Carbon Cub from Cubcrafters

N801BH said:
Motor is basically a 840 HP NASCAR cup engine,detuned to around 400 right now.. About 2.5 times recommended HP for the 801..:hairraise::yikes:

Weight is 437 lbs, complete firewall forward... For comparison a Lyc 0-360 /180 hp with a constant speed prop weighs in at 456 lbs complete.

Price should be in the 20,000 -22,000 range....

I estimate TBO to be in the 3000 range.
Click to expand...


Hey Ben...if I didn't say before, I like the pics! Very sharp. Wouldn't mind going for a ride either.

Noticing your trick ignition you got there (nice setup!), what happens when your alternator takes a dump? I'm assuming you're at the mercy of the life left in the battery, which means you're engine's minutes are numbered?
 
TheTraveler said:
Hey Ben...if I didn't say before, I like the pics! Very sharp. Wouldn't mind going for a ride either.

Noticing your trick ignition you got there (nice setup!), what happens when your alternator takes a dump? I'm assuming you're at the mercy of the life left in the battery, which means you're engine's minutes are numbered?
Click to expand...

The DAR that "very closely" examined my plane for it's Airworthiness inspection asked the exact same question...

I run a 1000CCA massive Optima Red top battery... I calculated my ignition endurance like this.... MSD ignition systems need 1 amp for every 1000 rpms of engine speed... I can kill the alternator, and with 65 gallons of fuel, land 4 times, refill to the top, and on the fifth run the battery will start to not want to fire the plugs...
With that range I told him I could get to Europe with that reserve of electrons.....

He joked.... " if you are dumb enough to take off that fifth time, you deserve to crash"..

I agreed... We both laughed far a minute...:lol::lol::lol::rofl:

He promptly issued me my cert...:yes::yes:.....:wink2:


More pics......

http://flightaware.com/user/n801bh
 
Last edited:
A 180 hp super cub would be beyond the abilitys of most on this site if what one reads is to be believed. A 180 hp super cub is a blast to fly and will take me to most any place I care to go in back country. In the hands of a real pro, which I am not, they are unreal. A nice one is around 120-140 grand on wheels. Why pay more?
 
Because a "typical" 180hp Supercub will weigh 1250#. A Carbon Cub on big tires will weigh under 1000#. Supercub builders will go to great lengths to shave weight. Less is more. And figure in a 1320# gross for LSA guys? No contest.
 
Stewartb said:
Because a "typical" 180hp Supercub will weigh 1250#. A Carbon Cub on big tires will weigh under 1000#. Supercub builders will go to great lengths to shave weight. Less is more. And figure in a 1320# gross for LSA guys? No contest.
Click to expand...

And the Carbon Cub has a huge pay load with full fuel. A whole 278lbs and it has only a 3hr range. If the Carbon Cub has the big tires I'm over gross with just me and full fuel. My Super Cub has 1150lbs useful load and twice the range and a 862lb payload with full fuel. Don
 
Apples and oranges. Not all Carbon Cubs use 1320# LSA gross. They can be certified at 1865# gross or a different number if the builder chooses.

If an E-AB Carbon Cub in final form weighs around 1000# it'll carry about 850# of useful load. The difference between it and a typical E-AB Cub is the gross weight is 1865#. Compare that wing and power loading to a 1300# Cub with the same 850# of stuff and tell me which will perform better.
 
Geico266 said:
Can't speak to the CC kit, but building an airplane is an incredibly satisfying and rewarding personal journey. The satisfaction of flying a machine you built can't be bought. Things never go exactly as planned, but everything can be figured out. It's a process, enjoy the ride.
Click to expand...

The more kits I look at, the more I have come to this conclusion. You have to do it because you think you are going to have a really cool airplane that you are proud of when you are done. Like most things in recreational aviation, economic justification is typically a myth no matter how much math anyone puts behind it.
 
WingNut42 said:
The more kits I look at, the more I have come to this conclusion. You have to do it because you think you are going to have a really cool airplane that you are proud of when you are done. Like most things in recreational aviation, economic justification is typically a myth no matter how much math anyone puts behind it.
Click to expand...

Ha! Now that is a fabulous and simple way to state the truth.

May break the hearts of those thinking they can economically convince the wife, but get real...exactly what you said. Nice post.
 
TheTraveler said:
Ha! Now that is a fabulous and simple way to state the truth.

May break the hearts of those thinking they can economically convince the wife, but get real...exactly what you said. Nice post.
Click to expand...
I suppose one could argue with their better half that it is a more affordable path of expenditure.

