PDA

View Full Version : Guillows Kits


canamrichard
10-18-2005, 07:05 PM
Just acquired a P-38 Guillows kit originally designed for rubberband power. Has a 40 inch wing span. Can I convert to R/C and what suggestions, if any, does anyone have for motors, etc? Should make a great stand off scale model and would like to know if it will be flyable or not.

WWI Ace
10-19-2005, 02:20 AM
I've heard of guys converting these planes but it takes alot of careful planning. They say you can leave some of the wood out of these kits to make them lighter.

canamrichard
10-19-2005, 03:11 AM
Thanks Ace! I have some experience making kits lighter for electric. Framing out places like wing tips instead of balsa blocks etc. Some ply formers can be converted to balsa etc. I built the Tiger Moth you see by my ID from a Pilot kit and came out electric, fully loaded for flight with bats, motor etc. at the recommended flying weight.

E-Challenged
10-25-2005, 02:20 AM
There are lots of E-Zone threads on Guillows conversions when you are ready. The P-38 one of the more challenging ones to convert. It can be done but it will be a lot of head scratching, tedious work, and will come out heavy, be hard to trim out and will be lucky to get through trim flights without crashing and rebuilding. Not quite enough wing area for the weight to be carried. Will need enough power to fly fast and land fast. If you are new to converting Guillows kits and want to build something with sticks, first try a Mountain Models Cessna 180 or a Dumas Cessna L-19 Bird Dog to get some experience with probability of success. They are larger, lighter and easier to get flying well. Then try converting Guillows kits.

canamrichard
10-25-2005, 03:28 AM
Thanks for the info (encouragement?). It would not be the first time I spent a lot of effort to build a poor flying plane although my flying skills can also be suspect. Do you have any suggestions regarding motors for this kit?

E-Challenged
10-25-2005, 04:37 AM
Two AXI 2212/20 or /26 brushless outrunners, two Phoenix 25 brushless speed controls and a Tanic 2220mah 3cell Lipo pack. This would provide adequate power at light weight. The AXI 2212/20's are especially good for 8" diameter props as needed scale Guillows models with short landing gears.

Two GWS 350 brushtype motor/geardrives, a single GWS ICS 480Li ( Lipoly friendly) speed control and a Tanic 2220 3S lipo pack would be a much cheaper but less powerful power setup with short motor life. (replacement motors are $10 each)

zoomzoooie
10-26-2005, 10:21 PM
Take a look at Komodo.com They have outrunner motor kits (KH278) that are easy for a beginner to build and for good quality cheap price (less than $18.00) . Check out the threads at RC Groups on it. They are very light and very powerfull and can be wound to suite your application. Check out the charts for spec ideas.

I have one for my WWI Halberstadt DII project and am more than happy with it. It turns a 1047 slow fly prop at around 10amp full throttle-26oz thrust on a 11.1v-3s Lipo.

ZZ

E-Challenged
11-04-2005, 03:25 PM
Thanks for the info (encouragement?). It would not be the first time I spent a lot of effort to build a poor flying plane although my flying skills can also be suspect. Do you have any suggestions regarding motors for this kit?

I know,there is a mysterious urge to redesign Guillows kits into super cool e-powered R/C models. If the object of the conversion is to have a challenge and overcome various problems with a chance of limited success, then a low wing Guillows ( etc) project is a great learning exercise. Those of us who have been doing this with tiny glow and now electric power systems try to warn new guys to hold off until they have some small built-up electric model experience. Many of us watched our little pride and joy rekit itself after it's maiden launch due to power, wing incidence, wing loading, tail-heaviness or thrust angle problems. If you are lucky enough to detect what went wrong and repair the model while correcting the problem, you learn something and may get to fly the thing sucessfully. First flights with any new small stick model conversion are iffy. On the other hand, if you get one of these conversions flying successfully, you will feel like a modelling genius for a while.:D

zoomzoooie
11-04-2005, 05:33 PM
I know,there is a mysterious urge to redesign Guillows kits into super cool e-powered R/C models. If the object of the conversion is to have a challenge and overcome various problems with a chance of limited success, then a low wing Guillows ( etc) project is a great learning exercise. Those of us who have been doing this with tiny glow and now electric power systems try to warn new guys to hold off until they have some small built-up electric model experience. Many of us watched our little pride and joy rekit itself after it's maiden launch due to power, wing incidence, wing loading, tail-heaviness or thrust angle problems. If you are lucky enough to detect what went wrong and repair the model while correcting the problem, you learn something and may get to fly the thing sucessfully. First flights with any new small stick model conversion are iffy. On the other hand, if you get one of these conversions flying successfully, you will feel like a modelling genius for a while.:D

