane struts, aileron pushrods. I used the aluminum airfoiled kind and replaced the crappy hardware that was supplied. If you visit RCSCALEBUILDER.COM and click on Pica-Waco 1/6 thread.........you'll see that bi-plane during the building process. That thread is over 97 pages long, but very interesting.
You'll be fine.
Charles.

sorry sent in error. Read previous reply.

Charles, good points but I don't want to argue with anyone on this so I'll keep my ideas to myself...thanks to everyone for their pictures and comments...Tim

Rangerman........be sure to let us know how the Saito 125 does!!! My brother has a world models ultimate and a saito 120 and it will hover! I'm gonna start saving my cash and go for the 125!!! If your ever down south of Big Springs, Tx, come fly with us! We have a little airfield in Garden City........Mike

Ok, fate has decided which way it will go-I mounted the engine mount too far over. I had to add two washers under the engine, this is the Saito 1.25, but I noticed my laser was a little skewed so I might take one of the washers out. The inidence was set at 2 degrees right and down and the bottom wing came out to .1 degree of negative pitch (that's .1, I figured that's close enough because I would have to add material to the front of the wing or really dig into the back end of the saddle and that is a hard chore if you don't screw it up).

Here's my incidence meter opinions:
I purchased both the Great Planes and Robart Incidence Meters.
I like the Robart for the bubble level but it doesn't seem centered with the needle which is hard to see unless your work area is really bright. It is excellent for determining level surfaces though and it is better made. If you use it without the "wing clamps" and level the plane and then put the clamps on and put those on the plane it's balanced both times
The GP is way more accurate but it mechanics have a lot to be desired. I have to tap on the table to get it to center because the pivots are too tight. There seemed to be some variances if you put just the meter on the level surface and then put the clamps on the surface but as accurate as it is it may be a lot easier to see just a little deflection. I might try adjusting it to be equal.

That's it. This is the first time to use them but they sure take the guess work out

Hey guys,

I am contemplating buying this kit or ARF or the DP. How many of you guys actually flown one yet? I have a 29% Ultimate that is a 3D machine and seriously hovers, harriers, and rolling circles awesome.

I want a smaller basher and its between this kit or the DP. Not sure if the DP is worth the extra $$ in plane and engine. Seems like I can hover this thing with maybe a Saito 1.25-1.80.

The nice thing about the larger ultimate is the elevators. It just elevators and harriers perfectly with no wing rock

Rangerman.............I've used the Robarts incidence meter, a matter of fact I use two of them to check incidences. Harry Higley has a book on Bipes excellent source for the Ultimate. You are on the right track, the wings, thrust line and horizontal stab incidences most important, just be patient . I am not familiar with the GP meter. Somebody recommended to me the Harry Higley book and I just went for it, plus a friend of mine uses the Robarts meters.
My Ultimate is the ARF, still I'm going to check it for any warping.

AirborneSGT........ if you are flying a 29% Ultimate that is a 3D great machine, you'll probably won't like the smaller Ultimates. I'm not in there. What's great about the smaller Ultimates is that they are fun to fly with less transporting hussle. Especially if you're a busy person and don't have that much time on hand. I chose the CG Ultimate 10-300 ARF from recommendations (everybody has his own reasons, can't argue that) I did some research and compared with DP. Cermark used to handle the DP. DP decided to sell them directly about one yr. ago, their size .40 was going on the market beginning of 2005. When I called DP I was told to wait till about March of 2005. I did'nt wait so Santa got me the CG Ultimate 2004. The CG Ultimate was designed by DP. The CG is a .60.
Cannot tell you which one will fly better, in your case you'll most probably like them both. If you're flying 3D you can tweek them both to your taste. Good luck with your choice.

Charles.

Let me get into this...

Just purchased a Goldberg Ultimate built from the kit. I am planning on a Saito 1.80 (mounted sideways) and will probably replace the cheesy wire landing gear with TNT aluminum and ABS cowl and pants with fiberglass. The 1.80 weighs only .5 oz more than OS 120 both without muffler (according to mfg sites). What servos are you guys using? I'm thinking Hitec 425's on airelons, 5475's (digital)in tail for elevator halves, and 5645 (digital) on rudder, pull pull mounted near CG.

Prboably won't be ready fly till late spring.

Anybody flying one with the 1.80?

Greg

Charles, I got the Robart because of Higley, and if anyone had either one it would work fine. Let's just say if I was going to buy one it would be a really hard choice but the Robart does show level which I like over having to set the GP to your datum.

Greg, I'm using JR 811 servos everywhere (2 on the ELEVATOR and 1 on each wing). I will use a micro Hitec on the throttle and my home made remote glow.
I'm going to order the gear and the fiberglass from Stan's. I think he gives you 50% off the gear with the glass if I understand it right.

