What model should I?

A while back I posted a question about four stroke motors, as I was planning to scratch build one. I'd no intention of flying the thing (see link)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7X2pe7BrtT8

but simply to see if I could actually build something that runs. Lots of learning along the way, but with new confidence started to plan the build of a .60(ish) v-twin four stroke. The design is supposed to be able swing a 12x6 prop at 8000 rpm, so not a screamer, but what sort of model?
Here is one of these engines I found on Youtube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLg9hga-1IA

All I need now is workshop time (the last took nearly two years!), hopefully get this done for next summer.
I'm thinking of something like an Eindekker or DVIII as a sport scale? I haven't flown RC in many years, and would intend to find a local seasoned flyer so model choice needn't be restricted by flying skill (I prefer building...)
So you seasoned flyers what would you do with a .60 v-twin at the lower end of the power output range?
TIA
Steve

  Quoted Text Here  
With low-power engines, you want to think "floater." Low wing loading, high-aspect ratio.
The Eindecker probably has less drag than the D VIII--a lot less. I've seen them putt-putt around our field with relatively little power applied.
Alternatively, treat your engine as if it were a .40 two-stroke and build that size biplane for it. WW I models are reported to be good for heavy engines because they often need a lot of ballast in the nose to get the CG right.
                    Marty

On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 14:38:20 +0100, Steve wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
I'd be inclined toward a 1/6 scale Cub* or similar sized Pietenpol. If you don't want to spend the extra time on scale, consider an appropriately sized Telemaster.
As Marty said, think "floater". I would add that you probably want to think "clean"; putting all the trimmings on a biplane adds a _lot_ of drag.
* A 1/6 scale Cub has a 6-foot wingspan and if built light will fly adequately on a 0.25 two-stroke. Your 'V' would be seriously not scale, but the thing would be glorious in a slow fly-by.

  Quoted Text Here  
Thanks guys. I had thought Cub, but hadn't a clue how to relate the engine power to size. So I'll put that into the planning.
I have successfully built an all built up balsa 6 foot glider, so a Cub from a plan shouldn't be beyond me.
Steve