flygilmore

Thinking about getting one of these kits for a future build. The Sportster .40 was the first plane I ever saw fly back almost 15yrs. ago and I have built both the .20 size and 90 size but they were for other folks. So, never having owned one, I am interested in the .60. Anyone care to share pics, thoughts, insight to this bird? I would be very appreciative!

Thanks.

ggraham500

My Feedback: (4)

I fly the GP Giant Super Sportster with a 26cc gasser or a Saito FA-150. What a fantastic plane. Highly aerobatic for an intermediate pilot such as myself. It is an old standard and very solid. I can only imagine the .60 size is the same.

daveopam

My Feedback: (9)

The 60 size is the best of the series IMHO. The 90/120 size is close but the 60 has lighter wing loading. A strong 60 2 stroke will pull it around great. If you want unlimited verticle a 75 OS would be my choice. If you want it to knife edge add about 1/2" to the rudder.

david

DaveB

Nice airplane. Good flyer. I build mine with tricycle gear and if I had to do it again I would build as a tail dragger. Although it's a .60 sized airplane, I powered mine with an OS .46 FX because that was what I had available at the time. It flies scale like with the .46 and will do all the basic maneuvers, but with the .46 it's not a "hot rod". The wing is attached with 4 wing hold down bolts as opposed to the usual 2 with dowels, but that hasn't been a problem. All said, it's a good choice.

DaveB

ChuckW

It is a fun, classic airplane. I had the .40 ARf version and built the .60 kit version. I want to do another 60 with retracts.

Mine seems to knife-edge pretty well. I did modify the elevators to allow for more rudder throw though. Maybe that helped.

The .75-AX flys it like a rocket.

flygilmore

So, what do you think about a Saito .82 spinning a 13x8 or a 14x6? The .82's will spin a 14x6 around 10k.

ChuckW

It will fly it and you;d probably be happy if you are into a more relexaed flying style. I think a little more power would help the plane fulfill its potential though. A good high performance .61-.75 2-stroke is excellent. For a 4-stroke, I'd go at least a .91 or something like an OS 1.10, YS 1.10, Saito 1.00, etc.

Edwin

My Feedback: (2)

I flew mine with a ST75. Pretty much ballistic. Its about 15 years old now. Been retired for 4 years. I'm only guessing but I think I have well over 200 hours on it. A good tough plane. The only suggestion I would give would be to make the fuel tank accessable. I had a hatch on mine that was just tack glued down and monokoted over. Its one of the planes I suggest to students as a low wing trainer.
Edwin

FLYBOY

My Feedback: (11)

I too like the 60 size. I flew it with retracts and a Webra 61 with a pipe. Was a blast. Can't find any pics of it though. That bites. I have another kit though for some day.

flygilmore

I was just wondering as I had heard of people using an OS .70 4strk. and I know that the Saito .82 has more power. I have a couple of Saito 1.00's that I can use so I am in good shape. I am more or less wanting to get the kit and put it up for a rainy day.

The guy that taught me to fly back 15yrs. ago was letting his son fly theirs last year (had an OS 1.08 on it[X(]) and it would scoot!! It also after 3 laps fluttered on a level pass blowing the back half of the fuse to bits, smacking the runway so hard it "bounced" back up in the air a good 75-90ft!!!!! Kind of scary!

Edwin

My Feedback: (2)

I can see that with a 1.08 on it. I just sold a 1.08.
Edwin

silverwings

My Feedback: (21)