Is that your eagle in the avatar? My grandfather built one so they have always interested me.
 
WingNut42 said:
I suppose one could argue with their better half that it is a more affordable path of expenditure.

Is that your eagle in the avatar? My grandfather built one so they have always interested me.
Click to expand...


Unfortunately not mine, just a pic. My grandfather also built one, so I share the same interest. I will build someday. In the planning stages now, hence the thread.
 
TheTraveler said:
Unfortunately not mine, just a pic. My grandfather also built one, so I share the same interest. I will build someday. In the planning stages now, hence the thread.
Click to expand...
Well that's cool. It's definitely fun to think about the possibilities.
 
TheTraveler said:
Noticing your trick ignition you got there (nice setup!), what happens when your alternator takes a dump?
Click to expand...
I have the same problem. Despite having a two-string ignition, my engine quits if, for instance, master switch is off. If my alternator blows up, my plan is to rely on my low stall speed of 35 mph to minimize injuries.
 
yakdriver said:
And the Carbon Cub has a huge pay load with full fuel. A whole 278lbs and it has only a 3hr range. If the Carbon Cub has the big tires I'm over gross with just me and full fuel. My Super Cub has 1150lbs useful load and twice the range and a 862lb payload with full fuel. Don
Click to expand...

Exactly! Plus the fact that most on this site could not fly either one to begin with! Much less take advantage of its performance. Super cub, 180 horse, hands down!
 
zaitcev said:
I have the same problem. Despite having a two-string ignition, my engine quits if, for instance, master switch is off. If my alternator blows up, my plan is to rely on my low stall speed of 35 mph to minimize injuries.
Click to expand...

I made my wiring architecture different then any others....

My ignition #1 is wired to the main buss..

My Ignition #2 is wired directly to the positive post of the battery using a dedicated wire and chase..

That way the entire electrical system can fry and I will still have power to the #2 MSD ignition box.....

So far. so good..:)

Panel layout and switches are shown about 21 minutes into the video..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=
 
Last edited:
Stewartb said:
Apples and oranges. Not all Carbon Cubs use 1320# LSA gross. They can be certified at 1865# gross or a different number if the builder chooses.

If an E-AB Carbon Cub in final form weighs around 1000# it'll carry about 850# of useful load. The difference between it and a typical E-AB Cub is the gross weight is 1865#. Compare that wing and power loading to a 1300# Cub with the same 850# of stuff and tell me which will perform better.
Click to expand...

ALL factory built Carbon Cubs are LSA with no way to change the gross weight.. There are very few EAB Carbon Cubs out there yet. I will say again that the Carbon Cub kit is first class all the way and would be an easy build for a first timer.A Javron Cub can be built at about 1050 with a 2200lb gross. The guy that designed the Carbon Cub re designed the wing structure for Javron saving most of the weight. It can be built for around $100,000 with a new O-360 putting out over 200hp. Don
 
I hope the third class medical reform happens so I can get busy on my next Cub. If LSA is expanded upon or becomes irrelevant it'll be a market changer for factory built Carbon Cubs and the like at 1320# gross. This will be an interesting year.
 
yakdriver said:
ALL factory built Carbon Cubs are LSA with no way to change the gross weight.. There are very few EAB Carbon Cubs out there yet. I will say again that the Carbon Cub kit is first class all the way and would be an easy build for a first timer.A Javron Cub can be built at about 1050 with a 2200lb gross. The guy that designed the Carbon Cub re designed the wing structure for Javron saving most of the weight. It can be built for around $100,000 with a new O-360 putting out over 200hp. Don
Click to expand...

What I understood from the site is that there are a few different kits that can be bought or built, and the EAB versions were a lot more versatile with the ability to carry a lot more weight.

Looking at EAB for myself, I wonder why (if you're correct) there would be so few EAB's out there.
 
TheTraveler said:
What I understood from the site is that there are a few different kits that can be bought or built, and the EAB versions were a lot more versatile with the ability to carry a lot more weight.

Looking at EAB for myself, I wonder why (if you're correct) there would be so few EAB's out there.
Click to expand...

Because you can't make money with an E-AB, and most Supercubs are out there making money.
 
Henning said:
Because you can't make money with an E-AB, and most Supercubs are out there making money.
Click to expand...

