Race21

My Feedback: (20)

Looking to get into gas and move up to a 100cc airframe. I have been flying nitro for a while (off and on for nearly 20 years) and I want to step up. I am currently flying a Goldberg SU-26MX with a Saito 180 on it. Great plane. Lots of fun. Like the looks. My question for all of you Giant 3D gurus is this: Between a Comp-ARF Yak 55SP, an Aeroworks Edge 540 (older, surfaces a little small), and an Aeroworks Katana what would you recommend and why? I like all of them. The Edge however is a little older and the surfaces look too small to 3D (from the looks of the ailerons it looks like hovering would be very challenging!). They all have 3W power (100i B2's and the 106) and all have a wingspan between 102" and 104". All are comp equiped with smart-fly regulators and very similar servos (5945MG's). All three are local. Don't need to ship. Any and all ideas are welcomed! Even if you want to tell me to get something other than one of these three. Thanks in advance.

Rcpilot

My Feedback: (78)

Get the Comp-ARF Yak.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

Being your first 100cc plane, as much as I like the Comp Arf Yak, and having one, I'd suggest staying with wood framed for the first one. Keeps you in a comfort zone you're used to. Be less expensive as well.

The Aeroworks Katana would be my suggestion out of the group named. Easy to fly.

However, staying true to what I believe, you should take a look at the Wild Hare R/C 100cc aircraft. Their new Edge does it all and more effortlessly. Very well built and finished, large flight surfaces, designed around high performance, lighter than Aeroworks at 24 pounds with a 100, and less expensive.

I have that one too and wrote an assembly thread on it in the Wild Hare Forum. Take a look because you get to see everything involved with it.

thevirginian

I agree with the Tired Old Man. I just bought a WH Sukhoi 26 for $799.00. This plane is awesome. Comes with (priceless)"pocket hinges" on all surfaces and the quaity is second to none. Mine is powered with a Brison 6.4 (104cc). Very light wingloading.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

That's what I had in mine[8D]

Race21

My Feedback: (20)

Thanks for the replies guys. What's the "knock" on the Comp-ARF? Thin airfoil? Snappy? Difficult to repair or all of the above. They look sharp but the Katana looks like it has a lot more wing area. Thanks again for the input.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

No knock at all. They are different to work with if you've never worked with an all composite plane before. Not difficult, but different. You don't want to add any weight to one, don't "beef" anything up, and you don't want to start drilling holes all over the place. Structure wise they are a lot like an eggshell. Pretty darn tough as a unit but fragile when cracked or slightly broken. Repairs are completely different from wood planes and a bit labor intensive. If you don't know or understand fiberglass or carbon they can be intimidating to work with. Plus you can't just patch a hole in the covering with something that matches from the hobby shop. It's all painted hard surface.

Fly like a dream and maintain that "new" look for as long as you take a little care of it. Definately expensive. Now if you were to find one already done, rtf, in good shape, at the right price, there would be no hesitation about a recommendation. If you do one yourself you'll be into it an extra grand or more before you're done and it will take a lot longer for you to put the first one together.

The two easiest to fly 3d planes available are the Katana and the Edge. Personally I also believe them to be the best 3d and freestyle performers, while the Katana is also an excellent precision machine if set up right. Big Edges do pretty good but their forte' is freestyle and 3d. You can't get hurt obtaining any of the good ones. SD Models made the best Katana at 35% but they are no longer available and won't be again anytime soon..

sensei

Do you like to build? How about a 40% Carden on the diet plan...

Bob

Jake Ruddy

My Feedback: (40)

I agree with Tired... The Katana is a nice design. THe Comp-Arf is an awesome plane.. flies like a dream! HOwever you pay dearly for it and even more on a really hard landing. If you consider yourself a good flyer than the Comp Arf would be fine... the wood will be easier to fix though while you get used to flying a 100cc plane.