Greg............I'm using Futaba servos/PCM RX. Ailerons Fut 9202 (2). Rudder Fut 9202 (1). Elevator Fut9001 (2). Throttle Fut 9001. The two elevator servos back of fuse. The pull-pull rudder servo as indicated. Total 6 servos. The ARF is supplied with fibreglass cowl, fibreglass wheel pants and aluminum landing gear. The tail wheel is CG newest one, not the plastic. The ARF is also supplied with the Du-Bro large wheels. I reinforced the firewall, landing gear block and the wing block. The ARF's cabane struts are awful to install, especially the forward connection, for guys with big hands please watch out, you'll swear like you never swore before. This area needs to be reinforced as well, it will fail if it's not. The engine mount supplied is not the same one they're showing in the manual, a bit of extra work is needed. Just have to make sure to follow the thrust line. Some of the hardware should be thrown out, I upgraded most of it. I would'nt even think about putting them even in a size .40. For the money this ARF cost CG should have upgraded the hardware. The Interplane aileron pushrods should be upgraded to 4-40. The 2-56 rods will flex. The above is just my opion, when one is paying $450CDN. for this ARF, the extra effort of replacing border-line hardware is worth it. In the end it will be a nice flying machine.

Charles.

airborneSGt. I've built several kits and now own the ARF. I'm going with, you can't build one for the ARF price. The kit has several problems the crap ABS cowl and wheelpants for one. The kit shows one servo and a bellcrank. Two servos in the wing is the way to go. That's how the ARF is set up.The ARF comes with fiberglass cowl and pants. I paid 300 bucks for my ARF there is no way you can build and cover and paint it for that. I won't even bring up the landing gear. I've got a old O.S. 91 2 stroke flies it scale and can do all the full size does. I've never seen a fullscale do a full hover anyway. I like to build so I'm by no means a "ARF Lover" but this is one case where the ARF beats the kit in my book unless someone just gives you the kit. One more thing it flies great it my "Sunday flier" Mike

Those pictures are COOOOOL!
ARFs are fine but I got these for 100 bucks each and if I were to make it a gentle flier and liked the stock covering I would have bought the ARFs. But there are a few cases with the cabanes and firewall from friends and here, plus, unless you strip the factory covering you can't personalize it. Besides, I like to tinker with stuff

Here is a picture of my Christen Eagle. Dont knock the funny living conditions; I was a single NCO (Sergeant) so I lived in the barracks.

I think I am leaning more toward the GB ARF. Yeah I have built some kits and in the end its cheaper to do the ARF! However with a 42% or some larger planes its nice to get everything exactly how you want it.

Did you guys see this engine:
http://www.bmeengine.com/html/point90.htm

Its supposed to have 20% more power than a regular .90, run 30 mins on a 10oz tank, and weigh just 26oz! Ill wait to see some flying tests on it. I have done the small gas thing with limited success.

I fly the JR 9303 synth, but I like these Futaba servos: S3102 micro mg. More reliable then the HITEC 225 series. I have had the digital and regular 225's and burned out a lot. I fly a lot of hard 3D though

I think that the GB Ultimate equipped with those and some fast digitals on the rudder and throttle would be a winner. FWIW I have two smaller DP ultimates and was able to do the same as the 29% Ultimate does in terms of 3D. Of course smaller planes are always just twitchy.

Mike, I would like to see more of your Skybolt engine mounting, thanks Tim.

AirborneSGT. that engine is quite interesting. Your Christen looks great, a friend of mine has one of those. Can't expect Hilton accomodations when you're in the military. I remember those kind of accomodations (RAF U.K.).

Can't go wrong with the CG Ultimate ARF . Any ARF or plans build require somekind of modifications. I will choose the CG Ultimate ARF over having to build it. It is a lot of work building a bi-plane. I've been there. Besides that, the ARF (CG Ultimate) is supplied with better stuff, fibreglass cowl, aluminum landing gear etc..... by the time you upgrade the plan build kit plus the covering it will end up costing more than the ARF.

Charles.

Greg, I think the 1.80 is overkill, uses a lot of fuel compared to 1.20 or even 1.50 Saito. Shake more, too.

Here's a pic of mine all together ready for covering:

Looks good! You have enough room for a smake tank too!
Have you decided on a color scheme?
That YS looks realy good, nice and clean, is that fiberglass or stock ABS?
Congratulations Pilgram!

Thanks for the compliment, Rangeman. I'd love to add smoke, but hate to add the weight. Maybe I'll try smoke on a bigger airframe that can handle the weight better without affecting the handling as much (big gasser). The cowl and pants are Fiberglass Specialties, wheels are Kavan (extremely light), gear is TNT. I'm planning on a dark blue top over white bottom with red pin stripes, like the Pitts by Cermark. How 'bout some pics from the rest of you here?

flyingpilgrim.....................that is really nice. Don't you guys get any snow ?. Looks like it's flying weather. Hurry up, cover it and let us know how it's flying. Enjoy the nice weather.

Charles.

'Just mounted the engine at a 45 because I plan on using a light weight smoke system.
The Tru Turn spinner will not fit the Saito 1.25, the hole is too big so now I've got call them.

Charles,
Don't let the grass fool you. It is still well below freezing. We had our January thaw, but it was very windy, and now below freezing again. Oh well, gives me time to build.

This is a novice builders question... Do you build up in the bones all the way and then remove everything again to cover? I have recovered a few planes and its always a pain once the tail feathers are already on. Like I said I have built a ton of ARF's and a few kits. This seems to be the case with most planes I have seen. I guess in this way it gives you a much better way to see what will or wont work. Perhaps more control over all the small details which make the plane fly better.

Garth and Rangerman--Thanks for comments on servos.

Flying Pilgrim--I know the 1.80 is large and it is a thirsty beast, but it's what I have so I am trying it. Sticks out of the cowl a good bit. Hope it doesn't shake the structure apart. I will be very "gingerly" with it.

Greg