Extra 330s or 300 or 260...

[harrys]

Now i have seen in the past 2001 or so most of the people flew the Extra 330s but many are moving towards the 260 or the 300 version is this upgrade or downgrade & in flying which plane would be the best. I personally find the Extra 330s the best.....

Please vote right

[pepatrick]

I think everyone has their preferrence. I have flown all of the above and really cant tell much of a difference..so i prefer the 330s because of a couple of things. I like the looks of the 330s is the main reason. I also like the singe place cockpit. Carden offers a 330s in a midwing format which I really like. I have one new in the sticks and may start building on it sometime soon. I like the 260 too as it is a single place cockpit, but I dont like the way the nose slopes down. This is all petty stuff, but if you are going to dump many thousands of dollars in one of these, it might as well be one you like.

[danielph]

Well, my favorite all around plane is the Extra 300 midwing. I have flown the other Extra models, but the midwing rolls more axial, and just a tad faster. It also "feels" more balanced to me. Personaly, I think that the 300 looks even better than the 330s, but that's just my opinion.

[fish2keel]

Id have to say the 260 out of this. I love the cowling on the 260 and the lines or the 260. Plus is single cockpit is nice although I love double cockpits.

Although id have to choose the 260 out of these 3 chooses I love the slick 540. It is an amazing machine and is my favorite. Its a work of art in my opinion

[extra 260]

I choose the 260 ,Not on looks alone but more of the way it flys.A 260 the wings and stab are on the thrust line meaning less coupling and a more balanced plane overall.I feel they are more responsive to controll input and fly really straight and true.This does have alot to do with setup ,but the 260 needs less setup to fly staight.

[Bam Bam]

Is the 260 the oldest design out of them all? if so why did they go backwards in the design?
The 260 is the most neutral of them all. with proper mid wing. the 330 looks best but needs most coupling.

[mlstoner]

The 260 is the oldest design of the three and really only a handfull were ever made - the most famous one flown by Patty Wagstaff and it's sitting in the Smithsonian. I asked her years ago about the plane and she said that the 300S was a better precsion plane and the 260 was a better "airshow" plane being much more short coupled and nimble. I think from a pure pilot's perspective the 300S was nicer to fly than either the 260 or the Midwing 300 for several reasons.

In the RC world, we can look at things from a different perspective and the things that made the full-scale midwing planes more uncomortable aren't an issue to us. From a purely aerodynamic view, we can take older designs that had some good aerodynamic tendencies and optimise them for RC. Lucky us! That's one of the reasons that I initially prototyped the 300 midwing design for Carden. In full-scale competition, you won't find too many of the older long canopy Extra 300's flying in competion but the model just performs great.

[Nelvick]

I have a 300 and a 260.

I like more my 260 !!

[Salmon]

	Quote: Originally Posted by mlstoner
	In the RC world, we can look at things from a different perspective and the things that made the full-scale midwing planes more uncomortable aren't an issue to us. From a purely aerodynamic view, we can take older designs that had some good aerodynamic tendencies and optimise them for RC. Lucky us! That's one of the reasons that I initially prototyped the 300 midwing design for Carden. In full-scale competition, you won't find too many of the older long canopy Extra 300's flying in competion but the model just performs great.

Good posting! Following the IMAC circuit around OH has taught me a lot as well. I like the looks of the 260----sexier lines, sleeker fuse and all. But for precision flying the 300 midwing seems to bring together the best characteristics of the more modern designs. Thrust line centered engine, wing, and stab, wider 300 fuse versus the 260, classic extra wing design, and 2-place canopy for more fuse area around the center of lift. The Yak 54 shares all these characteristics and one reason it is so popular.

[Bam Bam]

i'm learning! i always loved the look of extras over any other birds like yaks and edges. i thought the differences between the extras was 260=single seater, 330=twin seater.
Now i know better. i thought the 330 had lower wings and slightly wider wings as well as longer tail so it could better cope with twin humans at 10+/- g's

[exeter_acres]

Here is my take....

For the RC world.. Unless you are darn near Winning the Invitational class every time you are out...
find a respectable manufacturer or Kit, pick the plane you like the looks of and burn LOTS of gas...

any of the 3 will fly very well assuming they are from a quality company, built correctly and set up well....

[sensei]

	Quote: Originally Posted by exeter_acres
	Here is my take.... For the RC world.. Unless you are darn near Winning the Invitational class every time you are out... find a respectable manufacturer or Kit, pick the plane you like the looks of and burn LOTS of gas... any of the 3 will fly very well assuming they are from a quality company, built correctly and set up well....

What he said...

Bob

[JEFFRO503]

Quick question for you guys......

In the extra series of aircraft ( RC anyways) for 3D type flying wouldn't a "mid-wing" extra be more axial during harrier rolls and so forth? It would seem like to me that the versions that have a slight low wing placement have a tendancy to have the nose "waller" around in a harrier roll. I flew a lower wing 330 and it seemed like no matter what i did , the front would start to waller around ( my term of wallering.......the nose goes around in like a 1'-2' circle , and doesnt stay axial). I also get this feeling on an edge as well..... but i have only flew a couple of those , maybe i'm just not used to them , even though they are a mid wing aircraft. With a 260 or 300 mid wing , i don't see this happening so much.

am i correct on this? Does a low wing waller around the front end slightly? The reason i ask , is because i tend to do a lot of harrier rolls....it just seems fun to me. But i like the aircraft to keep the nose in one position , kind of like what a yak does.

[Salmon]

	Quote: Originally Posted by JEFFRO503
	Quick question for you guys...... In the extra series of aircraft ( RC anyways) for 3D type flying wouldn't a "mid-wing" extra be more axial during harrier rolls and so forth? It would seem like to me that the versions that have a slight low wing placement have a tendancy to have the nose "waller" around in a harrier roll. I flew a lower wing 330 and it seemed like no matter what i did , the front would start to waller around ( my term of wallering.......the nose goes around in like a 1'-2' circle , and doesnt stay axial). I also get this feeling on an edge as well..... but i have only flew a couple of those , maybe i'm just not used to them , even though they are a mid wing aircraft. With a 260 or 300 mid wing , i don't see this happening so much. am i correct on this? Does a low wing waller around the front end slightly? The reason i ask , is because i tend to do a lot of harrier rolls....it just seems fun to me. But i like the aircraft to keep the nose in one position , kind of like what a yak does.

Jeffro, yes you are basically correct. The more symetrical an a/c is the more axial it will be at any attitude. Of course there are many factors in an a/c design such as distribution of surface area and center of gravity and lift in all three axis. But with the wings more on the thrust line of the plane, one can certainly see why rolling manuevers would be more axial. That's the main reason I'm a fan of the mid-wing extra design.

[JEFFRO503]

Ah ok , thanks man! I was thinking i may have stepped onto something.