That being said, Guillows kits can be converted successfully. I would encourage you to check the Guillows conversion threads on the other RC forums for details. There is lots of info to help you with a Guillows conversion. Weight savings is one of the main concerns with a Guillows kit. What ever your model choose, find as much info on it as you can from others who have done these conversions. If you have scratch building experience, it would help a lot with your set up that E-Challenge is refering to.

ZZ

david212
01-21-2007, 08:47 PM
I just got the cessna 150, where do you get an electric engine to go in these models, and what kind of electric motor is best for it.

Bill G
11-06-2008, 12:10 AM
I just got the cessna 150, where do you get an electric engine to go in these models, and what kind of electric motor is best for it.I guess this is a bit late :D but I just took my Guillows 150 out today, after installing a small outrunner in it a month back. The motor was not bought at HC, but they have the same little gem at a great price.
http://www.hobbycity.com/hobbycity/store/uh_viewItem.asp?idProduct=5358&Product_Name=18-11_2000kv_Micro_Brushless_Outrunner_(10g)

I first had a DD Feigao 12mm. Not a very ideal setup. Next a larger ELE outrunner, which was too heavy and far overpowered. Flew ok, but tough to launch straight and easily overcorrected. I'm assuming partially due to the excess weight, and partially due to prop torque from a 5" GWS prop. Installed the small outrunner it has now, and sized down to 4.5" GWS prop. Launch was finally perfect and hands off. Flew like an entirely different airplane today, with trainer ease. This is definitely the setup for it. Flew well at 1/2 throttle with a TP3s-480. The 3s would probably be too much at full throttle for the motor, but is not needed. With my sheeted fuse, I needed the forward weight anyways.

Jollyroger
11-27-2008, 09:42 AM
I attempted to convert the B-24 for E-Power and told myself to forget it. The wood is too heavy, the construct is too cumbersome Ie:design and even the printwood replacement isn't worth it. Junk really. I don't see how that company remains in business unless it's some sort of tax shelter.
Obviously the people who own/operate that company hasn't a clue about upgrading their designs and improving the supplied wood. Even the lasercut kits are nothing but warmed over from the originals.
does it sound like I'm bashing Guillows? Yeah. So what. If they can't or won't make any effort to improve their kits then too bad if they no longer make it. There are a number of small plane kit makers who can blow Guillows out of the water. Park Scale Models is one of them. Molt Models is another and Aerodrome R/C makes fabulous WWI and Golden Age kits, all laser cut.Check out Pat Trittle and his offerings.Lots of alternatives to the trash Guillows makes.

rhino
11-27-2008, 11:44 AM
(cough) Well, despite my better judgement I'll take a different stance here. Most every kit, I don't care who makes it, has faults - like women. Crap I hope my wife doesn't read this. Anyway, some faults are things some can live with or tolerate and others aren't.

With a Guillows kit you can end up redesigning as much or as little as your skills or frustration levels may warrant. Some are easier than others to get to fly - as I've read - and some like the P-40 may need a lot of "head scratching" and redesigning to get back down in one piece. I'm no expert when it comes to Guillows kits, and I wouldn't claim that my building skills are better or more efficient than another mans or many builders here. I've seen a lot of building talent here that totally drops-my-jaw.

My current build is in the WWI section and I've redesigned almost 100 percent of the guillows kit. I would almost brave calling it a scratch build, but that wouldn't be fair to many true scratch builds that I've seen other folks do.

For me a Guillows kit is enjoyable for those aspects. Are thier kits crap? No. They are what they are. They are not the only kits that I build but they can challenge some builders skill levels like mine. For that reason a Guillows kit from time to time is welcome on my workbench but its true that they arent for everyone. Infact they may not even be for most of us some of the time; however, they may be for you.

