Jim Van Loo Chipmunk '68-'73

I have two SIG Jim Van Loo kits, one that I just won on ebay the other I picked up at the IMS show in Pasadena back in January. The one I got on ebay has no kit number on it and the picture of just the finished plane with the usual dimensions... The other one is a CL-3 kit that has a picture of Mike Stott holding up his plane with his contest winning stats printed under it.
Here's my dilema... Only the CL-3 kit has plans, but is missing all the wing parts. The other un-numbered kit has no plans. Does anyone out there know if the kits are in fact the same?
It is my guess that the un-numbered kit would be the first run kit ('68?), and the CL-3 kit after '68 or '69. I compared the ribs to that of the current Super Chipmunk and they are different. But I can get a wing kit from SIG for $40 if I get too lazy to clone the JVL kit. I have been talking to guy from the ebay crowd who has a set of plans (it's a two pager) but I have not heard back from him this weekend, so if you have a set of plans from the first run kit please let me know what you need for a copy.
Thanks to all, Phil Hawkins

You should be able to build two Chipmunks from the kits you have. To the best of my knowledge, there is no difference between the unlabeled kit and the one labeled CL-3. The plans and parts are interchangable. The Super Chipmunk (CL-19) wing kit will work, from what I understand, but it will not be correct for the earlier version anfd the fuselage will need a slight bit of modification.

For more information, check:

http://showcase.netins.net/web/mdgretz/Chipmunk.htm

Page 35 of the 1968 SIG catalog shows the same picture

http://showcase.netins.net/web/mdgretz/early68sigcat.htm

as your kit.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3138164867

You'll note that the catalog page has no kit number on it either. This is the same as the ad for the Chipmunk in my copy of the SIG Airmodeler from July 1968.

Navigate around the whole site and you'll probably have more information about the SIG Chipmunks and their predecessors than you wanted. It's interesting reading though.

Have fun.

Phil:

Email me for CL3 plans.

[email protected]

I have all three kits and have compared the wing construction. The no number kit is the first and appears to be essentially a Nobler wing as per the magazine plans. The CL-3 and CL-19 main wing parts are identical. The wing tips and flaps are different. You can easily convert the CL-19 wing to Cl-3 configuration. I have completed one like that in the past year.
Jimmy

Jimmy,
I think my un-numbered kit may be missing one of the formers... The one that would have rib number three along with the landing gear block rib doublers. Was the #3 rib and doublers on there own former?
Thank you for your reply, this was the main question I was hoping to have answered! Are the plans from CL-3 different from the no number kit? I suspect that there are some differences.
Thank again! Phil

Phil,

I had hoped that my earlier reply to your questions would have answered those questions, but I guess not, so I'll try again.

I refer you to the web sites listed in my initial reply to your questions. The article and, indeed, the web site regarding the Chipmunk evolution were put together by Mike Gretz, a long-time and current employee of SIG Manufacturing, after a great deal of research into the SIG archives, as well as conversations with Jim Van Loo and Mike Stott. At the first page linked, he writes:

"Also during the winter of '67-'68, Glen Sig, President of SIG Manufacturing Co., worked out a deal with Jim to kit a slightly smaller .35-size version of the Chipmunk, to compete with the Top Flite Nobler. SIG announced their new CL-3 Chipmunk kit with an ad in the March 1968 issue of Model Airplane News. Jim had also written a construction article on his Chipmunk stunter, and for maximum exposure and marketing impact, it was carried in the same March 1968 issue of MAN."

And later on the same page he writes:

"The SIG CL-3 Chipmunk remained basically unchanged from its introduction in 1968 until 1973."

Note the reference to the CL-3 Chipmunk and the dates shown. The SIG ads from MAN as well as the SIG Catalog from that time show the same picture that appears on your newly purchased, unnumbered kit box. These same ads also show no kit number at that time, but the kit IS the CL-3 kit. The differences between the box pictures and the advertizements appear to be that the later ones attempted to capitalize on Mike Stott's success with the plane. This was probably done for the same reason that the Nobler of the day listed the contest success of that design. If a potential kit buyer could see that this was a kit for a successful model, he might be more easily persuaded to buy one.