I had an old version of the Super Sportster 60 I bought in 1986 and finally put it together 17 years later. I covered it in Super Coverite and it came in over 10 lbs. with about a pound of lead in the nose for balance. It still flew great with a Magnum ringed 61, though. I also installed a Magnum 75 abc and it was even faster. The firewall became loose after several years of flying and I pulled all the covering off and had a lot of fuel damage to the wood. I used cornstarch and heat to get most of the oil out of the wood. I then used epoxy to re-glue the front end back together. Mine had very heavy wood in the tail feathers, so I drilled lightening holes in all the tail surfaces to lighten them up. I recovered it with monokote and ultracote combination and removed all the lead from the nose. I had come into possesion of a new/old O.S. 61 fsr abc with the 3 needle valve pattern carb on it that I installed in the new version. This combination proved to be a real hot rod. The plane weighed over 2 lbs lighter and was a joy to fly. Another mod I did was to move the main gear just ahead of the wing, which was one of the better mods I did to this plane. The wing mounted landing gear were not very sturdy, especially when flying off grass.
I would suggest checking the wood for the tail feathers before assembling to make sure it is not too heavy. I also have one of the newly released kits and noticed one change immediately that I like. They replaced the vertical grain fuse doublers with 1/8" lite ply. I think this will be even stronger in this area. I plan to build the new kit when I get a chance so I can have another SS60 in my stable for when I get the "need for speed" at the field.
Here are pics of the two versions. The yellow was the Coverite and the John Deere was Mono/ Ultracote.
Unfortunately, this plane met its demise when I got it into a flat spin too close to the ground and could not recover in time.

GarySS

My Feedback: (13)

I flew my Sportster with a Saito .91 4 stroker which puts out about the same amount of power as a .82. It had unlimited vertical while doing aileron rolls so I don't know why you would require more power unless you enlarge all control surfaces in an effort to turn it into a 3D machine. But the dihedral would not be good for that. I have recommended before if using the stock wing gear as a tail dragger to reenforce the hardwood blocks with some light ply to keep them from splitting. The wire torque inside those blocks can split them along the grain. Also widen out the two elevators to give your rudder more room to swing. This will require a new wire joiner and some reshaping of the elevators themselves....

Gray Beard

My Feedback: (-1)

I was using the SS in both 40 and 60 size as a teaching kit for people that wanted to learn to build kits. One of my all time favorites!! Then I started using the 4*60 because it is an easier build and a little better first plane from a trainer. The SS is a much better stunt plane though and I think I will be going back to it. I have another 4* on my bench and really getting sick of seeing them. I was using the .60 or .61 in the SS but I think today I would use the OS .75.

ml3456

Love this plane. I have a ST 61 on a pipe. But make the rudder a little bigger.

ML

flygilmore

Sounds good. I was planning on cutting angles on the elevators to get more throw for the rudder and I may go ahead and add just a hair to it while I'm at it. I mainly got this plane for good all around sport flying as I have purpose built aerobatic and 3D planes to handle those tasks. I have always liked the look of the Sportsters, in fact I think the first RC plane I ever saw was a .40 size with the red/yellow starburst pattern for covering......man was it beautiful, fast too!!!!!!

Anyway, my kit came on Wed. and I went through it right away. Not a whole lot of wood to it but what was there looked really nice! Lightweight, good cutting/sanding I was pleased with everything. I think that I will do the traditional yellow base color with the red star burst pattern whenever I decide to fuild it.

flygilmore

So, looking ahead to joining the wings on this build and wondering if a ply dihedral brace should be used even though it is not mentioned on the plans or instructions???? I will be adding the 6oz. cloth to the wing joint and wodered if the joiner would be just added weight that's not needed?

I did add sheer webs even though the plans and instructions didn't call for them (surprisingly), widened the elevators for more rudder travel and really beefed up the wire mounts in the wing and the ribs that accept the landing gear blocks. I added side and top pieces to hopefully prevent the torque block from splitting. I do land my models very smoothly but still wanted a very strong LG setup cause I don't want to try and get back inside that wing to fix something broken!! Any other tips/insight would be appreciated!!

rambler53

My Feedback: (494)

Glad you know, I literally drove 250 round trip miles to pick up a SS 90/120 in beautiful shape, it was $150, complete but underpowered with a Super Tigre 90, which wouldn't idle for beans. What would you suggest I throw on it instead?