Good luck if you give it a go, and remember sometimes its not the destination but the trip getting there thats best.

phupper
11-27-2008, 05:23 PM
I built Guillows kit #1005, the F6F Hellcat into a Bl RC setup. Granted it was designed for rubber power or gas, but how much of a leap is it to electric from there? I just used the original balsa and followed the plans. It came with separate plans for rubber or gas power, and showed how to assemble with ailerons, elevator, and rudder. This was only the second balsa model I ever built, and it wasn't that hard. The Hellcat flies great with a 400XT motor and a 1650MAh 3s lipo.

Phil

dbcisco
11-27-2008, 06:15 PM
My first balsa plane was a micromoth. I wanted electric power but the micro electronics were to0 pricey so it is rubber powered FF. Next was an Easy-Built SE5. Went along fine until I applied coverlite:( Wings warped, cracked and unfliable. Decided to go with a Guillow's SE5 next. Got the fuselage and electronics finished. Pretty easy so far but a challenge compared to all the ARF kits I've built. Will see how the wings turn out. Have not left out any wood and the fuselage with electronics (escept battery) is only 4.5 ounces. I even decided to use smaller brushed motor than originally planned. Of course the proof is in the flying, not there yet but I am confident it will fly. I have a few Guillows kits on the shelf now. I even think they are so nice, if they just end up as static models I would still be satisfied;)

Bill G
11-27-2008, 07:52 PM
I built Guillows kit #1005, the F6F Hellcat into a Bl RC setup. Granted it was designed for rubber power or gas, but how much of a leap is it to electric from there? I just used the original balsa and followed the plans. It came with separate plans for rubber or gas power, and showed how to assemble with ailerons, elevator, and rudder. This was only the second balsa model I ever built, and it wasn't that hard. The Hellcat flies great with a 400XT motor and a 1650MAh 3s lipo.

Phil
Thanks for the motivation. I've flown their 190, Zero, P47, and Spitfire, but still haven't flown my Hellcats. I built the Guillows Hellcat and a 125% version from the plans. Need to put the 30" in the air, as it should possibly be better than all the others yet.

DBCisco, youre going to fly the SE5A. I don't mean to harp on the servos, but remove those things and install some 4 gm jobs under the wing. The plane will fly. Dummy Bill forgot to consider the rudder stickers (should have just painted the stripes on) weight on his 17.5" Peashooter last night, and spent a half hour with a custom bent wire, picking away at the light foam battery shim behind the firewall to move the batt forward. That's right, stickers seriously affected the CG. On my SE5A, I really should relocate the ESC and rec, stuffing them next to the geared motor in the nose, and then I could remove most of the lead, and make it a better flyer yet. I have an everything forward as possible rule now.

On the P38 that started this thread, I would cheat and add chord to the wing, making a less than scale taper. I added span to my Guillows DC3 which flys well, and really needed the added wing for as heavy as it is. If I had to take it over, I would have deepened the chord, as adding span to an already proportionally large span plane looks a bit silly.

phupper
11-27-2008, 08:13 PM
Bill, I think your scratch 125% turned out even nicer than the original. I don't know how you haven't flown those yet. When I finish a new model it only sits on the bench long enough for me to blink at it a few times, and then I'm off to the field. :ws:

Bill G
11-27-2008, 11:19 PM
Bill, I think your scratch 125% turned out even nicer than the original. I don't know how you haven't flown those yet. When I finish a new model it only sits on the bench long enough for me to blink at it a few times, and then I'm off to the field. :ws:The scratch built has 1/32 sheeting. Warbirds just don't look right without it, but the 30" version has open framed covering, for weight savings. The larger one is actually fairly light for its size. I really do need to fly these planes. At the time they were built, I didn't have the skill to fly them. :D I built a number of planes that slowly made it to the air, several years after building them, as I was still flying rudder when I built them. I was too conservative in not wanting to crash anything, that it slowed my learning. I would have been better off just buying a bunch of GWS warbirds at the same time, and just crashing them into the ground until I learned. I had to take the slow route, and actually learned mostly on Guillows planes. The end result is that you become a very good pilot when you learn it like that :eek: as well as building also, but its a slow route.

Glacier Girl
12-11-2008, 03:43 PM
Canamrichard,
It can be done. But as others have mentioned, it has to fly fast and land fast due to design.