The plans and instructions for the later, numbered CL-3 kit you have should be the same as the earlier kit. This is also true of the parts in both kits. From your description of the two kits you own, you should have already have the plans and the parts to use as templates to complete both kits.

I, too, have all three kits and can tell you that the kits in my possession indicate that, contrary to the experience of Mr. Paul, the earlier, unnumbered kit and the later kit labeled CL-3 are identical in every respect except for the box labeling. Both are somewhat significantly different than the CL-19 Super Chipmunk. I, too, have endlessly(!) studied all kits and plans and have matched die cut sheets. The plans and parts in both the unnumbered and the numbered CL-3 kits ARE the same in my samples.

As I stated earlier, the current wing kit available from SIG can be made to work with the rest of the CL-3 parts, but the CL-3 fuselage will need to be modified, and the model thus constructed will NOT be Classic Stunt Legal (if that may be a concern) because of a change in airfoil shape and wing span.

You are, of course, free to spend your cash for an extra set of plans and/or a wing kit in order to enjoy your planes, but my experience proves to me that this should not be necessary.

>Phil,
>
>I had hoped that my earlier reply to your questions would
>have answered those questions, but I guess not, so I'll try
>again.
>
>I refer you to the web sites listed in my initial reply to
>your questions. The article and, indeed, the web site
>regarding the Chipmunk evolution were put together by Mike
>Gretz, a long-time and current employee of SIG
>Manufacturing, after a great deal of research into the SIG
>archives, as well as conversations with Jim Van Loo and Mike
>Stott. At the first page linked, he writes:
>
>"Also during the winter of '67-'68, Glen Sig, President of
>SIG Manufacturing Co., worked out a deal with Jim to kit a
>slightly smaller .35-size version of the Chipmunk, to
>compete with the Top Flite Nobler. SIG announced their new
>CL-3 Chipmunk kit with an ad in the March 1968 issue of
>Model Airplane News. Jim had also written a construction
>article on his Chipmunk stunter, and for maximum exposure
>and marketing impact, it was carried in the same March 1968
>issue of MAN."
>
>And later on the same page he writes:
>
>"The SIG CL-3 Chipmunk remained basically unchanged from its
>introduction in 1968 until 1973."
>
>Note the reference to the CL-3 Chipmunk and the dates shown.
>The SIG ads from MAN as well as the SIG Catalog from that
>time show the same picture that appears on your newly
>purchased, unnumbered kit box. These same ads also show no
>kit number at that time, but the kit IS the CL-3 kit.
> The differences between the box pictures and the
>advertizements appear to be that the later ones attempted to
>capitalize on Mike Stott's success with the plane. This was
>probably done for the same reason that the Nobler of the day
>listed the contest success of that design. If a potential
>kit buyer could see that this was a kit for a successful
>model, he might be more easily persuaded to buy one.
>
>The plans and instructions for the later, numbered CL-3 kit
>you have should be the same as the earlier kit. This is also
>true of the parts in both kits. From your description of
>the two kits you own, you should have already have the plans
>and the parts to use as templates to complete both kits.
>
>I, too, have all three kits and can tell you that the kits
>in my possession indicate that, contrary to the experience
>of Mr. Paul, the earlier, unnumbered kit and the later kit
>labeled CL-3 are identical in every respect except for the
>box labeling. Both are somewhat significantly different
>than the CL-19 Super Chipmunk. I, too, have endlessly(!)
>studied all kits and plans and have matched die cut sheets.
>The plans and parts in both the unnumbered and the numbered
>CL-3 kits ARE the same in my samples.
>
>As I stated earlier, the current wing kit available from SIG
>can be made to work with the rest of the CL-3 parts, but the
>CL-3 fuselage will need to be modified, and the model thus
>constructed will NOT be Classic Stunt Legal (if that
>may be a concern) because of a change in airfoil shape and
>wing span.
>
>You are, of course, free to spend your cash for an extra set
>of plans and/or a wing kit in order to enjoy your planes,
>but my experience proves to me that this should not be
>necessary.