Also there's a lot of competition making cub-like airframes, both plans and kits, that are cheaper alternatives for E-AB and E-LSA customers.
 
yakdriver said:
ALL factory built Carbon Cubs are LSA with no way to change the gross weight.. There are very few EAB Carbon Cubs out there yet. I will say again that the Carbon Cub kit is first class all the way and would be an easy build for a first timer.A Javron Cub can be built at about 1050 with a 2200lb gross. The guy that designed the Carbon Cub re designed the wing structure for Javron saving most of the weight. It can be built for around $100,000 with a new O-360 putting out over 200hp. Don
Click to expand...

Isn't the gross weight regulatory, rather than structural? I'm betting that a few (like 95%) of those Carbon Cub LSA's are flown a little over regulatory gross. ;-)
 
kyleb said:
Isn't the gross weight regulatory, rather than structural? I'm betting that a few (like 95%) of those Carbon Cub LSA's are flown a little over regulatory gross. ;-)
Click to expand...

If you ever see two big people in a Carbon Cub it is over the 1320# gross weight. It will fly just fine and the structural limits are not being exceeded but it is illegal. When a Light sport airplane has an accident guess what the FAA and insurance company is going to look at first, the weight and balance. The FAA is going to violate you and the insurance company is going to tell you sorry Charlie we aren't going to pay. I couldn't believe the pilot report in AOPA pilot giving a wink to the useful load and even stating that most people will probably be flying around over the 1320# limit. Don
 
yakdriver said:
If you ever see two big people in a Carbon Cub it is over the 1320# gross weight. It will fly just fine and the structural limits are not being exceeded but it is illegal. When a Light sport airplane has an accident guess what the FAA and insurance company is going to look at first, the weight and balance. The FAA is going to violate you and the insurance company is going to tell you sorry Charlie we aren't going to pay. I couldn't believe the pilot report in AOPA pilot giving a wink to the useful load and even stating that most people will probably be flying around over the 1320# limit. Don
Click to expand...

The way I understand it, insurers take the data you provide and evaluate the risk associated with you and your planned activities. If they underwrite you, you're golden. Not that you can't lose your ticket, get sued well beyond your insurance limits, etc. but your insurance company is going to pay if you have an accident.

If you know of examples which prove otherwise, please share.
 
kyleb said:
The way I understand it, insurers take the data you provide and evaluate the risk associated with you and your planned activities. If they underwrite you, you're golden. Not that you can't lose your ticket, get sued well beyond your insurance limits, etc. but your insurance company is going to pay if you have an accident.

If you know of examples which prove otherwise, please share.
Click to expand...

So this makes flying it over gross legal? I personally think the light sport rules are stupid. But the rules are the rules. It did however let the camel's nose under the tent and we have 10 years of safe operation to lobby for a repeal of the third class medical. There are only a couple of light sport airplanes that have anything near a decent useful load. My Dad's Remos is 1450# gross with a variable pitch prop and a 140kt + cruise speed in Eruope but 1320# with an RPM restriction to keep it under 130kt here. The Carbon Cub would be a great airplane if allowed to fly at the gross it is capable of. I like how it flies and love what they have done with the interior. Don
 
tsts4 said:
Also there's a lot of competition making cub-like airframes, both plans and kits, that are cheaper alternatives for E-AB and E-LSA customers.
Click to expand...


You bet, tons of them are available, and you can build an E-AB same-same as the $250k+ certified versions for half that, probably less. The reason that the people can demand $250k+ for the certified ones is that you can make the certified one earn income and pay for itself where the E-AB is outgoing expense only.
 
I have many 135 operators, hunting guides, and lodge owners as friends. All use Cubs. None would ever consider a Top Cub or any other $200K Cub. They use average looking Supercubs and beat the living **** out of them. They blow their maintenance money to repair bent airframes and overhaul engines and spend little time making their planes pretty. The ONLY Top Cubs and new Huskies we see in Alaska are owed by the government. And as for E-AB? If transport is coincidental to the services being provided and the flight is not specifically for hire they can use experimental airplanes, and some do. But that's speaking only for Alaska.
 
Henning said:
You bet, tons of them are available, and you can build an E-AB same-same as the $250k+ certified versions for half that, probably less. The reason that the people can demand $250k+ for the certified ones is that you can make the certified one earn income and pay for itself where the E-AB is outgoing expense only.
Click to expand...

