Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
#1
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Bentleigh EastVictoria, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
Hi, I'm after some info. on the Bud Nosen CITABRIA, mainly the most popular engine size suited
for this model, I'd like to use a ST 2000, though I could be tempted for going to a GAS engine as well.
Any helpfull recomendations would be very much appreciated!
dove.
for this model, I'd like to use a ST 2000, though I could be tempted for going to a GAS engine as well.
Any helpfull recomendations would be very much appreciated!
dove.
#2
Senior Member
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
GO GAS! Cheaper fuel, less messy, seldom needs tuning after break-in, almost NEVER flames out, provides usually needed nose weight.
Everyone I've talked to who's built and flown this plane has used a Zenoah G-38.
Beware, Citabrias tend to snap easily.
Dr.1
Everyone I've talked to who's built and flown this plane has used a Zenoah G-38.
Beware, Citabrias tend to snap easily.
Dr.1
#3
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Monroe, NY
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
Have one with a G-23, Fits in fiber cowl well, CG's is very good with no extra weight. Use plenty of rudder on take off and let it build up air speed and you should not have a problem.
#4
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
ORIGINAL: dove57
Hi, I'm after some info. on the Bud Nosen CITABRIA, mainly the most popular engine size suited
for this model, I'd like to use a ST 2000, though I could be tempted for going to a GAS engine as well.
Any helpfull recomendations would be very much appreciated!
dove.
Hi, I'm after some info. on the Bud Nosen CITABRIA, mainly the most popular engine size suited
for this model, I'd like to use a ST 2000, though I could be tempted for going to a GAS engine as well.
Any helpfull recomendations would be very much appreciated!
dove.
Funny... I also have a Nosen Citabria kit up next on the building board. I bought a new, old stock S2000 to power it, but have been strongly discouraged from using that engine (not just in the Citabria, but in general) by more experienced guys at the club.
I'm currently trying to find out if the new, improved carb barrel (with straight guide slot) from the ST 2300 will fit in the S2000's carb. If it does, I'll try using the S2000. If not, I may buy my first gasser for it.
Good luck with your model,
desmobob
#5
My Feedback: (243)
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
11.5 lbs dry weight, Magnum 1.08 two stroke. Great performance and strong aerobatics.
Just about any 1.0 and up engine will fly this plane extremely well if weight is in proper proportion. Mine is monokote covered, used Sig Spacewalker wheel pants, built wood cowl from the plans with resin/Lusterkote paint finish. A G-23 would have been perfect but didn't have one at the time.
Just about any 1.0 and up engine will fly this plane extremely well if weight is in proper proportion. Mine is monokote covered, used Sig Spacewalker wheel pants, built wood cowl from the plans with resin/Lusterkote paint finish. A G-23 would have been perfect but didn't have one at the time.
#6
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
If you mount the elevator servos in the rear, a gas engine should balance without adding nose weight. If you mount them just aft of the pilot posistion in the fuse, a 120/150 size 4 stroke works well.
#7
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
ORIGINAL: Dick T.
11.5 lbs dry weight, Magnum 1.08 two stroke. Great performance and strong aerobatics.
Just about any 1.0 and up engine will fly this plane extremely well if weight is in proper proportion. Mine is monokote covered, used Sig Spacewalker wheel pants, built wood cowl from the plans with resin/Lusterkote paint finish. A G-23 would have been perfect but didn't have one at the time.
11.5 lbs dry weight, Magnum 1.08 two stroke. Great performance and strong aerobatics.
Just about any 1.0 and up engine will fly this plane extremely well if weight is in proper proportion. Mine is monokote covered, used Sig Spacewalker wheel pants, built wood cowl from the plans with resin/Lusterkote paint finish. A G-23 would have been perfect but didn't have one at the time.
I can honestly say that is the first model I've seen that looks perfect in pink. That is a beautiful job.
I might try a 25cc Brillelli Toro conversion in mine if I can't get the Super Tigre S2000 running the way I want. I better get it built before I worry too much about engines right now....
Good flying,
desmobob
#8
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
ORIGINAL: Bass1
If you mount the elevator servos in the rear, a gas engine should balance without adding nose weight. If you mount them just aft of the pilot posistion in the fuse, a 120/150 size 4 stroke works well.
If you mount the elevator servos in the rear, a gas engine should balance without adding nose weight. If you mount them just aft of the pilot posistion in the fuse, a 120/150 size 4 stroke works well.
Another beautiful model! Nice job, Bass1! Seeing these pretty Citabrias is making me anxious to start gluing some balsa together....
Happy Thanksgiving,
desmobob
#9
My Feedback: (84)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ida Grove,
IA
Posts: 681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
I have one that is about 2/3rds done I should sell. Don't have the needed time. Anyone interested let me know. i can send all the pics you want.