The original Chipmunk that Sig manufactured was in a smaller box with two piece fuselage sides that were glued together to make a side. After discussion with Glen Sigafoose at the time I had wanted one piece sides but manufacturing changed that. On the second run of Chipmunks the box was enlarged to accomdate one piece sides. After Mike won the Nats the kit label changed with Mike holding the Chipmunk he won with and still has.

However there was a run of Chipmunks between the original and the one with Mike holding the airplane. It was the same picture that was on the first batch but it had a yellow label that Glen had printed elsewhere.

As to the mention of the Nobler wing, "THERE WAS NEVER A NOBLER WING IN ANY OF MY CHIPMUNKS". The early Chipmunks had a plywood wing rib that the landing gear was attached to and it wasn't until Mike made the foam wings for our CA Nats that the gear blocks were in the wing.
The original Chipmunk plans that I sent to MAN had a wingspan of 57" and in his infinite wisdom of which Al Novotnik redrew the plans and reduced the wing to the one that was in MAN. He also did change my plans on my "Mystere II" to accomodate his needs.

The kit that Walter Umland is producing is the one that I flew at the Olathe Nats and was the last Chipmunk that I built until Walter's. The kit is really great, the foam far exceeds anything I've used so far, and I used to manufacture R/C airplanes.

Mike Gretz probably has the best chronological order of the Chipmunks.

Jim Van Loo AMA 822
[email protected]

Jim,

My two kits have one piece sides. One has the picture of you holding the plane and has the kit number on the box. The other has the picture of the plane sitting on the ground with the blue checkerboard on the label above and below the specs and no kit number.

Does this jive with what you've written above, or do I have some sort of anomaly with either (or both) of my kits?

Thanks for the design. I have been drooling over the Umland kit's story for some time, but with two CL-3 kits and one CL-19 kit on hand, I'm having trouble justifying the expense of another, the reported quality notwithstanding. I certainly do like the one you've built, though. How does it fly with that Brodak .40?

Wow, Thank you Jim for jumping into the discussion on this fantastic plane! I have FINALLY connected all the dots and have the full picture... After viewing the MAN plans again (carefully) I figured that what I have is the original run. It is not missing the #3 rib and landing gear block doublers at all. I was comparing it to the CL-3 kit and noting the differences. Of course, what jumped out was the landing gear construction.
I have friends that fly the Super Chipmunk and have been wanting to build/fly one. When I bought the partial CL-3 kit I really did not know what I was buying other than I liked the cowling a whole lot more, and it had a fuel tank with the deal! After Walter came out with his kit and reading the Mike Gretz story, this plane has become my absolute favorite! Since I have returned to the hobby after 30 years I am considering myself a beginer. But someday soon, I hope to show up to a contest with a beautiful Jim Van Loo Chipmunk.

Gotta go now, today is my aniversary and the wife is about to smack me to get my attention.... Phil hawkins

Hi Guys,

The Super Chip was the airplane of my dreams as a kid (early 80's, long after the regular Chip). Finally did get one and started it, but lost interest due to girls, went off to college, parents moved, it didn't survive. Still loved the plane and eventually came to like the Chip as much or more. Recently got a partially built Super Chip, but wanted a Classic legal plane. I reworked the fuse, including lowering the wing to near the bottom, replacing the horiz stab/elevators, replacing the rudder, reworked the flaps, made a wood cowl and obtained a CL-3 canopy from Mike Gretz (courtesy of asking around here on this site). The wingtips aren't EXACTLY like the CL-3 plans dictate, but the rib spacing and everything else visible from the outside is correct, including the moments, spans, chords, etc. I've competed with it in Atlanta (and Tom Dixon is quite good at spotting things incorrect and knows the story of this plane) and Brodaks and had no problem. Although I've seen several Super Chips (with telltale paint, canopy, cowling, rudder and shoulder height wing) compete in Classic as well... However, total auththenticity at the intermediate level isn't a very controversial thing.

