Midwest Super Stinker
06-21-2003, 09:53 AM
#1
Midwest Super Stinker
I wasn't sure where to post this; finally decided to put it here because more folks would see it.
I am interested in comments from anyone who has built/flown this model. I would like to know about the kit/build quality, flight characteristics, and suitable engines.
We're talking a LONG-range project down the road; but part of the fun of this hobby is scheming and dreaming...<G>
Steve
I am interested in comments from anyone who has built/flown this model. I would like to know about the kit/build quality, flight characteristics, and suitable engines.
We're talking a LONG-range project down the road; but part of the fun of this hobby is scheming and dreaming...<G>
Steve
06-21-2003, 05:12 PM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Thunder Bay,
ON, CANADA
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Midwest Super Stinker
I just finished mine last week and have maybe 10-12 flights with it her are my pros and cons.
pro: Very well engineered kit and builds very light although the ABS parts have to go. Mine is powered with a moki 1.8 and an apc 18/10. Engine is still being broken in rich but has astounding performance will vertical forever on this. I believe the model was designed for this motor, it balanced perfectly. Takeoffs and landings are super easy. A little R rudder on takeoff is all you need. The plane will not tip stall. I tried stalling it into the wind with full up elevator the plane just mushes around and drops the nose. The other day I was making landings with a strong crosswind without any problems. It is very stable and doesnt flit around the sky with wind gusts as smaller models.
cons; This is an easy fun plane to fly but is not a precision ship. My plane rolls severely to the belly on knife edge. Although I'm not really capable I dont believe this plane was designed for the 3d stuff. I tried several attempts at torque rolling but I think it is just the pilot. Plane gets tossed around on windy days and doesn't hold lines as well as an extra.
one extra note: the moki is a sweet running engine and not a fuel hog that I expected. Starts on the first flip every time.
pro: Very well engineered kit and builds very light although the ABS parts have to go. Mine is powered with a moki 1.8 and an apc 18/10. Engine is still being broken in rich but has astounding performance will vertical forever on this. I believe the model was designed for this motor, it balanced perfectly. Takeoffs and landings are super easy. A little R rudder on takeoff is all you need. The plane will not tip stall. I tried stalling it into the wind with full up elevator the plane just mushes around and drops the nose. The other day I was making landings with a strong crosswind without any problems. It is very stable and doesnt flit around the sky with wind gusts as smaller models.
cons; This is an easy fun plane to fly but is not a precision ship. My plane rolls severely to the belly on knife edge. Although I'm not really capable I dont believe this plane was designed for the 3d stuff. I tried several attempts at torque rolling but I think it is just the pilot. Plane gets tossed around on windy days and doesn't hold lines as well as an extra.
one extra note: the moki is a sweet running engine and not a fuel hog that I expected. Starts on the first flip every time.
06-22-2003, 06:16 PM
#5
The OS160 is probably the best bet.
Mine is Moki powered. 13 pounds on my scale. Good vertical, hovers, needed tail weight...the Moki with it's wonderful radial mount is a pig. Powerful yes, but heavy, requires a long break-in period, and there is very little consistency from one motor to the next. I have my battery as far back as I could reach and still added about 2 ounces of tail weight for a rearwards CG (the airlpane is quite stable and really does nicely with the DG on the rear of the recommended point).
This airplane can easily come in at just under 12 pounds, perhaps even 11.5. The OS160 will swing big wood, allow nice battery placement, will break-in quickly, and yank the airplane around.
I agree with replacing the ABS...lighter and stronger. If you get it into 11.5-12 pounds, you will have a very 3D'able Pitts on your hands.
Mark
A picture of mine. I happend to have a Patty when the canopy went on a she looks great with her hair and earings)
This airplane can easily come in at just under 12 pounds, perhaps even 11.5. The OS160 will swing big wood, allow nice battery placement, will break-in quickly, and yank the airplane around.
I agree with replacing the ABS...lighter and stronger. If you get it into 11.5-12 pounds, you will have a very 3D'able Pitts on your hands.
Mark
A picture of mine. I happend to have a Patty when the canopy went on a she looks great with her hair and earings)
The following users liked this post:
Superklaus (03-26-2020)
06-22-2003, 07:38 PM
#6
Midwest Super Stinker
Beautiful model, Mark.
Okay, you guys have me fired up; this is DEFINITELY a project for the not-so-distant future.
But it would seem that four-stroke engine chioces are limited to a Saito 180 or an OS 240 or 300 twin. And those would stick out both sides of the cowl.
So a Saito 180 is the only thing I can think of. Don't want a YS 140.
Any ideas?
Steve
Okay, you guys have me fired up; this is DEFINITELY a project for the not-so-distant future.
But it would seem that four-stroke engine chioces are limited to a Saito 180 or an OS 240 or 300 twin. And those would stick out both sides of the cowl.
So a Saito 180 is the only thing I can think of. Don't want a YS 140.
Any ideas?
Steve
12-23-2003, 11:38 PM
#7
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: WI
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: <span class=
Steve-
I'm currently building one of these and also plan to use a Saito 180 that I have laying around. If you find out any other info, please jot it down. Also, if I come across any other info I'll post it. So far, the build has gone fairly well. I felt that some of the wing sheeting was sub-par, and quite a bit of the plywood was badly warped. Most of it I was able to get straight by the use of the doublers. I am a perfectionist, so maybe I am just being too picky. But, I thought I'd just put my $.02 worth. If there's anything else you'd like to know about it, I'd be happy to answer any of your questions.
