News:


  • April 25, 2024, 10:12:47 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Wood in SIG kits?!? Plane finished  (Read 4470 times)

Offline Mark Mc

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 719
Wood in SIG kits?!? Plane finished
« on: January 27, 2018, 01:50:41 AM »
When it comes to building, I bounce around a lot.  I was going to take a day and build a plane for the Cox Engines Forum Medallion .15 engine that's going to be traveling around the country.  I have a SIG Buster that I was going to put the Medallion .15 in, and with the pre-shaped solid wing I figured I could get the whole thing done in a day easily using CA and Monokote.  Then after the travelling engine is gone onto someone else, I can use the plane as a loaner for someone wanting to learn.

I took the kit out this evening to look at it and do a little planning.  Man!  This kit wood is terrible!  The pre-shaped wood is warped, and part of the trailing edge is broken off.  And I didn’t notice it when I picked up the kit, but it only has 140 square inches on the wing.  For racing that may be good, but for training and sport flying it’s not nearly enough.  Not for a .15 sized engine.

So, on to the next plan.  I bought a SIG Akromaster on SIG's Black Friday sale at the end of November.  It arrived at my door just before Christmas.  No biggie, I’ll just build that for the traveling engine and keep it for a loaner trainer afterwards. I have an older Akromaster in a box in the closet, but I figured I’ll use the newer one as the wood is supposed to be better.

I opened up the plastic while sitting in on the Hangout chat this evening.  Better wood!  Hah!  The stuff was also terrible.  The fuselage felt like hardwood.  So did the other sheets of balsa.  I pulled out the old kit from the closet and started comparing wood.  Here’s the fuselage wood between the two kits:




The new wood isn’t finished nearly as good as the older fuse blank, and it’s MUCh heavier.  The new fuse weighs 46 grams.  The older fuse weighs 25 grams.





And check out these two sheets of 1/8” balsa that the elevators are stamped out of.  The older sheet weighs 11 grams, and the new weighs a whopping 27 grams!  That’s more than the older fuselage blank!






Now, I know the two 1/8” sheets have more than just the elevators on them, but the weights are just to illustrate how heavy the new kit wood is.  So, to get an accurate detail of how heavy the wood is, and to get the lightest plane possible, I separated the parts from their parts sheets for both the old and the new kits, and weighed all the parts.  Where there was lighter wood in the new kit (only a couple of items), I swapped it out with the older kit.  Then I weighed the complete lighter wood kit vs. the complete heavier wood kit.

I didn’t take pictures, but the total weight for the lighter kit wood was 175 grams, or 6.2 ounces.  The heavier kit was 229 grams, or 8.1 ounces.  A difference of two ounces!!!  Just for the bare wood!  Hopefully with the two ounce saving I’ll have a nicer plane for the Medallion .15 engine.  Pics as I slowly go along.

Mark
« Last Edit: February 17, 2018, 03:27:06 PM by Mark Mc »

Online afml

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 537
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #1 on: January 27, 2018, 02:47:00 AM »
Hi Mark,
This is why many of us "Kit the Kit!"
Use the kit as patterns and select your own lighter, straighter wood that meets your desired needs.
You can also increase the area of the parts to meet the 'norm of the day' or again....
'To meet your desired needs.'
Regardless if the plane is for training purposes, racing, or stunt.
Good luck on your build, post some pictures of your progress and "Tight Lines!" H^^
Wes
Wes Eakin

Offline Paul Smith

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #2 on: January 27, 2018, 06:01:15 AM »
90% of the builders demand only the lightest 10% of the balsa.

So where does the other 90% of the wood go?  Into kits of course. 

Wood has a strength-to-weight ratio.  You can deal with heavier wood by using less of it.
Paul Smith

Offline Target

  • C/L Addict
  • 2019 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1692
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #3 on: January 27, 2018, 10:11:37 AM »
It's hard to use less wood in a profile fuselage.
You can taper from the wing TW back to the rudder TE, but I think the finish sometimes helps stiffness and the further that is spaced apart, the more stiff it is.