Don't know if the airfoil is exactly the same, but seems to be judging by the root rib cutout in the fuse side view.

LOVE the plane, by the way, really lived up to my expectations and hopes of having one and waiting some 20 to 25 years before I finally did get one flying. Scratch building a Super Chip (including all the mods mentioned in Stunt News a number of years ago) right now. Would LOVE to build Walt's kit, but lost my job...but will eventually.

Since putting the Chipmunk history pages on my web site 1-1/2 years ago, I have been lucky enough to acquire another old Chipmunk kit that has answered a lot of questions I had about the oldest Sig Chipmunk kits (it has created some new questions too). This old kit is from the very first run of Sig Chipmunks in March 1968. It prooves that I have a couple mistakes on the Chipmunk history web page. The mistakes pertain to the very first kits produced between March '68 and late fall of 1969.

Here is a picture of the three old Chipmunk kits that I now have.

The missing link was the kit labeled Box #1. I did not have this kit when I put the Chipmunk history together. This is one of the the fabled "short box" Chipmunks that Jim VanLoo mentioned in his excellent post.

Jim said; "The original Chipmunk that Sig manufactured was in a smaller box with two piece fuselage sides that were glued together to make a side. After discussion with Glen Sigafoose at the time I had wanted one piece sides but manufacturing changed that. On the second run of Chipmunks the box was enlarged to accomdate one piece sides."

This kit has:
1) the two-piece fuselage sides
2) no CL3 number on the label or plan - it had no kit number at all that I can find
3) the Al Novotnik drawn Model Airplane News plans, with the Sig address and written assembly instructions added to the margins of the plan
4) the rib mounted landing gear, not grooved blocks like the later CL3
5) a thinner airfoil than the CL-3, but not as thin as a Nobler. It also has a slightly wider chord than the Nobler.

Until I got kit #1, I had been trying to find out what plan the first Sig Chipmunks had - those produced between March 1968 and late fall of 1969, when the Stott redesigned CL3 first appeared. Jimmy Paul had written to me about the pre-CL3 he had that, which did not even have a kit number on it. I had thought all pre-Super Chipmunks were CL-3s. Wrong! According to Jimmy, his kit also had a different wing.

Now after seeing the early "short box" kit (#1), I can say without a doubt that the '69 redesigned CL3 (#2 and #3 in the picture) had a completely different plan (drawn by Mike Stott) with numerous changes - including a slightly thicker airfoil, new wingtip shape, grooved block mounted landing gear, different plastic cowling, slightly different size tail surfaces and flaps (for better wood size economy). Both kits #2 and #3 in the picture are CL3 Chipmunk kits. When the CL3 first came out in the fall of 1969 it had a white label (#2). After Nats wins in Junior and Senior stunt in 1971 by Mike Waldron and Dave Osdoba, the label was changed to the yellow version (#3). #3 is basically a rearranged version of #2, with a new yellow background and the new Nats wins added.

I haven't been able to find out how exactly many of the pre-CL3 Chipmunks were produced. According to Jim VanLoo, the "short box" Chipmunk (#1 in the picture) was a mistake, and Sig only made one run of them (probably 500 kits which was a normal Sig kit run then). The story goes that Sig did not have a box long enough for the Chipmunk in March '68, so they decided it would be alright to cut the fuse sides in half to get them to fit in the box they had on hand. When Jim found out about this, he called Glen Sig and told him that wasn't acceptable, so Sig had to order a new longer box. There were undoubtably several runs of Chipmunks produced with the corrected one-piece fuselage, between the first "short box" run (March '68) and before the Stott redesigned CL3 (late fall '69). I don't have one of these kits. It is the next missing link. According to Jim, it also had a yellow box.