Yup, it's fun to build these things. just wish i had more free time.
And it's setup for a G23
Yup, it's fun to build these things. just wish i had more free time.
And it's setup for a G23
#10
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Bentleigh EastVictoria, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
Hey DR 1 ,
Thanks for the advice on the Citabria, lots of other great responses on it ,
seems the G23- G38 is the Favourite, though a big Glow could manage I gather.
Ok, you mentioned these snap!??...............is it trouble with the wing spar/ retention design???
Would like to know as theres lots of wood & time on one of these
Dove57
Thanks for the advice on the Citabria, lots of other great responses on it ,
seems the G23- G38 is the Favourite, though a big Glow could manage I gather.
Ok, you mentioned these snap!??...............is it trouble with the wing spar/ retention design???
Would like to know as theres lots of wood & time on one of these
Dove57
#11
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Bentleigh EastVictoria, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
Many thanks for your reply Dick T, AND thats a stunner Citabria! you have there!!
DR 1, mentioned these "snap" any inherent problems of the design that your aware of??
Seems the motor selection now is straight foward , though this "snapping" or I think perhaps
"wing -clap" maybe needs some ..........looking into??
Dove 57
DR 1, mentioned these "snap" any inherent problems of the design that your aware of??
Seems the motor selection now is straight foward , though this "snapping" or I think perhaps
"wing -clap" maybe needs some ..........looking into??
Dove 57
#12
My Feedback: (243)
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
Thanks for the compliments on the Citabria. It was flown for four seasons then retired, hanging in my brother in law's 50's-60's room in his huge house.
Used to get razzed about the pink, white and blue scheme but everywhere I took it to fly it won spectator's choice and was frequently photographed.
I have no idea what the "snap" comment refers to but usually means a low speed snap upon stall or landing. My Citabria floated to touchdown so slow that it rolled no more than five feet after landing. Now, if it is a snap roll you want, this big bird will snap in the blink of an eye on command.
The airplane builds easily if you like a lot of sticks, other than that it is perfectly strong as designed. The cockpit area sides in the kit are 1/4, or thicker, balsa that won't conform to the curve from the door forward. Replaced them with two individual layers of 1/8 that curved nicely. Also increase the leading edge of the stab from 0 degrees incidence to +2 minimum, otherwise you will need a lot of elevator down trim to fly level.
The plug in wings work fine and the struts are functional. Also reduce the dihedral to 1/2 to 1" per wing panel. This makes the wing look flat. If you have 0 dihedral, the wings appear to droop. This plane responds quickly to rudder inputs. Also set up the aileron differental for max throw up and about 15 degrees down. This minimizes the adverse yaw when using the ailerons.
Use a, incidence guage when setting up the struts so each wing is 0. It is very easy on these large wings to get some wash in or wash out when fabricating the strut and setting the attach points.
Funny how nobody wanted these Nosen kits when AA Industries was selling cheaply heavily on ebay. Now that production ended, guys are looking everywhere for them.
Used to get razzed about the pink, white and blue scheme but everywhere I took it to fly it won spectator's choice and was frequently photographed.
I have no idea what the "snap" comment refers to but usually means a low speed snap upon stall or landing. My Citabria floated to touchdown so slow that it rolled no more than five feet after landing. Now, if it is a snap roll you want, this big bird will snap in the blink of an eye on command.
The airplane builds easily if you like a lot of sticks, other than that it is perfectly strong as designed. The cockpit area sides in the kit are 1/4, or thicker, balsa that won't conform to the curve from the door forward. Replaced them with two individual layers of 1/8 that curved nicely. Also increase the leading edge of the stab from 0 degrees incidence to +2 minimum, otherwise you will need a lot of elevator down trim to fly level.
The plug in wings work fine and the struts are functional. Also reduce the dihedral to 1/2 to 1" per wing panel. This makes the wing look flat. If you have 0 dihedral, the wings appear to droop. This plane responds quickly to rudder inputs. Also set up the aileron differental for max throw up and about 15 degrees down. This minimizes the adverse yaw when using the ailerons.
Use a, incidence guage when setting up the struts so each wing is 0. It is very easy on these large wings to get some wash in or wash out when fabricating the strut and setting the attach points.
Funny how nobody wanted these Nosen kits when AA Industries was selling cheaply heavily on ebay. Now that production ended, guys are looking everywhere for them.
#13
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
ORIGINAL: Dick T.
Funny how nobody wanted these Nosen kits when AA Industries was selling cheaply heavily on ebay. Now that production ended, guys are looking everywhere for them.
Funny how nobody wanted these Nosen kits when AA Industries was selling cheaply heavily on ebay. Now that production ended, guys are looking everywhere for them.
Thanks very much for the building tips!
