By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more
Forum sponsored by:
Forum sponsored by CML

Seagull i-sport 60

All Topics | Latest Posts

Search for:  in Thread Title in  
Braddock, VC13/08/2017 13:10:13
1464 forum posts
21 photos

Despite having more than enough models, I couldn't pass up a bargain and drove home from Ashford with a slightly used one of these models, which looked good in its blue and yellow covering.

It was sold as airframe only so I was surprised to find it fitted with 7 servos ( it has flaps), all mainstream makes. When I took the cowl off I was surprised to see the trademark laser mounting holes (miles apart) and my laser 80 dropped straight in, so eventually, after a bit of twiddling including trying my 70 laser in there the cowl was fettled, a slec square tank fitted in place of the seagull one life battery shoehorned in and then it's on to the c of g machine.

The recommended c of g is 75 mm from the l/e but with the laser in it balanced at about 85 mm back which is the furthest the makers recommend.

The laser hasn't been run for nearly a decade so after some fiddling up the field including dialing in dual rates off she went.

Got the first flight under my belt and am well impressed, second flight took it up a height and did the power off 45 degree dive and it exhibited all the tendency of nose heaviness, ie gradual pull out, this was early in the flight so I stooged around for 10 minutes or so and did it again, exactly the same slightly nose heaviness.

I'm well pleased with the bargain, also well pleased with the laser which just LOVES 15% nitro. Vertical performance on a 14x6 apc was very good.

The reason I've gone into so much depth is because when I was agonising over engine choice for my dragon lady, which is virtually identical in both size and weight (dragon lady has 1" more wing span and 4 more ounces), I was put off using the laser 80 as inadequate. I have to say, on the performance in a very similar airframe that advice was inaccurate, the 80 is really up for the job in this size airframe.

Finally anyone with experience of the i-sport 60 please could you comment on the recommended c of g and your own experiences.

Percy Verance13/08/2017 20:58:48
6630 forum posts
111 photos

I was almost tempted by one of these a while back. Seagull seem to have honed the quality and general presentation of their offerings of late, and the i-sport is one of the nicest looking sport jobs around. Ok it's an unashamed Pulse copy, but if they've got it right it'll be a good one.

Oh ye of little faith Braddock. A Laser 80 will readily fly anything up to 70 - ish inch span, even if it weighs around 8 1/2 pounds or so.

Edited By Percy Verance on 13/08/2017 20:59:39

Jon - Laser Engines13/08/2017 21:36:09
3826 forum posts
149 photos

14x6 on a 70? it cant be doing many revs, but if its going then who am I to argue!

Anyway the only info I have is that I sold an 80 to a customer for one of these and he was very pleased with the combo. He couldn't believe the performance of the engine and said he needed no ballast at all to meet the recommended c/g which apparently is the one used by others in his club with the same model.

Not heard if the model has flown yet but I would guess it would shift rather nicely

Braddock, VC13/08/2017 21:49:44
1464 forum posts
21 photos

Percy I got the faith, it's just that I've been moving back to 2 strokes for ease of operating in the winter.

I have a confession, the forum I posted about the yt dragon lady wasn't this one, old age setting in.

The 80 was superb in the air as I indicated and the liquid gold 15% was certainly to its liking but there was a lot of oil residue on the wings, much more than with a 2 stroke. Surprisingly it was a lot quieter than I remember, but for most of the flight I was on about 1/3 throttle. I mean it even took off on about 1/2 throttle.

One thing I've found, the rudder is nowhere near as effective as the pulse 60 or the dragon lady but I have got the throw set at 20mm as called for in the on line manual. Incidentally, the only thing I've found in common with the pulse is the removeable hatch, the fuselage is MUCH stronger than the pulse. I'd liken it more to the calmato 60 which is a much better allrounder than the pulse, IMHO.

The u/c mounting is well braced but, tbh, with the flaps down and on tickover, the rate of sink is minimal; it took me several attempts to get this judged correctly and I uncharacteristically managed several real greasers, most unusual so the u/c wasn't that tested.

If you can get one Percy, you won't be disappointed, lovely flier but the stated c of g is certainly extremely safe, so much so that I'm thinking of swapping the 80 for the laser 70 I have which puts the c of g at approx 1/3 chord, viz 110 mm back from the leading edge. It's why I didn't use the 70 in the first place. Must say the experience has rekindled my passion for lasers, though I still think the positions of the valve gear and carbie are prehistoric and consistently cause installation and fuel syphoning problems nowadays. Far better than saito though and not far behind OS. FWIW the laser is mounted sidewinder.

Braddock, VC13/08/2017 22:07:28
1464 forum posts
21 photos

Jon, I have the 80 in it, it puts the c of g at about 85 - 90 mm back from the leading edge as opposed to the recommended 75 mm stated in the manual. BTW, you're right; it does get a move on at full throttle.

My 70 has only flown in a KK Falcon with a 14x5 prop on it but severely overpowered that model.

The reason I didn't use the 70 was as I mentioned above, the c of g with the 70 was 110 mm back from the leading edge and needed at least 8 ounces of ballast to achieve the 75 mm back position stated.

My flight testing lead me to believe that the plane is still nose heavy (at the setting I currently have) as the standard test, 45 degree power off dive showed, also it required almost full down elevator and appropriate rudder input to make the rolls axial. This isn't a criticism of the plane, more of the maker's opt out for the US market ie to provide a safe basis for initial flights

Jon - Laser Engines13/08/2017 22:49:42
3826 forum posts
149 photos

Ah I misunderstood.

As for the mess, it might be that fuel

Braddock, VC14/08/2017 00:04:23
1464 forum posts
21 photos

No, not the fuel, runs ok in my 2 strokes and my other 4 strokes, possibly as they all have exhaust outlets well clear of the fuselages of their respective models, whereas the laser exhaust outlet is much closer to the boundary layer of air around the cowl and gets drawn into the low pressure area over the wing, just my thoughts on a complex issue.

In mitigation, I have to say that the cut out in the cowl has an aerodynamic dam ahead of the cylinder head of the 80, it was obviously cut out for a laser 70 when the dam fitted snugly up against the head as i had to move the cowl forward by 5 or 6mm to butt up against the spinner backplate. I intended to remove it,(it was the front of a fairly small apple cheek fairing) as it serves no useful purpose and aesthetics aren't my strong point.

Jon - Laser Engines14/08/2017 08:26:05
3826 forum posts
149 photos

Its possible the oil is from the crankcase breather and not the exhaust. If so then it could point to slightly tired piston rings. My 360 currently suffers the same issue for the same reason and i cant be bothered to take the model apart to fix it at the moment so i just give it an extra wipe and that sorts it out.

Braddock, VC15/08/2017 18:21:32
1464 forum posts
21 photos

Crank oil ejected below model, top of starboard wing is whee oil is landing

All Topics | Latest Posts

Please login to post a reply.

Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!

Find RCM&E! 

Email News - Join our newsletter

Love Model Aircraft? Sign up to our emails for the latest news and special offers!

Latest Forum Posts
Support Our Partners
Airtek Hobbies
Gliders Distribution
Wings & Wheels 2018
electricwingman 2017
Expo Tools 14 July
Advertise With Us
Latest "For Sale" Ads
What is the main brand of transmitter you use? (2018)
Q: What is the main brand of transmitter you use?


Latest Reviews
Digital Back Issues

RCM&E Digital Back Issues

Contact us

Contact us