I think if you dug into it most of the high dollar new Husky's and Cubs are never used for hire. Also the average Carbon Cub goes out the door for over $200,000 and they can't be used for any commercial purpose except training and they can't keep up with demand. The Super Cub has become a status symbol for the wealthier guys. For a lot of them it is a second airplane. You should come up to the Super Cub fly in at Johnson Creek in Idaho and see how many of these new Cubs are owned by idiots who can barely fly them. Don
 
yakdriver said:
I think if you dug into it most of the high dollar new Husky's and Cubs are never used for hire. Also the average Carbon Cub goes out the door for over $200,000 and they can't be used for any commercial purpose except training and they can't keep up with demand. The Super Cub has become a status symbol for the wealthier guys. For a lot of them it is a second airplane. You should come up to the Super Cub fly in at Johnson Creek in Idaho and see how many of these new Cubs are owned by idiots who can barely fly them. Don
Click to expand...

A couple of years ago, I attended the Idaho Aviation assoc annual meeting at Aeromark in KIDA..
Stu Horn from Aviat had a fully buffed out Huskie.. Ie; glass panel, big motor, big tires etc etc..... Sticker on the window was a bit north of 300 grand..:yikes::hairraise:...
 
yakdriver said:
... You should come up to the Super Cub fly in at Johnson Creek in Idaho and see how many of these new Cubs are owned by idiots who can barely fly them. Don
Click to expand...

I as at Big Creek for their fly-in breakfast this year. I think the Super Cubs were gathered at Johnson Creek at that time. Anyway, watching departures was "interesting" to say the least. Directional control by several pilots while on the runway was just a little lax. Then there was the odd choice to fly down the slope following the runway rather than climbing out. Maybe nobody taught those guys that climbing out at Vy is the safest profile in a single? Maybe they thought showing off trumped safety. Maybe they thought that with so many trees around it just didn't matter. Dunno. Anyway, a little training would go a long way with those guys and there are some pretty decent pilots in the area to help them out. Of course they (the deficient pilots) do need to ask for help and listen when it is offered.
 
The RANS S-7 is another option for a Cub-alike that is available as a factory built for a little over $100K as a S-LSA or in kit form as E-AB. It is a nice little plane and provides very good useful load ~575 pounds. It carries 26 gallons of gas, which with the Rotax 912, one option for power, gives you about 5 hours without reserve fuel. There are some supposedly being built with 180 HP UL Power engines as well. The S-20 from RANS also is a side by side model that I saw a 180 HP model being built.

This gives you the best of both worlds with good useful load, but Cub like looks and performance.

http://rans.com/aircraft/kits/s-7s-courier.html

Carl
 
That much to spend on a go slow airplane? I'd rather buy a used Lancair.
 
A friend has a slat wing nitrous injected Cub for sale for $189K. Full control authority at 17mph. Very cool. I have no interest in sleek, fast, IFR airplanes. Different strokes.
 
Blueangel said:
That much to spend on a go slow airplane? I'd rather buy a used Lancair.
Click to expand...
Depends where you want to go. You can get here faster in a Sport Cub/Carbon Cub than you can in a Lancair ...

P1070964.JPG


P1070865.JPG
 
Pilawt said:
Depends where you want to go. You can get here faster in a Sport Cub/Carbon Cub than you can in a Lancair ...
Click to expand...
You can still get there faster in a Lancair. The ability to re-use the airplane is a bonus with the Cub.... :)

Ron Wanttaja
 
Blueangel said:
That much to spend on a go slow airplane? I'd rather buy a used Lancair.
Click to expand...

As they say, if you have to ask, you wouldn't understand. And you might be forgetting that those who have the $$$ to buy a plane like this want something brand new and fancy, and are less affected by price than those of us who would place more value on a solid Super Cub plus a lot of leftover gas money.
 
RoscoeT said:
As they say, if you have to ask, you wouldn't understand. And you might be forgetting that those who have the $$$ to buy a plane like this want something brand new and fancy, and are less affected by price than those of us who would place more value on a solid Super Cub plus a lot of leftover gas money.
Click to expand...
And likely if they can afford a 1/4 million for a cub they can also afford a go fast plane. Or sit in the back of a real go fast plane. If I had jet money I'd ride in the back, then fly cubs and sailplanes for fun. Why do the chauffeur's job?
 
Why some guys like Cubs. Another story from the Stewie Archives.