Frank
I'm currently building one of these and also plan to use a Saito 180 that I have laying around. If you find out any other info, please jot it down. Also, if I come across any other info I'll post it. So far, the build has gone fairly well. I felt that some of the wing sheeting was sub-par, and quite a bit of the plywood was badly warped. Most of it I was able to get straight by the use of the doublers. I am a perfectionist, so maybe I am just being too picky. But, I thought I'd just put my $.02 worth. If there's anything else you'd like to know about it, I'd be happy to answer any of your questions.
Frank
12-24-2003, 02:18 AM
#8
RE: <span class=
Well, I have been flying mine for about three years now and if I were doing another I would make some small changes.
Currently mine is Moki 1.8 with radial mount also. It torque rolls very fast and quite easily. Once the nose is vertical the rotations become outrageously fast. It takes fast thumbs to keep up with the tail with such quick rotations. While it does not leap out of the hover it does climb away nicely. Mine weighed exactly 13 pounds before adding the tail weight necessary to achieve my prefered rearwards balance. My battery is as far rearwards as I could reach through the wing saddle opening.
So, what change would I make. The motor. OK, the Moki is great. However, why not go with the OS160FX and a nice lightweight mount. Lose more than a pound, have a better power to weight ratio, don't worry about a five gallon break-in period, less vibration, and mount the battery where it is easily accessable. Also, the Moki tends to quickly overheat on warmer days and THAT is not a good thing when torque rolling at low altitude. Next change...well, I had a different mind set when I bought the servos as now and saved a few dollars. Dumb idea. Get good servos with great centering. I used Hi-Tec low profile high torques on the ailerons and the airplane rolled like a big fat lady and did not stop very well on vertical hesitation rolls. Speed, accuracy and tightness is the key here. Lastly, get the fiberglass replacement pieces for the cowl and pants. The ABS cracks quickly and weighs a ton.
Anyway, with the OS160, under 12 pounds is easily achievable, perhaps as low as 11.5. With that weight and power, 3D would be much better even with the smallish control surfaces (do not enlarge them, the airplane is very short coupled and the controls are extremely effective).
All in all, it is a very easy to build (framed and ARC in two weeks in the evenings), extremly durable, flies quite nicely (great knife edge, spins, normal, knife and very very flat, violent blenders, harriers are there with reflex on ailerons, rolling is fantastic with good servos now, lands honestly and easily, and enormous tumbling capabilities) and is a great machine for shows without spending 5K plus on a true giant scale airplane.
Mark
I just realized that I posted to this practically the same thing twice. Hmm, only 38 and Alzheimers is already starting. Hmm, soon I'll go from F3A to dropping candy for the chidren with a J3 Cub.
Currently mine is Moki 1.8 with radial mount also. It torque rolls very fast and quite easily. Once the nose is vertical the rotations become outrageously fast. It takes fast thumbs to keep up with the tail with such quick rotations. While it does not leap out of the hover it does climb away nicely. Mine weighed exactly 13 pounds before adding the tail weight necessary to achieve my prefered rearwards balance. My battery is as far rearwards as I could reach through the wing saddle opening.
So, what change would I make. The motor. OK, the Moki is great. However, why not go with the OS160FX and a nice lightweight mount. Lose more than a pound, have a better power to weight ratio, don't worry about a five gallon break-in period, less vibration, and mount the battery where it is easily accessable. Also, the Moki tends to quickly overheat on warmer days and THAT is not a good thing when torque rolling at low altitude. Next change...well, I had a different mind set when I bought the servos as now and saved a few dollars. Dumb idea. Get good servos with great centering. I used Hi-Tec low profile high torques on the ailerons and the airplane rolled like a big fat lady and did not stop very well on vertical hesitation rolls. Speed, accuracy and tightness is the key here. Lastly, get the fiberglass replacement pieces for the cowl and pants. The ABS cracks quickly and weighs a ton.
Anyway, with the OS160, under 12 pounds is easily achievable, perhaps as low as 11.5. With that weight and power, 3D would be much better even with the smallish control surfaces (do not enlarge them, the airplane is very short coupled and the controls are extremely effective).
All in all, it is a very easy to build (framed and ARC in two weeks in the evenings), extremly durable, flies quite nicely (great knife edge, spins, normal, knife and very very flat, violent blenders, harriers are there with reflex on ailerons, rolling is fantastic with good servos now, lands honestly and easily, and enormous tumbling capabilities) and is a great machine for shows without spending 5K plus on a true giant scale airplane.
Mark
I just realized that I posted to this practically the same thing twice. Hmm, only 38 and Alzheimers is already starting. Hmm, soon I'll go from F3A to dropping candy for the chidren with a J3 Cub.
12-24-2003, 08:05 AM
#10
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: West Suffield, CT,
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: <span class=
I sold my Super Stinker after flying it on and off since 1998. I used the Moke 1.8 with Bisson Pitts muffler, Futaba 9202 on elevators, 9204 on rudder, and standard ball bearing on the ailerons. A good flyin aircraft but as previously mentioned, not precision and not 3-D. I mixed opposite aileron and can't remember which way on the elevator, but it greatly improved the knife edge coupling. One thing I did when building is double up the lower wing saddle (fuselage) by adding soft 1/4 balsa on each side of the fuse (match the contour). This helped prevent the wing sheeting from getting worn/squished. The Moki ran great, but a long break in.