But you are right, heavy balsa has a use and unfortunately you can't see what's in a kit box online. In a LHS, it would be funny, but you could weigh multiple kit boxes and walk out with the lightest one. That would have the hobby shop workers talking for a week, I am sure. <=
Regards,
Chris
AMA 5956

Online Crist Rigotti

  • 23 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3859
  • Electric - The future of Old Time Stunt
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #4 on: January 27, 2018, 10:25:04 AM »
SIG ain't what it used to be.  Nowhere close.
Crist
AMA 482497
Waxahachie, TX
Electric - The Future of Old Time Stunt

Offline Allan Leonard

  • A&P Mech
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Ensign
  • **
  • Posts: 27
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #5 on: January 27, 2018, 10:35:43 AM »
Drill some lightening holes in the fuselage and cover. Just got to remember they are there so you don't punch thru. Yes? No?

Offline Mark Mc

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 719
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #6 on: January 27, 2018, 01:33:20 PM »
Drill some lightening holes in the fuselage and cover. Just got to remember they are there so you don't punch thru. Yes? No?

Actually, a few minutes ago I was thinking about taking my Dremel tool with a router bit to a fuselage to strategically  lighten it.

Mark

Offline Dane Martin

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2804
  • heli pilot BHOR
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #7 on: January 27, 2018, 01:47:14 PM »
I built my SIG Twister, box stock wood. Even added heavier landing gear. We weighed it today in Tucson. It's 38oz ready to fly. If I copied all the parts and used lighter wood it would have been lighter, but I'm pretty happy with a 38oz box stock build.

Online Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 13738
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #8 on: January 27, 2018, 01:59:42 PM »
I built my SIG Twister, box stock wood. Even added heavier landing gear. We weighed it today in Tucson. It's 38oz ready to fly. If I copied all the parts and used lighter wood it would have been lighter, but I'm pretty happy with a 38oz box stock build.

   Assuming you have sufficient power, 38 ounces is plenty light enough, a lot lighter and you might start finding it a problem to trim.

     Brett

Offline Dane Martin

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2804
  • heli pilot BHOR
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #9 on: January 27, 2018, 02:23:39 PM »
Sufficient power..... well it's close. The guys here are helping me out. I did my best score so far with it (440). I'm hoping tomorrow will go well for me!

Online Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 13738
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #10 on: January 27, 2018, 03:03:13 PM »
Sufficient power..... well it's close. The guys here are helping me out. I did my best score so far with it (440). I'm hoping tomorrow will go well for me!

     Don't forget it's 2200 feet. Get more nitro.

     Brett

Offline Dane Martin

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2804
  • heli pilot BHOR
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #11 on: January 27, 2018, 03:05:09 PM »
Will do. Mark is bringing out more gallons of fuel tomorrow, I belive. It's very fun out here . We will definitely be doing it again.

Online Dan McEntee

  • 23 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 6867
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #12 on: January 27, 2018, 05:21:02 PM »
  If you are a beginner to intermediate class flyer, don't get too hung up on this weight thing.  You can't just grab a bunch of what you think is light wood and build a world beater right off the bat. You have to learn wood selection, using the right wood for the right part of the model, and build toward a light airplane in every step you take. Sparky has a line where he states that w really good finish begins with the first piece of wood cut, and that is true. You have to have the finished weight in mind right from the start, and a lot of that finished weight is in the finish. When you are at the beginner to intermediate level, it's more important to learn how to built straight, accurate airplanes. There isn't a kit on the market, of any manufacturer, that won't fly OK as it comes from the box with the wood supplied if built straight and accurate.  With the fine cottage industry kit makers we have now, we get spoiled by the great quality wood that they use in their kits, because they are aimed at a certain customer who expects that, and they are priced accordingly. Companies like SIG market kits for anyone and everyone, and to keep prices in check, they buy wood in a market where they don't have a lot of choice and wood is cheaper so their kits cost less. It's simple marketing and economics. You can get lucky and get decent wood in a SIG kit, but it's subject to the wood that is available to them  to buy. You should have seen the barn siding that was in some manufacturer's kits during some of the alleged "balsa shortages"  years ago. I built my Shark Twister profile model using Twister parts, almost every piece of wood that came in the kit. I wanted to make the wing a D tube, so needed to trim the ribs some to allow for that. The wood in the ribs was so hard I could not cut it with an Exacto knife! I had to stack the ribs up and cut them on a band saw. The added wood of the wing sheeting, plus what was needed for increased tail surface sizes, and fuselage length to fit Fancherized Twister numbers, was still only enough to push the weight of the finished airplane in the upper 40 ounce range, 48 or 49 ounces I think, and the airplane flies quite well. There is always questions about the Fancher mods on here, and while they work, they can also tend to send a finished weight up to and over 50 ounces if you are not careful, and most beginner and intermediate modelers are not that skilled at that yet.  You should build that Akromaster as it is in the box, and build a duplicate right beside it using the kit parts for a template on contest quality wood to illustrate what I mean. Use the same finish on both models and the same power plants. Let us know what the results are. I think you will find not too much difference between the airplanes, both in finished weight and in how they fly. You are bound to crash one,m so then you will have a back up almost immediately! And notice that that heavier, hard fuselage doesn't shake and twist as easier and that nice, light soft wood fuselage does. To help get the weight down on the harder one, just sand things more, round off and contour things more. Drilling holes in things won't get you what you want and you just may screw up a good fuselage. 
  Good luck and have fun,
   Dan McEntee
AMA 28784
EAA  1038824
AMA 480405 (American Motorcyclist Association)

