Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > Kit Building
Reload this Page >

Sig vs. Midwest Citabria

Notices
Kit Building If you're building a kit and have questions or want to discuss kit building post it here.

Sig vs. Midwest Citabria

Old 03-14-2003, 02:54 AM
  #1  
ilikeplanes
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: portland, OR,
Posts: 1,058
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Sig vs. Midwest Citabria

Besides the size difference, how do they compare. I'll be using a Saito 72 which should be hot in the Sig and mild in the Midwest. I think I want this one to have a more scale type power to weight ratio.

Any comments?
Old 03-14-2003, 04:35 AM
  #2  
Den B
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Addison, IL
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Sig vs. Midwest Citabria

Hi I have been flyin my Midwest all last year with a Saito .91 and I don't think the ..72 would do the job very well.
The Sig is a builder kit more so than the Midwest and will be more work but will be a very nice plane.
The Midwest is a 60 size plane with a 80" span and a geat flying plane very strong and durable too.
So I would say if you have the 72 waiting for a plane go for the Sig.



Den
Old 03-15-2003, 02:35 AM
  #3  
Walter D
My Feedback: (16)
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: palm harbor, FL
Posts: 716
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default Sig vs. Midwest Citabria

One of the best and most fun airplanes I've ever had was the Sig Citabria, in the looks department is top notch, and flies like a dream, had mine powered with a ST .51 and it was perfect so the Saito .72 should be right on the money, I also flew mine off water, easy build, but it does however have many parts, mine was covered with supercoverite and painted with automotive enamel, a great little airplane. (very aerobatic too!!)
Old 03-15-2003, 05:39 AM
  #4  
Lightfoot
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: MS
Posts: 3,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Sig vs. Midwest Citabria

I have not even seen a Midwest Citabria but I have an A&A Citabria. I know that this is not one of those mentioned but I feel compelled to mention it. It is a Bud Nosen design but it is not a scale model as it is touted to be. It resembles the Citabria but is not true scale. The A&A kit is inexpensive but it cost me more to replace the bad wood than the original kit cost.

I was so disappointed with the kit that I started looking for another one. I ordered the plans for the Sig Citabria and I was so impressed with the design that I bought the kit. I have not started to build it but I can't wait to get started. I have other projects on the board now and simply don't need another one taking up space.

R/C Flight Unlimited
Old 03-15-2003, 03:03 PM
  #5  
tailskid
My Feedback: (34)
 
tailskid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Tolleson, AZ
Posts: 9,502
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default MW all the way!

I've flown my MW Citabria for over 4 years and w/ Saito .91 is one of the best flying birds in the 'fleet'....builds fast - in fact it took me longer to cover it than build it!

Jerry
Old 03-16-2003, 04:29 PM
  #6  
ilikeplanes
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: portland, OR,
Posts: 1,058
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Sig vs. Midwest Citabria

I ordered the Sig from my LHS. $99.99. I decided the MW would be a little too big for the Saito 72. I also wanted a "builders" project to keep me busy during those rainy spring days that we seem to have so many of in Oregon.

I did some research on engine weight. I was amazed to learn that the Saito is only 1 to 3 oz heavier than most 40 to 50 size two strokes. I also knew that I will be more interested in "burning it up" rather than "put-putting".

The last issue is how "scale" do I want to build it. I may try fabric and paint covering. I hate painting though. Oh well, time will tell.

Thanks for the comments.
Old 03-16-2003, 06:42 PM
  #7  
doctor jason
 
doctor jason's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Essex, AZ, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default Sig vs. Midwest Citabria

sig is best !
Old 04-12-2003, 08:20 AM
  #8  
sporty982000
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: IL
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default sig citabria

hello,

I just ordered the kit,

new to r/c planes and building.

was hoping that sig citabria builders or owners could help me out with some info.

I have not found yet some info that I am looking for. I do not know if it comes with the kit.

what size wheels to use, front/back ?

what size fuel tank will fit and to use ?

I was thinking a .40 engine 2 cycle, but thought maybe that it will be to small, since I see some of you use a much bigger engine.

2 cycle .35-50 cu
4 cycle .45-61 cu

what size prop should I use ?

building tips needed and any other info that may be usefull.

I am thinking monokote but not for sure if this is the way to go for this plane ?

thanks

sporty
Old 04-12-2003, 12:47 PM
  #9  
Lightfoot
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: MS
Posts: 3,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Sig vs. Midwest Citabria

Since mine is not built yet, I can't say what would be the best combination. I can only tell you what I plan to do. I am going to use a Thunder Tiger .46 with an APC 11x5. The Citabria should do well with a good strong .40 but that little extra power of a .46 should give better performance. The 11x5 prop will give more scale like flight characteristics.

If you are planning for it to be a strictly sport plane, go with a plastic covering. Personally, I want something more of a stand-off scale and I would like to have a fabric covering. I have not decided what type I will use but I have plenty of time to make that decision.