I built this one way back when. I used a pair of brushed motor geardrive set ups from the PZ Cub in it. It flew pretty much wide open throttle all the time, otherwise it would just fall from the sky. :eek:

If memory serves me, I couldn't fit servos in the wing for ailerons, ended up with a single servo mounted in the gondola, and several bellcrank setups to make em work. Maybe now with the micro servos you might find something to work. ????

Bill G
12-12-2008, 02:33 AM
Canamrichard,
It can be done. But as others have mentioned, it has to fly fast and land fast due to design.

I built this one way back when. I used a pair of brushed motor geardrive set ups from the PZ Cub in it. It flew pretty much wide open throttle all the time, otherwise it would just fall from the sky. :eek:

If memory serves me, I couldn't fit servos in the wing for ailerons, ended up with a single servo mounted in the gondola, and several bellcrank setups to make em work. Maybe now with the micro servos you might find something to work. ????Looks nice. The Guillows P38 is not converted too often. I've been looking at the 30" Dumas P38 at the LHS. Kept light as Dumas kits are, it may go fine with brushed IPS motors. The Guillows warbirds are as you described. Throw some power at them to stay in the air.

Bill G
01-04-2009, 09:20 PM
Of all the Guillows planes I built back when I was not capable of flying them, the 190 proved to be the only one that flew reasonably well with rud/elev control. I've since converted the others to ailerons, and they are now decent flyers. The 190 had sufficient right thrust and dihedral to fly reasonably well with rudder control. After 5 flights, it's been shelved, still in one piece.

I figured of all the Guillows warbirds I've built, this one really deserved ailerons. Adding ailerons after the wing has been built with the top sheeted, is actaully easier than building them separately at the time of wing construction. Carefully cutting the ailerons out at wing formers allows for a single header to complete the wing framing. After that, perimeter framing is added to the cutaway ailerons.

The fun part is installing the torque rods. After punching the rods through the first former at the aileron hinge line, you need to align a ruler with the wing, positioned along the trajectory you want it routed. Then when you are satisfied the the rod is aligned with the ruler, you punch the rod through the second former. After that, you simply punch it through the remaing formers and hope :D that it comes out in the center of the wing, where you wanted it to. You can slot the center former a bit and glue a ply bushing to the former that is slipped over the rod, for slight adjustment to its exit point in the wing center. Bend the rod slightly to get it to exit where you want, and the use a drop of CA to fix the bushing to the wing former. Not much bending though, as too much bend on the rod creates friction.

The next fun time is to create 90 deg bends in the rods, where they enter the center of the wing. You have to get in there with small pliers or tweezers, clamp the wire for all you hand is worth, and put the bend on the end. All this has to be done to create the correct offset between the bend in the wire at the aileron, and the one that you are now bending. Ideally, if this offset is somewhat less than 90 degrees, then you will create some desired aileron differential in the geometey, once the pushrods are routed to the servo.

Just need to install the servo and linkage at this point. Like all these planes, I added just enough noseweight to fly with some stability, hating to make the plane any heavier. I now am less conservative with adding noseweight, as the nose heavy plane flys better than the lighter one with aft CG. I'll also add some noseweight, as the CG was quite aft during the previous flights.

Glacier Girl:
My LHS still has the lightweight Dumas P38 that I've been considering forever. Looks like it could be a nice conversion with the 10gm outrunners available now for low dollar.
I told a friend online that my LHS had the MM P38, as he was looking for one. Well, he bought them both. :D I didn't see that one coming, as I was planning on buying the other. I'll do one of those 2 models someday.

Alpea42
01-05-2009, 08:02 AM
I've built the Guillows P-38 and flew it succesfully as a Cox .09 x2 powered control line model. It flew great tho it was heavy , sounded awesome and would truck around on a single engine on 55' wires but just barely. I've also built Boyingtons F4u Corsair as a R/C model . Sheeted the fuse and originaly put a .10 gas motor in it but it was heavy and never flew it. 25 years ago the lightest servos were Futaba S20s. So I put a 15 motor in it and never flew it. Then put a 20 motor in it and it was heavier still. I did put a 480 E-Flight motor in it about 6 mo. ago but have become so attached to it in the 25 years it's been a hangar queen that I didn't have the guts to throttle it up and fly it ,so I taxied it around and dreamed of flying it . LOL

Alpea42
01-05-2009, 08:23 AM
Nice job on the FW 190 Bill. The story of the torque rod installation is a good one too. Stick and tissue rubber powered kit planes are not really an ideal project for R/C conversion. Too much altering and weight problems when finished. Not to mention flying challenges. I just noticed this thread was originally posted in 2005, the P-40 was either a really long build or never finished or never flew. LOL Like my F4U

TLyttle
01-05-2009, 05:16 PM
The best cure for the Guillows kits is to just buy the plans. Often someone in your club/group has built the one you want, and the plans are just hanging around. Replace the wood, make the design changes required (there are always some required!), and just do it.