Offline Balsa Butcher

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2357
  • High Desert Flier
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #13 on: January 27, 2018, 07:51:56 PM »
Sig used to be known for good wood, apparently that is no longer the case in every case. Briefly on the Twister: 38 ounces is a very good weight for a Twister. They fly good from anywhere from 36 to 44 ounces, I know, I've built a few. Weight on the Acromaster is more critical as it is a smaller plane.
If you plan to stunt it use the kit for templates and cut new pieces out of lighter balsa. As a compromise, just cut a new fuselage, replace the heavier spars, and duplicate the stab and elevator with lighter wood. It's a simple airplane and this will not take long. That, and extensive use of sandpaper will cut down quite a few ounces without the hassle of making new ribs. I would make a rib template though in case you want to build second one. 8)
Pete Cunha
Sacramento CA.
AMA 57499

Offline Geoff Goodworth

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 808
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #14 on: January 27, 2018, 09:53:51 PM »
So true.

I bought an Akromaster kit several years ago and most of the wood was 25 pound.

I was not happy and, at this point, the kit is still in its box while I ponder what to do with it.

Offline wwwarbird

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 7980
  • Welcome to the Stunt Hanger.
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #15 on: January 27, 2018, 10:29:20 PM »
SIG ain't what it used to be.  Nowhere close.

 Very true.  D>K
Narrowly averting disaster since 1964! 

Wayne Willey
Albert Lea, MN U.S.A. IC C/L Aircraft Modeler, Ex AMA member

Offline cory colquhoun

  • 2017
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 125
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #16 on: January 28, 2018, 04:09:31 AM »
Was keen on getting a sig twister for my youngest boy, just made my mind up to scratch build, thanks for the heads up.

   Cory

Offline FLOYD CARTER

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 4458
    • owner
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #17 on: January 28, 2018, 05:44:21 PM »
Looking for great kit wood? 

                              +++++++RSM DISTRIBUTION++++++

(there are others, of course)
89 years, but still going (sort of)
AMA #796  SAM #188  LSF #020

Offline Mike Keville

  • AMA Member
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2320
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #18 on: January 28, 2018, 07:58:41 PM »
SIG ain't what it used to be.  Nowhere close.
==========================
Got THAT right!!!
FORMER member, "Academy of Multi-rotors & ARFs".

Offline Don Coe

  • 2019 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 49
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #19 on: January 29, 2018, 07:12:41 AM »
Add Water Umland to RSM for good balsa in their kits.  I'm sure there are other smaller vendors who do the same.

Offline MikeyPratt

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 748
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #20 on: January 29, 2018, 07:00:27 PM »
Add Water Umland to RSM for good balsa in their kits.  I'm sure there are other smaller vendors who do the same.

