Originally Posted by CFIMEI

I'm not necessarily looking for "high speed ballasted acro", I just wanted a larger plane that could do most or all of what my 1 meter Bobolink can do without the wings bending severely or breaking. I have never used ballast but this thing is a slug without it. Maybe even with it it might not be very snappy, I don't know. In your demo vid you note that it's being flown without ballast which, I would conclude, implies that it can be flown with some. This is obviously not true!

So what kind of rebate do I get for having bought the wrong plane without any knowledge that the "right plane" was next in the pipeline??

Richard

Hi Richard,

There are always new models in development, and the Speedo manufactures are quick to knock them out. The Speedo Pro is not getting replaced by the new molded version it is in addition for the pilots that do want to do full ballast runs and higher speedo acro. I personally love my built up 1.43 speedo pro, and it is the exact type of flying i like to do. You can still ballast the built up version and get it going faster you just cant pull on it as hard.

Cody

Originally Posted by CFIMEI

I'm not necessarily looking for "high speed ballasted acro"...

Yeah, me neither. I'm just hoping for similar performance to the 1.2 m SP, with a tad more visibility, + a rudder. The 1.2 SP doesn't need ballast even in strong winds IMO. It penetrates surprisingly well and seems to have a good turn of speed (although the small size can make that deceiving). Plus it can thermal when it needs to (although the lack of rudder is more keenly noticed then IMO). Did I mention that I like the 1.2m SP ?!

Comparing the 1.43 m SP to a 1m span plane (Bobolink) may be a bit like comparing apples and oranges, or what?

Originally Posted by Woodstock 1

Yeah, me neither. I'm just hoping for similar performance to the 1.2 m SP, with a tad more visibility, + a rudder. The 1.2 SP doesn't need ballast even in strong winds IMO. It penetrates surprisingly well and seems to have a good turn of speed (although the small size can make that deceiving). Plus it can thermal when it needs to (although the lack of rudder is more keenly noticed then IMO). Did I mention that I like the 1.2m SP ?!

Comparing the 1.43 m SP to a 1m span plane (Bobolink) may be a bit like comparing apples and oranges, or what?

I think you will be surprised with the performance if you gets yours built and flying. Alex was flying his in 35MPH winds a few days ago and it was penetrating great.

Cody

I appreciate Cody coming in here and communicating with us.

Originally Posted by cody303

I think you will be surprised with the performance if you gets yours built and flying. Alex was flying his in 35MPH winds a few days ago and it was penetrating great.

Cody

Tanx. Better get her down then and built!

Originally Posted by Rotozuk

Do you really think the molded version will be much better?

No, probably not. Guess I've learned my lesson about these guys. Sometimes it's better not to be the "first on your block" to bite on something new on the basis of hype. Better let someone else take the risk of being chumped & take a look at what he got first.

It's hard to judge a plane from just one or two "reviews". If I look at the "expert reviews" of the car I'm driving, I'm convinced they've been driving the wrong car .... Or, it wasn't one of the "in" brands ...

Well, I think the Speedo Pro has it's place, and I'm impressed by the smooth Aerobatics cody did in his Video. He pulled some nice VTPR like smooth aerobatics with it. It might be well targeted to that market.

The airfoil they are claiming is a good section, and should turn a bit of speed, but it doesnt really like ballast, so you probably aren't missing much anyhow.

A little wing flex is OK in my book. Makes it more "scale" like. And if it flexes and doesn't break, then it is a good sign that they got it light, but strong enough. I have not heard anyone report a wing failure in air, so you are probably going to be fine, but it may not be the rip roaring plane you had hoped for.

As for the smaller Speedo and ballast.. We had some MOM races a couple of weeks back, and I was flying a light brand new Speedo with no ballast. The lift and wind were good, and I was kicking myself for not having any ballast ready to go, but it did not become and issue as I tied for first, and no ballasted Speedos made it to the final. (Pretty sure that was the case.) So yes, the unballasted 1.2 Speedo works well.