I have a TT Pro 1.20, FX91, FX 1.60. I want unlimited vertical, 1.20 it is?

jrbmoto

flygilmore
You asked for tips/insight, well here's my 2 cents... You did the right thing by reinforcing the gear mounts in the wing. However, if you haven't started building the fuse yet, I suggest you install a 3" wide chunk of 1/4" ply in front of the wing just in case at some point you decide to install a fuse mounted gear. I did this after a couple of not so smooth landings. Since then, I have come to prefer this setup because the fuselage is always sitting on its 3 wheels even when the wing is off. Makes transporting easier and I think its more durable. Just a suggestion... Good luck and post some pictures!!


-Johnny-

nitrobomber

Rambler53....I am looking for an st90. would you be lokking to get rid of the one you have ? If so, PM me.

flygilmore

I decided to go ahead and do without the ply dihedral brace. I added 3/32" sheer webbing 6 bays out and then also 2 bays on the other side of the spar at the center section. Hopefully will be enough.


Nice looking Sportster you have there with the fuse mounted gear. I think that the wheel pants really makes a model.

Bax

My Feedback: (11)

If you build the airplane EXACTLY to the plans and instructions, you will find that the wing is quite strong. Shear webs and ply wing joiners are really not needed if the other parts of the structure are properly-sized and of appropriate stiffness and hardness. The old Bridi designs, such as the Kaos, Super Kaos, and the Trainer 20/40/60 series didn't use shear webs nor plywood wing joiners. They had properly-sized wing spars, and the wings had sheeting from the leading edge back to the main spar. Cap strips over most of the ribs, with some full sheeting in the center of the wings. The wings were joined with 6-inch wide fiberglass cloth that was applied with polyester resin or slow-cure epoxy. I never, ever saw a properly-built wing on those models fail due to the structure.

Today, many models are built very, very light. This allows them to perform 3-D type maneuvers easily. However, it also means that the structure is less than adequate for some types of flying. It also makes those types of models less durable than others, and so they will not take much abuse of any kind. If you land them on anything but the wheels on a less than smooth surface, you can expect to take some damage. It's part of the price you pay to get such maneuverability.

If you build the Great Planes Super Sportster 60 as dictated in the plans, with good glue joints (that means NO GAPS!), then it will be a very strong model and last you quite a long time.

As far as the landing gear blocks are concerned, the ribs have plywood added for strength, there's a hardwood support on one end and you add a gusset at the other end. If you use good-quality epoxy, you don't have to add anything else to make the installation "stronger". The only reason to add structure would be that you lack confidence in the designed structure or your adhesives.

daveopam

My Feedback: (9)

I would do the 1.20 of the ones you listed. If I was buying a motor for it, I would get a OS 1.20AX. Think about a set of flying wires on the tail or limit your elev throw on high speed stuff like split S's. I lost one cause I handed the radio to a guy who procceded to do a full throttle split S. The stab broke at the fuse.

David

Edwin

My Feedback: (2)

What Bax says is true. I built my SS60 when I was a novice and cart wheeled that plane down the runway a few times. Just dusted it off and flew again. However, it did fail the high speed pass through the tree's test. Must have been the 3" limb. Just built a new wing and was flying again.
Edwin

flygilmore

Finished the wing and got it glassed with a 6" strip of 6oz. cloth which turned out very smooth....looks and feels very stout! On to the fuse now. Planning on a Saito 1.00 just cause I have one laying around. I actually was going to use an .82 but when I lined them both up on the firewall, there was only a few millimeters difference in where the throttle arm/carb inlet etc. line up so I figured I'd just go with the bigger engine. I am figuring it will need some nose weight anyhow as the solid tail feathers are hefty. I thought about building up the tail as I always do but decided against it and chose to build this one "stock" so I could get an honest assesment of how this plane is. The kit came with the new ply fuse doublers but the build manual is the "old" one so it doesn't refer to that. Someone not knowing about the kit changes would get pretty confused about this. Overall, going very smoothly and quite enjoyable-one of the easier wings that I have built in a while I might add!!

Only thing I am not liking is the prop clearance....it is going to be tight with a 14" prop I am afraid! Planning on a 14x10 for the 1.00-that ought to make it scoot!