I built a Guillows P38 off the plan decades ago, inspired by a magazine article: one of the old masters (Srull?) hung a TD049 on a stock kit, installed "mini" servos (about 6 times the size of today's minis), and it flew fine. Mine was very much simplified, and I figured that a couple of reedies would have the same pull as the TD: wrong. 60 degree climbout, anything in the book, heart failure when one engine quit, long, gentle glide. I only flew it a couple of times, the ol' ticker wouldn't take it...

The P38 is versatile: I have seen it fly rubber powered, CO2, and 020s. It WILL fly, and fly well, if care its taken with the wood and the finish.

Bill G
01-05-2009, 06:19 PM
After converting 1/2 the Guillows fleet, the important things I've found are:

Lightening: The difference between the heavy and light wood often does not amount to as much as one would think. The tail area is where you will make the difference, in that you will not need key word MULTIPLE times this weight added to the nose to balance. Lighten the tail formers, replace the wood in that area, and build light framed control surfaces. Also mount all gear including batteries and servos as far forward as possible. Don't work against yourself. I've been reworking many of my older builds, extending pushrods and moving servos further forward.

CG: I think most people, including myself, cringed after adding the weight needed to set a near proper CG. The problem was that if we had just lived with a little more weight and set it a few percentage points further forward, we would have had a beautiful flyer. I finally learned this, and found that planes like the P47 fly well at over 20 ounces. The weight only kills you when the plane is not right in the first place. Get everything right and they will handle unbelievable weight.

I have found this CG setting to be so consistent, that I now use it on all low wing warbirds with straight wings: Use a ruler to determine where the TEs and LEs intersect each other, and mark those points on the fuse. Go back 25% from the front mark and set the CG there. With Guillows planes, you will often cringe at the weight needed to get there, but don't worry, they fly well heavy as long as the plane is straight and true. Somewhere between 26% and 28% is where the plane will get into trouble if stalled, and can get into a dangerous spiral. If you are right on the borderline of that point and manage to save the plane, move the CG a mere 1 percentage point forward and you will have an entirely different, stable airplane. It's that sensitive.

Right thrust: Some planes need more than others. I'm convinced that so few have had success with the elliptical wing Spitfire due to not having enough right thrust. I finally added a bizarre looking 3 degrees, versus a pretty heavy 2 degrees, and had a whole different airplane. Now it would launch hands off. Before, it would roll as if you had full left aileron, just with a mere 1 degree less of right thrust. Down thrust can be important also, but generally it's best to first correct wing tail incidences, as many of the rubber jobs are excessively positive for powered flight.

Straight wings and washout: While obvious, nobody including myself seems to get it through their thick heads how important it is, until they learn through experimenting, and see the difference. Wings that assemble separately can suffer from different incidences, which produces a very awkward flyer. The simple "stand behind the center of the plane, slowly tilt it upwards, and watch the outer underneath of the wing panels expose first, moving consistently to the inner as you tilt the tail upward" rule works. Obviously iron-on covering is nice, in that you can twist the wing and carefully use a heat gun to set angles.

prolegra
04-12-2009, 10:58 PM
I built Guillows kit #1005, the F6F Hellcat into a Bl RC setup. Granted it was designed for rubber power or gas, but how much of a leap is it to electric from there? I just used the original balsa and followed the plans. It came with separate plans for rubber or gas power, and showed how to assemble with ailerons, elevator, and rudder. This was only the second balsa model I ever built, and it wasn't that hard. The Hellcat flies great with a 400XT motor and a 1650MAh 3s lipo.