On that same note, I have a friend that was flying his stock wings Speedo with 750 grams of ballast in HUGE lift with the lead sleds. I was amazed how well it was pumping the stall turns. Sure the lead sleds were much faster and pumping twice as high, but no stock Speedo would have flown at all in these conditions. All was going well until the landing when the plane self destructed. The only thing that survived was the socked fuse. All radio gear, and all balsa was ripped from the plane. LOL - RIP The fuse will fly again.

-Wayne

Originally Posted by Rotozuk

A little wing flex is OK in my book. Makes it more "scale" like. And if it flexes and doesn't break, then it is a good sign ....
-Wayne

Interesting Orwellian "1984" type analysis; bad is good, war is peace, up is down, etc., etc.

Not to continue this discussion too much further but this reminds me of a gas gauge problem I encountered in a fairly new Toyota truck recently. Fuel gauge was remarkably accurate for four years, then suddenly it quit indicating any fuel usage until about 100 miles or 1/4 tank down. Then it would drop & continue toward empty with good tracking. Took in in for fix under warranty (2 day stay) but the new gauge was half as bad as the one replaced, not showing any fuel drop until about 60 miles from top-off. Mentioned it to the service manager on next interval & he said, "That's the way they're supposed to work". I asked him if he were telling me that a career Japanese engineer, when asked to design a cost-effective gas gauge, intended for production by the millions, would intentionally have the thing lie to drivers for the first 1/4 of its indicating range? He sheepishly replied in the negative & I said I really didn't want to leave the truck for another 2 days & would just live with the problem. Technical snow jobs work better on old ladies!

Richard

Sounds like the stopped watch. It's bang-on accurate twice a day!

Wonder when this molded one will arrive

I flew my speedo 1.4 yesterday for the first time( finally had a day off with decent slpoe conditions). I have not flown the smaller speedo, but have seen one fly quite a bit. The 1.4 is not as good a plane as the smaller speedo. It does do acrobatics, passs through the lulls in the lift and will thermal. Just dose not seem to do it as well as its smaller brother. I bought the Pro because I like to use the rudder when I fly.

I flew my Speedo Pro yesterday with 4.2 oz. of ballast in 25-30mph wind. It was very stable. The ailerons provided plenty of roll. I didn't notice any wing flexing when pulling loops or yanking the elevator in turns. There was so much lift I had a hard time getting any plane down onto the landing pad, but in numerous approaches I never had any stall problems. It's a fun plane.

Hi Folks!

Got my Speedo Pro Lite Mk. II yesterday and now it's nearly ready build.

Just trying to balance the plane to your reported CG between 80-82mm.
This plane will no longer be a lightweight thing, that's for sure.

By using a 3S 1000mAh LiPo there's still about 130g of lead needed in the nose. It seems that it's more useful to take a little more lead in the nose to be able of relocating the battery for balancing after the maiden flight - although there are only about 1,5cm for moving the battery...

By using a 2S 1000mAh Lipo effects more lead but more place for relocating the battery...


Is this correct or is my thinking wrong???

Originally Posted by 620ertom

Hi Folks!

Got my Speedo Pro Lite Mk. II yesterday and now it's nearly ready build.

Just trying to balance the plane to your reported CG between 80-82mm.
This plane will no longer be a lightweight thing, that's for sure.

By using a 3S 1000mAh LiPo there's still about 130g of lead needed in the nose. It seems that it's more useful to take a little more lead in the nose to be able of relocating the battery for balancing after the maiden flight - although there are only about 1,5cm for moving the battery...

By using a 2S 1000mAh Lipo effects more lead but more place for relocating the battery...


Is this correct or is my thinking wrong???

Yes grasshopper, very wrong! Using a LiPo in a free-range glider is one degree removed from prairie land arson! Why would anyone, needing nose weight, use a dangerous battery type which has a much higher power density than NiMh? When I had a 1.4 I used a long shape factor 600 maH NiMh which fit better into the confined nose but I still had to use recast fishing weight lead to fill the deepest part of the nose cone. Came in at 21 .oz with a slightly rearward cg. Used digital servos which worked well but draw about twice the current of non-digital. Got a reliable 2.5 hrs air time with this setup.