Since other options have been brought up. I highly recommend the H9 35% 260. They had some wing issues when they first came out.. but this has got to be one of the most under rated planes out there right now. It tracks effortlessly and 3Ds with the best of them. I was shocked the first time I had my hands on one.

SLINGSHOT-RCU

H9 35% 260. DA 100

thevirginian

Second that what Slingshot said. It's an awesome plane and super light. I witnessed one that desintigrated midair. Was definitely one of the first genaerations. But the new ones seem to stay together.

SU-13

My Feedback: (1)

Hey, Have you looked at the PAU 36% edge 540. Great 100cc plane. Builds light, and 3d's fantastic.

www.performancercaircraft.com

harv

Race21

My Feedback: (20)

All great looking planes. Thanks for the ideas. The waters seem to be getting muddier though. What do you guys think of the 50cc and 75/85cc aircraft? The latest that I am hearing around the field is that I would be happier with the 75/85cc size due to the power to weight equation. I dismissed this at first but then I looked at the output of the ZDZ Super 80 and DA-85. Pretty impressive. I fly in Denver (which makes anything Aero-works the obvious choice for convienence and support) where the model field elevations range from 5000' to about 5600'. Standard HP loss on a gas engine is about 3% per 1000' of elev so I'm giving up at least 15% of published numbers right off the bat. With that in mind I can see the arguement for a high powered 75/85cc model. Anyone have any ideas on the 50cc vs 75cc vs 100cc debate?

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

With the elevation I'd suggest a plane designed to generally fly well using an 85cc engine but use a 100 instead. Your original plan of a 100cc plane (35%) still works just fine if you stay with the lighter planes. Wild Hare, QQ, and Extreme Flight do well in the weight department. 22-1/2 to 24 pounds with the 35% Wild Hares and an 85cc engine. Extreme Flight is in the same area. Someone else will have to chime in about the weights of the 36% PAU Edge and 102" QQ Yak.

flatspinjim

My Feedback: (3)

Hi Race. I fly just north of you and quite a few guys fly 35% planes with 100cc engines and if you keep them light they have PLENTY of power. I just ordered a WH extra, can't wait for it to get here!

Sukhoi4Me

You already like Sukhois. why not look at the Wild Hare Su-26?

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

He likes Edges too and a very nice one will be hitting shore next month at W/H. Single servo BIG ailerons to boot!

flatspinjim

My Feedback: (3)

T.O.M. What engine are you running on your edge? I talked to Tom and he said he's going to start selling DLs. I followed your build on the edge and hope my extra flies as nice as yours!

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

I'm using an RCGF 100 rear induction twin. It's the original version that was later upgraded with some of the improvements found on the latest version. The DL works out very well too, with a bit more history to work with. Not many RCFG 100's out there yet, so there's not much to work with for long term life cycle. Should be just fine though.

Either engine should serve extremely well. Both are light, with the RCGF holding a slight edge in that area. Power wise it's a close match. Tom's Edge flies extremely well with any engine in the 85 to 100cc class so it' would be damned hard to go wrong. It really is among the best planes I've flown. It flies as light as a 22 pound Comp Arf 2.6m Extra 300, and that's says quite a lot. Probably the best planes I've seen fly in the 35% class have been that particular Comp Arf and an SD Katana, which is no longer available. This is easily on a par with both.

The SD had parts fit issues that took some work to correct but came out well. The Comp Arf is a composite so the obvious differences apply along with the 2nd mortgage to buy it. The Edge is the basic assembly process and literally flies together. If you had the free time you could have it done in 3 days.

flatspinjim

My Feedback: (3)

Dang it T.O.M now you have me second guessing myself. I've always been a big fan of the extras, they fly so precise. I'm not a hardcore 3d flyer, but I do like to hover and and harrier and such. Hopefully I'll get better as I keep practicing. I've never flown an edge. How is yours as far as knifeedge coupling and wing rock in a harrier?