Phil

I am new to forums but have been given a Guillows Kit 1005 F6F-3 Hellcat which I am dying to build but I don't have the plans - very frustrating! :sad:
Is there any way/where that I can get the plans please?
Any help would be much appreciated :)

dbcisco
04-12-2009, 11:13 PM
You can get them here: http://www.balsamodels.com/Parts/1005-kitparts.htm#

I'm not sure which ones you need they have a "Building Plan", "Action Plan", "Instruction sheet", "Instruction detail Sheet" for this model.

Some of the sheets that came with my WWI kits were basic instructions for any balsa model.

Hope this helped.

prolegra
04-13-2009, 11:45 AM
Thanks so much to dbdisco for website link, I had a look. Which plans are the ones which you lay out and build the model on so all positioning is correct, please?
Saw you were online and tried to send you an email, but not allowed, nor to respond to you - because I am new.

Afraid I don't understand how the forum thing works really, so how do I post a 'thank you' to you?

Cheers
Prolegra :ws:

birdDog
04-13-2009, 11:51 AM
Afraid I don't understand how the forum thing works really, so how do I post a 'thank you' to you?

Cheers
Prolegra :ws:

Click the far right button on his post. " thanks" :)

dbcisco
04-13-2009, 11:56 AM
... Which plans are the ones which you lay out and build the model on so all positioning is correct, please?
...

I don't have that model, so I don't which are the important ones. Hopefully someone else can help out. Of course, if this is your first model, it wouldn't hurt to get all the sheets you are missing. They are fairly cheap compared to the cost of the kit.

prolegra
04-13-2009, 12:11 PM
Click the far right button on his post. " thanks" :)

It won't let me as I am new!
I will try later ????
Prolegra

prolegra
04-13-2009, 12:12 PM
You can get them here: http://www.balsamodels.com/Parts/1005-kitparts.htm#

I'm not sure which ones you need they have a "Building Plan", "Action Plan", "Instruction sheet", "Instruction detail Sheet" for this model.

Some of the sheets that came with my WWI kits were basic instructions for any balsa model.

Hope this helped.
"thank you"

E-Challenged
05-01-2009, 06:35 PM
Another good idea, if you have the scratch building experience, is to have the Guillows or other rubber free flight kit plans enlarged some 30%-40% and have a model with considerably more wing area, better able to carry the weight of typical small R/C and power system components and overall easier to fly. If you go to this trouble and expense though, why not invest in a larger sized model kit purpose-designed to be a good flying electric powered R/C model

High wing models are a better choice for a beginners electric R/C conversion and can fly acceptably without ailerons. Low wing models fly better with ailerons. Judicious beefing up of landing gear mounts and wing spars without adding excessive weight
helps models last longer. Avoid adding any extra weight in the tail, it has to be componsated for with more nose weight adding to the overall model weight.

graniteleisure
05-15-2009, 03:28 AM
I have a friend that is looking for a B-29 kit, he has completed most of the other kits, if anyone has one for sale, please let me know. I know he would love to finish up his collection. I am new to the forum stuff, hope I posted in the right spot.

Nitro Blast
05-15-2009, 04:08 AM
I have a friend that is looking for a B-29 kit, he has completed most of the other kits, if anyone has one for sale, please let me know. I know he would love to finish up his collection. I am new to the forum stuff, hope I posted in the right spot.

Check these guys:
http://www.happyhobby.com/hobb_html/guillows.htm
(and its ok to start your own thread next time~!)

PaperAirplane
08-28-2009, 03:01 PM
Has anyone done a guillow control line electric conversion?
I was thinking that this may be simpler than a rc conversion (weight-wise).

Thanks,
Paper

Nitro Blast
08-28-2009, 04:15 PM
Has anyone done a guillow control line electric conversion?
I was thinking that this may be simpler than a rc conversion (weight-wise).

Thanks,
Paper


Personally, I'd fear the frame would not take the stresses of control line flying.

PaperAirplane
08-28-2009, 05:20 PM
good point

dbcisco
08-28-2009, 08:34 PM
The control line models are even stronger than the free flight models. Both FF and CL models have been converted. Check this out for a list of conversions HERE
(http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=827861)

pd1
08-29-2009, 12:14 PM
Here's a place that discounts Guillows kits.

http://www.acsupplyco.com/aerospace/guillows/guillowsmain.htm

PaperAirplane
08-29-2009, 01:40 PM
Could I build the Giant P-38 with normal gear?
I mean normal as in gear that would work on an 18 ounce (raw) plane.