Happy Thanksgiving,
desmobob
#14
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Bentleigh EastVictoria, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
This is great info DT! many , I compile a lot of notes on future builds, the Nosen C being one of them,
I'll definately add these refinements to the plans which buy the way is all I have of the Citabria, from my
experiance with the A@A kit I had, the plans are the only worthwile items keeping from the kit! as my kit
was[:' and thats being mild about it!........the wood quality and die cutting I havn't seen so bad since I
last looked at an old 'Sterling' kit!........I'm not sure if I was unlucky but this was about 9 yrs back.....
and I heard on the vine the company had changed ownership, regardless the Nosen Citabria is still one of
my fav's!!........and after seeing yours , I need to start cutting some (lots) of wood!!!
Dove 57
I'll definately add these refinements to the plans which buy the way is all I have of the Citabria, from my
experiance with the A@A kit I had, the plans are the only worthwile items keeping from the kit! as my kit
was[:' and thats being mild about it!........the wood quality and die cutting I havn't seen so bad since I
last looked at an old 'Sterling' kit!........I'm not sure if I was unlucky but this was about 9 yrs back.....
and I heard on the vine the company had changed ownership, regardless the Nosen Citabria is still one of
my fav's!!........and after seeing yours , I need to start cutting some (lots) of wood!!!
Dove 57
#15
My Feedback: (243)
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
The kit I built mine from was over ten years old and I picked it up at a swap meet for $30.00. About 90% of the wood was very good quality. Recut some of the ply formers and ply ribs as they were ragged cut and very warped. Die cutting was good on the balsa but fair on all the ply.
An adjustable mitre saw or the Sullivan trimmer are valuable tools for trimmiing all the bevels and angles on all the sticks!
Just mailed my plans to a friend so he could repair one he had picked up.
An adjustable mitre saw or the Sullivan trimmer are valuable tools for trimmiing all the bevels and angles on all the sticks!
Just mailed my plans to a friend so he could repair one he had picked up.
#16
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: lv,
NV
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
I fly mine with a G-23. Flys great. Make sure you calculate the cg as the one on my plans was incorrect at 33% mac should be at 22-25%.
happy flying
happy flying
#19
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
ORIGINAL: brady_vv
My Nosen Citabria is powered with an OS 90. I think it flies really nice with the 90. Mine comes in at 16 pounds.
Brady
My Nosen Citabria is powered with an OS 90. I think it flies really nice with the 90. Mine comes in at 16 pounds.
Brady
There sure are some nicely-built Nosen Citabrias out there.
Good flying,
desmobob
#21
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Lee\'s Summit,
MO
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
My Nosen Citabria was covered with Worldtex fabric, painted with Rustoleum and weighed 17 pounds. It was powered with a stock Supertiger 2000 and ended up having some weight added to the tail for proper balance. The servos were located in the rear of the cockpit and mounting them in the tail would have fixed that. I ran it on Byron and Omega Supertiger fuel and once the carb was set it never had to be adjusted again (and I flew this plane for years). The exhaust residue was minimal, practically nothing to clean up. Granted, it wouldn't climb straight up or hover (for more than a few seconds anyway), but neither could the real one. The 2000 is a great engine for this plane.
Duncan Stone
Duncan Stone
#22
RE: Bud Nosen CITABRIA recomended Engines??
ORIGINAL: DStone
My Nosen Citabria was covered with Worldtex fabric, painted with Rustoleum and weighed 17 pounds. It was powered with a stock Supertiger 2000 and ended up having some weight added to the tail for proper balance. The servos were located in the rear of the cockpit and mounting them in the tail would have fixed that. I ran it on Byron and Omega Supertiger fuel and once the carb was set it never had to be adjusted again (and I flew this plane for years). The exhaust residue was minimal, practically nothing to clean up. Granted, it wouldn't climb straight up or hover (for more than a few seconds anyway), but neither could the real one. The 2000 is a great engine for this plane.
My Nosen Citabria was covered with Worldtex fabric, painted with Rustoleum and weighed 17 pounds. It was powered with a stock Supertiger 2000 and ended up having some weight added to the tail for proper balance. The servos were located in the rear of the cockpit and mounting them in the tail would have fixed that. I ran it on Byron and Omega Supertiger fuel and once the carb was set it never had to be adjusted again (and I flew this plane for years). The exhaust residue was minimal, practically nothing to clean up. Granted, it wouldn't climb straight up or hover (for more than a few seconds anyway), but neither could the real one. The 2000 is a great engine for this plane.
That's the engine I originally bought for mine when I bought the kit. Everybody and their brother talked me out of using it. I still have it, new in the box, plus a Perry carb and pump. Maybe I'll try it after all.... Finding low-oil fuel would be a problem for me though.
Good flying,
desmobob