A couple of years ago, a good friend and I loaded my 180 with 10 days of hunting-camp supplies and headed for Alaska. We live in Anchorage, but Alaska really starts on the west side of the Alaska Range. It was a bluebird day, and we decided to fly Rainy Pass just for the views. Well, the day was perfect, the air smooth and uncrowded, and we figured this was the start of a great hunt. At our destination we had a couple of hunting-guide friends that have a base camp in a valley who would drop us out to a secret spot more appropriate for Cubs.
Rainy Pass is a fairly narrow cut through the mountains that is a shorter route than following the primary pass, which connects one wide valley to another. It saves about 30-40 minutes, and isn't a big deal on a good day. When we got to the entrance, it was apparent it wasn't a good day in there. From our side we could see low clouds, so off to Hell's Gate...the long way. Still clear, we rounded the corner to the the N. Fork of the Kuskokwim River. The view here is of a mile-wide valley sloping gently down away from you, with a nice gravel-bedded river below. Unfortunately, this is where the clouds started. At this point we were at about 4500', and so were the clouds. No problem as the valley floor is only about 3000'. Dropping below, we could still see the down-sloping of the valley, but also equal down-sloping of the clouds. There's a little emergency strip about halfway out of the mountains called Rohn. By that time, the clouds were about 1000' AGL. At the exit of the valley to the flats, at Farewell Lake, the clouds are 500' AGL and it's raining. I decide to poke into it a ways, keeping Farewell in sight behind us. Now the terrain is transitional between mountains on the left, and gently rolling flats on the right. Because of the cloud deck, we went more right than normal, now flying over spruce forests at about 100' above the trees, less than 100' below the clouds, and in heavy rain. I tell my buddy to watch our tree clearance, so I can concentrate on cloud clearance. Farewell disappears in the distance behind us. All we need to do is cross the Windy River and the terrain will flatten out to where we can find the Big River. These rivers become your best friends because you can follow them, and if the clouds drop to the ground, they offer gravel bars to get down. The minutes flying towards the Windy, further vectering away from higher ground, go very slowly. Heavy rain, 1/2 mile visibility, occasionally rising terrain that leaves you in about a 75' slot between clouds and trees. But now, the sky grows brighter in the distance. Although the visibility is bad, I know where I am, and Farewell remains stable according to a pilot on the ground there. Keep going, carefully.
Finally, we approach some low bluffs that are indicative of the Windy. We shuck and jive a little to find a passage over the bluffs. The Windy, and her gravel bars, are a welcome sight. Not much further to the Big. We slog along a few minutes longer, and as expected, the Big appears. This river has more gravel bars than water, so all we have to do is turn left, fly up valley, and find the base camp. We make the turn, sky still low, slow the plane down even more, expecting to not be able to go much further up the valley. We round a bend, and the sky goes from soup to broken layers, with filtered sunshine. We're 10 miles from camp, the weather's improving, and we made it!
We land, unload and sort our gear, reload and jump into a couple of Supercubs to head to the "spot." We fly from good weather back into bad, and for about an hour try to find an alley back out onto the flats. No luck. Back to base camp.
A bottle of whiskey (or two) and some storytelling in camp, and off to bed. I'm awakened by F-15's and their supersonic booms, (we're in a MOA) and perfect, clear skies. Back into the Cubs and an easy trip out, followed by a good hunt, and a great (and clear) flight back home.

The Moral of the Story:

At this point I owned a PA-12 project that I intended to work on "someday." After what was truly a white-knuckle ride through the weather in my 180, the equal ride back into it in a Cub was an experience I couldn't anticipate. Bopping along, fairly slow in a Cub, staying near the river bars, with 31" tires, felt so safe I was at total ease, when a hour before I was totally stressed. I related this story to my wife upon returning home, and started the 12 rebuild right then. I choose to live in a big and sometimes hostile land. I like to get away from people and the city. Although I love my 180 and don't intend to ever sell it, the addition of this 12 will allow me my escape, and will get me to more areas more safely. I'm not concerned that a Cub can get off shorter. The 12 can get off short enough. My flight in the weather wasn't something I'd characterize as wreckless or stupid. I'm neither. It was for many minutes below minimums, but at those moments turning back wasn't a safer or better alternative. Most of my fellow Alaskan pilots will have similar stories, and trust me, this isn't my only story, either. And yes, I got a Brown Bear.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
My original thoughts and consideration for this was not because it was a cub. Even for a lot less money, I wouldn't buy a regular cub.

I was specifically interested in the E-AB version. I am looking around at some of the nicer E-AB tailwheels available out there, and this does look like a really nice plane. But, adding up the costs and the drawbacks, I can say right now this one isn't going to pan out for me. It's still a sweet plane, and I'm happy for those who have either version, but it's not for me.

For that money, what would I buy? If it was certified, a Cessna 180. BUT, my problem would be keeping my hands off it. I really need an aircraft I can build and/or work on. So the research continues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top