The "short box" Chipmunk is the rarest of early Chipmunks. No more than 500 were produced. I personally know of only 3 in existance (although there may be more out there that I haven't heard about) ... I know of my own, which is 100% complete; Jimmy Paul has one, also complete I believe' and Sean Elliott of the EAA has a partial short box Chipmunk kit.

A little more about the "thinner" airfoil in the pre-CL3 kits. This past winter I spent an evening at Mike Stott's house looking through the remnants of his families old FOAM FLITE business. The stuff had been with his father Arnold, who retired to Texas in the mid-1970s. Mike's sister in Texas had just recently sent him all the old stuff in several big boxes. Mike and I spent a great evening looking through the boxes. The one thing we didn't find, which I was hoping for, was all the old foam wing cutting templates. Mike remembers that there was definitly two sets of Chipmunk templates - the original Jim Van Loo airfoils and the slightly thicker Stott CL3 airfoils. And yes, the Stott CL3 airfoils are the same as the current Sig CL19 Super Chipmunk airfoils.

I will update my web site to reflect this rediscovered Chipmunk history as soon as I can find the time. In the mean time, if you want a great early Chipmunk kit, get one of Walter Umland's "1968 Olathe Nats" kits. They are great kits, and I understand Walter doesn't have very many left.

Keep the Chipmunks flying!
Mike Gretz

Phil Hawkins

Phil. I forgot to ask. Is your no-number Chipmunk kit a "short box" or the my current "missing link" - a no-number one-piece fuselage kit?

Darn! How'd I miss that one on ebay? Probably a good thing for both of us I didn't see it, or we would have had a real bidding war.

Old Sourdough

Also, Sourdough, I just reread your post and see that you also have a kit with the blue checkers (#1 in my picture). Is it a short box or does it have one-piece fuselage sides?

AHA!! Now it all makes sense. I built the first, un-numbered kit in 1971. I had it for a couple of years before building it and I remember the fuselage being in two parts like the Ambroid Ares. I thought it was dumb!! Later I aquired another Chipmunk and the label was different from my first one and the box was longer, the fuselage was one piece. I was delighted with the change. It was confusing, but I built it and wrecked it also. I am now on my 4th Chipmunk, this one the Super Chipmunk and I have a Walter Umland kit.
I also remember the plans looking just like the MAN plans I had. And just for the record, I painted my chipmunk like the Skip Volk Chip three years before Mike Stott did his. I have dated photos for proof. I used Hobby Poxy paints. Never again, that stuff is heavy and just doesn't like to be sanded. The saga continues. Doncha luv it??

Mike,

The first thing I need to do is thank everyone who pulled together to solve this "mystery"... When I posted my original question I never considered that you and Jim might join this discussion, and am thrilled and pleased beyond imagination (My wife thinks I've done and gone off the deep-end!!)

I knew from the moment I opened the box that I had some kind of a rarity, I am as mystified as anyone that the bidding on this was between myself and one other...

What I have is the short box, two piece fuse kit. As you described, landing gear straps to rib #3, the cowl is different, the airfoil, also to be noted is the top block is two piece (the last 3 or 4")

The condition of this kit is very good. a couple ribs have been punched out (and cracked) a couple have fallen out of the formers and the 1/8 ply former that has ribs #3 and the cowl ring has separated, it is only three ply and is in three pieces (Which added to my confusion!) and is missing the plans. OK, thats the "bad" news
The good news is the wood looks good, the canopy is just starting to discolor (almost clear) it has all the hardware, tail wheel, and certainly appears to be complete except the plans.
Which brings me to my next set of questions... I sure would like to get a copy of the original no-number plans...The Al Novotnik plans you mentioned, with the instuctions in the borders. Of course now I don't think I could ever bring myself to build this! But the CL-3 kit I have is missing the wing and the fuse has been started (with errors) so that one is a builder. Am I correct in understanding that the CL19 ribs are the same? OK, now I'm fired up... Here I go rapid fire... Should I build the CL3 kit with the box stock 54" or go 57", 55 1/2"? What would be your recommendation for the engine, I have NIB O.S. .35 FP, .46 LA or Tower .40, but if you have something else in mind, what might that be? Can I get a copy of your plans, or do I need to buy the MAN plans?
Again thanks to all for your help, (ucflier came thru with a set of CL-3 plans!)
Phil