Good luck,

R/C Flight Unlimited
Old 04-12-2003, 07:49 PM
  #10  
gimpy55-RCU
Junior Member
My Feedback: (9)
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Ashton, ID
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Sig Citabria

I built the Sig Citrabria this past winter, this is a fantastic kit to build very fun for a stick kit. I powered mine with an Enya 80 4stroke which should work great as in Idaho where I live we are above 5200 ft. As soon as the wind quits blowing mach 10 we'll give her a test flight. I finished mine with Tower Coat in Orange and white. I used the wheels recomended in the kit and the same with the tail wheel. As I always put a bigger engine in my kits because of our altitude I install the biggest fuel tank I can stuff in. I have built almost every Sig kit available at this time and have enjoyed building them all. I am sure you will enjoy building and flying yours also. As this kit weighs 71/2 # per the box, I would go for a bigger engine than the 40 or even the 46.

Gimpy55
Old 04-12-2003, 08:57 PM
  #11  
sporty982000
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: IL
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default citabria

thanks,

Getting some good info from everyone, can not thank you enough.

Thanks,

the rookie

sporty
Old 10-16-2003, 06:21 PM
  #12  
somethinextra
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: IL
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Sig Citabria

Greetings Citabria fans!

My Sig kit is almost finished. I kinda messed up by keeping the original center aeliron servo instead of going with individual servos in the wing - but the wing is built now, and all the control rods are run, and it works really slick on the bench.

I am powerering mine with a OS .91 Surpass - I know, its a lot of motor. However, its only 2 ounces more than the OS .70 Surpass, so I went with it.

Im going to use 21st. century fabric, white on the bottom, and Cub Yellow on the top. I have enjoyed building this kit, but as a Sig "Craftsman" kit, which means you get a box of sticks and go for it, it has taken a while. Im glad this is not my first kit. Directions leave a bit to be figured out by the builder, but buy way of personal experience I can tell you that Sig is very friendly on the phone with questions!

Blessings!

Andy
Old 10-16-2003, 10:09 PM
  #13  
dennis
My Feedback: (90)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Minersville, PA
Posts: 1,872
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Sig vs. Midwest Citabria

My flying buddy had one with a Saito 65. This was one of the nicest flyers that you could want. Even better then the one I had in 69.
We all took turns at spot landing with that plane it never seemd to dissapoint any of us with it's great flying habits.
I better qualify this and say that I'm obviously talking about the Sig kit
Dennis
Old 10-17-2003, 07:23 PM
  #14  
Yak18
My Feedback: (11)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Panama City Beach, FL
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Sig vs. Midwest Citabria

I had a Sig Citabria back in the 70s. It was built heavy with tons of carpenter glue (before CA) and several heavy coats of Hobby Poxy paint (before I knew how to paint). It was underpowered with a Fox .45 but man did that plane fly great! Steady as rock at all times...landed like a feather. Even with only a 71 inch wing it's an impressive airplane on the flight line. You will love it.

Yak
Old 10-18-2003, 08:18 AM
  #15  
LSP972
Senior Member
My Feedback: (13)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Zachary, LA
Posts: 4,749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Sig vs. Midwest Citabria

In view of all these glowing comments on the Sig version, one can assume it doesn't have the nasty snapping tendencies of the Great Planes offering?

Sounds like a good building project for an OS 70 Surpass...

Steve
Old 10-18-2003, 07:28 PM
  #16  
Miloh
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Springfield, TN,
Posts: 843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Sig vs. Midwest Citabria

Gimpy55:
My fuse with 21st century fabric, 2 mini servos, 1 standard servo, Rx, and battery pack comes in at 1 pound 10 ounces. The wing with 2 standard servos comes in at 1 pound 1/2 ounce. this is less than 3 pounds. I still have to put the wheels and the cowl on but I can't see this thing weighing in at any more than about 4 pounds less the motor. I could be off by maybe a half a pound or so. this is a pound less than my Avistar and my tower pro .46 had unlimited vertical on that plane.
I think a .46 will pull it fine for scale flight.

Miloh.
Old 10-18-2003, 10:07 PM
  #17  
MikeSell
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
 
MikeSell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Flushing, MI
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Sig vs. Midwest Citabria

In my observation an impecably built Midwest Citabria flys as well as any thing I've seen while one that is just put together leaves a little to be desired. On one of these a four stroke .90 is just right. They sound scale and have a enough more performance than scale to be fun. These are considered Giant Scale planes and are qualified to be used in Giant Scale events.
The Sig is smaller and easier to transport. Everything about them is more affordable. In the air they appear about the same size. I just don't like hearing a two stroke screaming during an otherwise scale flight. An OS .72, .80 Enya .80, Saito .65, .80 are all good choices for these planes. (I have 2 1/2 Sig Citabrias now)
My son flys a Pilot .20 size Citabria (54" span) with an OS .35s at about half throttle. It sounds acceptable too. I am scratch building a 1/2a size Citabria now at 42" span. There is little choice on using a two or four stroke in it.
Old 10-19-2003, 11:54 AM
  #18  
LaCerne
Senior Member
My Feedback: (16)
 
LaCerne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Bartlett, TN
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Sig vs. Midwest Citabria

Anyone ever notice that the Midwest Citabria is actually a Decathalon? The Citabria has a flatbottomed wing, while the Decathalon is semisymetrical wing.
Old 10-19-2003, 02:27 PM
  #19  
MikeSell
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
 
MikeSell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Flushing, MI
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Sig vs. Midwest Citabria

The symetrical wing is why I've seen my friend's keep up with a Cap 232 in aerobatics at a local field. The pilots switched planes and the Cap pilot stated he wished his flew as well. (The Cap pilot is a regular exibition pilot at local air shows)

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.