Hi Guy’s
I just can’t let this go for reasons it just plain stupid.  Sig still provides the best balsa wood around period!!!  Still graded the same and inspected for every piece of wood.  Dan tried to explain to you that wood is a matter of what shows up on the truck, sorted and weighted, then to the saw rood.  90% of all balsa comes from the same place.  I worked for SIg for twenty years so I know what they do and how they do it.  Bet you didn’t know that all balsa that is die cut has to be 10 to 12 pound stock befor it cuts good.   Just like the dumb old farts that say die-crushed (the wood was too soft not the blades need to be sharpened).  If you have a part that is not up to your standard send it back and they will replace it for you. 

Mike Pratt

Offline Chris McMillin

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1899
  • AMA 32529
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #21 on: January 30, 2018, 08:17:10 PM »
Thanks Mike.
Chris...

Hi Guy’s
I just can’t let this go for reasons it just plain stupid.  Sig still provides the best balsa wood around period!!!  Still graded the same and inspected for every piece of wood.  Dan tried to explain to you that wood is a matter of what shows up on the truck, sorted and weighted, then to the saw rood.  90% of all balsa comes from the same place.  I worked for SIg for twenty years so I know what they do and how they do it.  Bet you didn’t know that all balsa that is die cut has to be 10 to 12 pound stock befor it cuts good.   Just like the dumb old farts that say die-crushed (the wood was too soft not the blades need to be sharpened).  If you have a part that is not up to your standard send it back and they will replace it for you. 

Mike Pratt

Offline Dane Martin

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2804
  • heli pilot BHOR
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #22 on: January 30, 2018, 08:51:17 PM »
I've made the suggestion before, but if you call SIG and tell them exactly what you're looking for, that's exactly what you'll get. They are fiercely intelligent and have a great knowledge of balsa wood.
That being said, I wouldn't hesitate to build a stock kit from a SIG box. I'll be building a banshee soon. SIG will always be my favorite kit manufacturer. (Sorry to the other guys like RSM. I love you too! )

Offline Phil Spillman

  • 2017
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 804
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #23 on: January 30, 2018, 09:10:54 PM »
Sorry to hear about your porky Akromaster! I'd copy all the sub standard parts or the entire kit for that matter and sell it off! Just remember that John Brodak makes kits with very fine wood inside and he'll stand behind everything he sells! No questions asked! Many fine designs to chose from!

Phil Spillman
Phil Spillman

Offline Dave Hull

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1908
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #24 on: January 30, 2018, 11:23:25 PM »
Both the SIG Buster and Shoestring were originally intended for scale racing--and were pretty competitive kit designs back in the day. The rule was that they had to be within 5% of scale--and they are. The wing areas are not pumped up for stunt! Now here's an interesting note: they are still competitive in the local scale racing events. In full racing rig, these weigh 20 to 23 oz. The fuse and wing wood on the one's I've built was perfectly suitable, and I used it.  I started a Shoestring last year and used pretty much everything. (I like to change the empennage to basswood for durability.) The material in the kit allows you to shape the outlines into the seldom seen 1974 version. I hope to finish it soon!

And, it turns out that if you use a mild engine, these are also great trainers. Stunters--no. Why not build a Clown instead? On my project list is an Akromaster/Mustang conversion. The one I got a couple of years ago has nice wood. Maybe I'm lucky, but I was pleased with the Baby Skyrays (2 so far), Beech Staggerwing, Banshees (2), Twister, and a Chipmunk I hope to build someday....  Has the wood quality gone down in the last two years since I bought my last kit? I hope not because I have always counted on SIG.

Offline Mark Mc

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 719
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #25 on: January 31, 2018, 11:54:27 AM »
I didn't mean to start a bashing thread on SIG.  I have build two 1/2A Skyrays, a previous Akromaster, and scratch build three Skyray 35's with wood and accessories ordered from SIG.  I was impressed that SIG will sell the .15 sized Akromaster for a mid-$20's price.  And I think it's great that they still sell other CL kits.  Not enough mainstream mail order houses that still do.  I was just majorly disappointed in the warped and chipped wood in the Buster kit.  And the wood in the Akromaster kit is really very heavy.  I do not expect contest grade wood in these kits.  They'd be too expensive if it were.  But it was on the heavy side in this kit, and that one piece of 1/8" sheet really is the hardest thing that I think I've ever received before.  Will I let this stop me from buying or recommending SIG kits? No.  I was just pointing out how the wood was bad in this particular kit.  I'm sure if I told SIG I was unhappy that they would send me replacement stuff.  But for the last two years, when I order wood from SIG (which I do occasionally), my orders take between three and four weeks to arrive.  Five for the one kit I ordered through my hobby shop.  So it's not worth it for me to start a kit, and then call and wait a few weeks for more replacement wood to arrive.  Luckily in this case, I had a second Akromaster kit to build on hand.