Thought I should include this...
Anyone can Email me at [email protected]

Hawk II

Sorry guys, don't use the www on my email

[email protected]

I have the plans but they are cut up and would have to be pasted together. If push comes to shove I can try to do this for you. Better yet, I think Tom Dixon has the Novotnik plans available.
Jimmy

Phil,

I've built a CL-3 Chipmunk a few years ago using a CL-19 wing kit and scratching the rest. The wing is close enough for a builder, although note that the CL-3 does not have full span flaps whereas the CL-19 does. The airfoils and dimensions look just fine. Mine came out at 40 oz with an FP-35 and flew very well. If I used an LA-46 I might build the the larger version, because it would better handle the heavier motor and tail weight you'll need to balance it. If you use an FP-35 use a light tube muffler or tongue muffler and it should balance just fine w/o any tail weight.

My flying partner, the Jimmy Paul mentioned in some of the previous posts, has built a fleet of CL-3 Chipmunks, originally powered by McCoy 40s but now powered by FPs. They all are good flyers. He also put together something we call the "Noblemunk" which is a Chipmunk with a green box Nobler wing. That model was loosly based on the Novotnik plans. It is another great flyer, but badly oil soaked now and mostly retired.

Good luck whiever one you build

Here is a direct comparison of the ribs in my no-number "short box" Chipmunk kit (blue checks) with the ribs from the CL3 Chipmunk (white label, red checks). The no-number ribs are sitting on top of the CL3 ribs.

Note:
1) The no-number ribs have a significantly thinner airfoil.
2) The no-number wing used a full height "green box nobler style" sheet balsa main spar, notched halfway into the ribs and halfway into the spar. The CL3 Chipmunk has 1/4" sq. balsa top and bottom main spars.
3) The no-number ribs have triangular shaped cutouts for the leadouts. The CL3 has round leadout cutouts (I know you can't see them under the no-number ribs, but they are there).

To recap, the no-number ribs were in production from the release of the kit in March 1968 until the release of the Stott-redesigned CL3 kit in the fall of 1969. The CL3 ribs are the same as the current CL19 Super Chipmunk, which came out in 1973.

Both airfoils are classic legal.

Mike Gretz

>
>The kit that Walter Umland is producing is the one that I
>flew at the Olathe Nats and was the last Chipmunk that I
>built until Walter's. The kit is really great, the foam far
>exceeds anything I've used so far, and I used to manufacture
>R/C airplanes.
>
>Jim Van Loo AMA 822
>[email protected]

just found this again

thanks Jim and BTW your new one(kit)looks great

Walter:

Did I understand the website message correctly that plans for the version you are kitting are available from you?

A shout out to JIMMY PAUL...
Jimmy,
The two offers I had to aquire CL-3 plans did not materialize.
clflier had a nice set of Randy Smith chipmunk plans, but no CL-3.
What I need in the very least is the bottom right corner of page two, that should contain the assembly instuctions. Anyone have a copy of CL-3 plans?
Phil

Phil,
I recently bought a cl-3 kit (marked on box end). There are two sheets of instructions in it. I can get copies of them made for you if you have not gotten them elsewhere. Le tme know and also if you want them sent rolled or folded.

Bill Sawyer
[email protected]

>A shout out to JIMMY PAUL...
> Jimmy,
> The two offers I had to aquire CL-3 plans did not
>materialize.
> clflier had a nice set of Randy Smith chipmunk plans, but
>no CL-3.
> What I need in the very least is the bottom right corner of
>page two, that should contain the assembly instuctions.
>Anyone have a copy of CL-3 plans?
> Phil