Brad, Reply#1, OZ may be the source of my copy. Thanks. Some of the wording isn't particularly clear but can be inferred. BTW, AMA has a plans pack for it.
When it was designed few, if any, considered adjustable leadouts or tip weight. These could help dial-in one built now. Back then, IF we saw a need, the fix took a #11 X-ACTO and some covering and painting touchup.
Bill M used a shaft extension on the Fox 35. We'now know the Fox 35 didn't not like them. Most recent engines have: (A). a longer shaft bearings or (B) ball bearings. ...and are often heavier, plus muffler. Bill M's stated model weight range may cover that. A way to adjust CG could be built in. He didn't give a CG location in words or on the plans. He DID spell out ways to tune it by observing and correcting what it did in flight.
Ty said it was not very responsive because of the small tail. Bill M described the model's response as smooth and confidence inspiring - read not twitchy - but capable of optimizing. We did not look for violent corners then.
BTW, I presume that Classic's intent is to be for good representations of models from the era - not exact copies in terms of control systems, leadout location, hardware and a few other things as long as external appearance is preserved. The question about a no-wheels Classic model could be dealt with by stipulating a zero score for takeoff and landing, no Pattern Points, but scoring the in-flight maneuvers. Given that, who would bother?