Mark

Offline Steve Scott

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 673
  • Terrorizing earthworms since '65
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #26 on: February 01, 2018, 05:42:57 PM »
Worst wood I've ever seen was in a Hobby Lobby Telemaster 66 RC kit I ordered from the manufacturer online.  The tip blocks, well they were a grey color.  It was like carving maple motor mounts.  That kit never got built.  Sterling Models got pretty bad.

I've always been very happy with Sig, Goldberg, RSM, Brodak and Walter Umland kits.

I once scratch built a high aspect slow combat kit with foam wings.  It flew terrific - until the engine stopped then it simply fell out of the sky.  Too light for any penetration in the glide phase.  Fox Series V sport (single ball bearing) schneurle .36 for power.  Line tension was so strong it almost scared me.

Offline wwwarbird

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 7980
  • Welcome to the Stunt Hanger.
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #27 on: February 01, 2018, 06:20:22 PM »
SIG ain't what it used to be.  Nowhere close.

 Clarifying my "Very true" reply above to Crist's comment before that, I mainly meant The Company itself...
 
 I started in this hobby back in the mid-late '70's and grew up building primarily Sig kits, almost every one in the catalog, and some of them multiple times. I remember always noticing the various kit designer names in the catalog, Gretz, Stott, Pratt, McCullough, etc., and thinking these guys must be Modeling Gods. This was many years before I finally met them in person and found them simply to be great people and modelers just like most of us.
 Back in those days a few modeling buddies and myself would dig through the catalog, combine our orders and mail them in with a check, and consistently see our stuff on the doorstep within 4 or 5 days. Always that great service. This routine reoccurred about once a month for quite a long time.
 From my own beginnings I've always considered Sig kits to be very well done overall, and with excellent wood. The bottom line is that I just lost most of my respect for the company when they pulled the plug on their annual Control Line Championships contest. It was an excellent event at a beautiful site and is still greatly missed. 
Narrowly averting disaster since 1964! 

Wayne Willey
Albert Lea, MN U.S.A. IC C/L Aircraft Modeler, Ex AMA member

Offline Mark Mc

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 719
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!?
« Reply #28 on: February 17, 2018, 03:25:17 PM »
Well, I threw this together real quick.  I didn't put a lot of effort into it because I plan to fly it a couple of times and then hang it up, but it looks okay.  I still may put in dual cockpits like the old military trainers and put a star and "U.S. ARMY" on the wings at some later date.  But for now I'm calling it done.  Weight ready to fly came out at 17 ounces with the Cox Medallion 15.  The only tank I have on hand that fits easily in the available space is the tank from an ARF Flite Streak.  I need to fix a leak in the tank, and the plane will be flight ready.






Mark
« Last Edit: February 17, 2018, 04:14:55 PM by Mark Mc »

Offline Dave Hull

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1908
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!? Plane finished
« Reply #29 on: February 20, 2018, 11:40:02 PM »
Mark,
It looks good. The weight seems reasonable, too. Let us know how you like it!

Offline Joe Ed Pederson

  • 23 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 472
Re: Wood in SIG kits?!? Plane finished
« Reply #30 on: February 22, 2018, 10:29:15 PM »
An observation about the wood in Sig kits.  The last kit I bought from Sig was at Christmas 2016.  It was the RC 3-channel Rascal kit.  My main background is Free Flight and in Free Flight you are VERY particular about the density of the balsa for each part.   I was super impressed with the wood in the Rascal kit.  It will come out light enough I could make it a Free Flight model.

Joe


Advertise Here
Tags:
 


Advertise Here