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

I took the Edge out for another few flights today and have come to some interesting conculsions. You most definately CAN fly IMAC with this plane. Dial down the rates a little from where I have my lows at and you don't over control. Hammers real good with no tail waggle. A tiny amount of elevator to rudder mix for the KE positions takes care of any coupling that you might have based upon cg location. It holds a very nice straight line and rolls quite axially. Vertical lines are whatever you want them to be. Wind correction stuff is easy, as is inverted flight. Stall to spin will happen when it stops, so you have to plan your altitude line when you slow down for a spin. Wings drops, rudder into the dropping wing, spin, stop where you want it to.

For 3d stuff just don't "overfly" it. Like any of the big planes with big surfaces you don't want to pull high sped stuff with big deflections. It will harrier until the tank runs dry without any, again any, wing rock. It LOVES to harrier, and it LOVES to hover. Rolling maneuvers are super easy, as is total control at stupid slow speeds. The controls remain completely effective at all times. You really have to try hard to do anything wrong with it. You can make big mistakes and never feel that you will have a problem. Hover, climb straight up into a vertical snap, into another hover, into another vertical snap, into another hover, and on and on and on... I haven't bothered with any mixes for knife edge flight yet. The coupling very slight, but I'm guessing that you might dial in a 4 or 5% max elevator to rudder mix for worst case coupling. That's near none. I haven't experienced any low rate rudder roll coupling except at max rudder rates for KE loop stuff and that's relatively minor for that much deflection. You can hand fly the roll couping quite easily. Lands trainer slow. Actually slower.

I've flown some nice planes but I haven't flown anything that beats this one.

Race21

My Feedback: (20)

T.O.M. Which Edge did you fly today (and where can I find the build thread)? The only WH one that I could find is thier 50cc size. Do they no longer offer the 100cc you have? Is the one to hit the shores soon the new offering? I looked at their SU-26. It is agreat looking plane in pics and the pocket hinges are very nice. I saw that WH is selling an engine called a DZY-100. What do you (or any of you other guys) know about this one? Sorry to beat the dead horse here, but I sincerely appreciate all of the help and input (from all of you)! Thanks again!

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

This is the new 35% Edge that won't be in the country until towards the end of next month. I was one of the lucky four that received one of the prototypes. Very lucky ones indeed In the W/H forum there's a thread titled "New 35% Edge" That has everything in it about this plane. The same thread is over at the flying big guys site but without all the chit chat side bars. I originally did the build on this site. The plane is not yet listed on his website, now is the new 260, but there are a couple of videos of the 35% Edge being well flown. Kevin Edler does one and Charrua from White Knuckles Airlines does the other. I thing Charrua's flight was a maiden, but but sure. You'll find the vids in the "downloads" section of the W/H website.

W/H stopped selling or backed off the DZY line of engines for some reason. He still handles DA, and is also handling the DL, which is a very nice engine. He was out flying one of the 100's in his 260 today.

You're always welcome about the assistance. A couple of pics of the prototype. They didn't come with color on the wings because a scheme had not been settled on yet. I ended up using those big white wings as billboards. One wing is my wife's company since she tolerates what I do and does so without arguement or "punishment"

flatspinjim

My Feedback: (3)

Thanks T.O.M., now I'm going to have to build the extra AND the edge! Food is overrated anyway. Thank you for the answers though. You've answered a lot of my questions about batteries and things and I sure appreciate the help!

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I fly the PAU 36% Edge, and all I can say is that it never fails to put a great big smile on my face!!!

I am not into weighing my planes, I just watch what gear I put in and hope the manufacturer has done his design work properly. After all, who CARES what it weighs, as long as it flies good, right?

My 36% PAU w/ DA 100 flies light as a feather and has ballistic vertical (I do fly at sea level). Another at my field flies with a DA 85 and they are VERY SIMILAR in power and vertical, but mine seems to track better when the wind picks up a bit due to the extra weight of the twin.

So this airframe has been proven to be a winner w/ both engines....pick your poison!! (and have fun with whatever plane you pick, as that is what is really important, no?)

Regards,

Astrohog