Training in a tail dragger

[Silvaire]

I learned in a J3 so grew up with an affection for Cubs and a general (unfounded) dislike of Champs but later in life I ended up buying a Champ because, compared to Cub prices, it was a steal. Now, with a true and unbiased view of the two, I can't see myself paying the substantial nostalgia premium for a Cub.

The clamshell door is probably one of the major attractions of the Cub because everyone thinks they want to fly with it open and it is fun but after a time you're going to want to close it and unfortunately it doesn't do much good when you do. Then there is the issue of getting in and out of it and the fact that the passenger seat (front) is a dismally uncomfortable place to be. As someone who grew up a "Cub guy" I know they're going to claim they fly "better". I'd say they are different but neither is really better. I'd say the Champ is a bit harder to fly well but once mastered is just as good as a Cub. There is absolutely no question they are more comfortable and the heater, man does that thing work!

As for looks, you gotta kind of warm up to the Champ. It does look a bit portly next to a Cub.

 

[Henning]

Guess grandpa was too cheap to put a hand crank inertial starter on?

It was a weight and balance issue from what I was told, but yeah, he could have probably solved it with some money. Farmers of his generation don't do that readily.

 

[Henning]

Yes, but following the 140 community and 140 prices for a few years now, it appears that there is less demand as the older fellows step away from them.

Yep, but that isn't why the prices are down, it's mostly because they don't fit the SP exemption. With the Third Class rewrite though, this might be a good time to pick up a couple of good cheap ones if you know a couple really good deals out there. When that comes into effect, I suspect the market on them will pick up some.

 

[RalphInCA]

Yep, but that isn't why the prices are down, it's mostly because they don't fit the SP exemption. With the Third Class rewrite though, this might be a good time to pick up a couple of good cheap ones if you know a couple really good deals out there. When that comes into effect, I suspect the market on them will pick up some.

Hmmmm. Interesting comment. Perhaps this deserves a different thread, but what other "poised to appreciate" airplanes are there out there?

Always looking for a good investment....

 

[Jimmy cooper]

You tend to speak as if your opinion is unequivocal and universal fact. Yep, Cubs aren't for everyone. But since the J-3 is the highest valued, with the largest fanbase of any aircraft in its class (WWII era 2-seat taildragger), I'd say you speak for yourself.

I tend to speak from lots of hours in all these old aircraft. An F model Luscombe will run circles around a cub, better looking and much more responsive. Even a champ , (mine was an 85 hp with a starter , )is also much more versatile than a cub. To add to this my wife hated the cub front seat as it was too cramped and I don't like flying from the rear seat. You should remember that Piper was in the oil business and when WW 2 occurred he had the money and the numbers to get govt. Contracts. Taylor was broke but in my not humble estimation had the better airplane both looks wise and in flight characteristics. Faster for sure and as easy to fly. The j3 is wayyyyy overvalued. As I said, boring airplane.

 

[RalphInCA]

Our club's Champ was ground looped this past weekend.

Saves me from having to do it. ;-)

 

[RoscoeT]

The j3 is wayyyyy overvalued. As I said, boring airplane.

In the market, there is no such thing as overvalued, only overpriced. Boring to you, not to a whole lot of others. If you want performance bang for the buck, you better forget WWII taildraggers altogether. I see you still regard your opinion as fact.

 

[Stewartb]

Not a sheep hunter or fly fisherman in the world would make that statement. Cubs are king of the undeveloped bush. With 35" Bushwheels you guys would pee your pants to ride back seat into where Cub guys go with casual regularity. To each their own. I like Supercubs.

 

[Jimmy cooper]

In the market, there is no such thing as overvalued, only overpriced. Boring to you, not to a whole lot of others. If you want performance bang for the buck, you better forget WWII taildraggers altogether. I see you still regard your opinion as fact.

I probably have a lot more time than you do, but hang in there. As for performance try one I mentioned, the F model luscombe! FUN! More fact, ...... Incidentally , none are "WW2" all these crates are 1930s technology. It's why they were all underpowered. It was called the depression, no money for food much less flying. The cub eventually became the super cub which is a great airplane but also over priced. I also owned a super cruiser, also derived from the cub. Nice flyer.

 

[RoscoeT]

I probably have a lot more time than you do, but hang in there. As for performance try one I mentioned, the F model luscombe! FUN!

I think most airplanes with a stick, tailwheel, and centerline seating are fun. I hate side by side seating and squeezing in a Luscombe is NOT fun for me. I could live with a T8F though. Not many of those around.

I still recommend you should go to the Cub forum and tell them that anyone who thinks their airplane is fun only does so because they have sooo much less experience than you. Oh, and that if they find propping easy, they are neophytes. I mean, what you say is fact because you have "3000 hours". Many would laugh at your neophyte self. You really need to get over yourself.

 

[Jimmy cooper]

Have you flown an F Luscombe, probably not. Experience is the key. Try to broaden your experience. As for room in an airplane the front seat of a j3 cub is not really fit for anyone. It's a loser. I agree with the fellow from Alaska that the super cub is a great airplane,no doubt about it. Totally different from the sad J3. Hand propping also becomes a drag with experience, usually the new pilots think it's fun but as time goes on it becomes a real in convience and sometimes a real bad accident occurs, often times to long time pilots! It's an accident waiting to happen for most.

 

[RoscoeT]

Have you flown an F Luscombe, probably not. Experience is the key. Try to broaden your experience.

Ridden in, not flown. Disliked. Sorry to butthurt you.

 

[Jimmy cooper]

I thought that was the case. Experience!

 

[Silvaire]

Not a sheep hunter or fly fisherman in the world would make that statement. Cubs are king of the undeveloped bush. With 35" Bushwheels you guys would pee your pants to ride back seat into where Cub guys go with casual regularity. To each their own. I like Supercubs.

I've had a lust for a Supercub for as long as I can remember but one has to accept the compromises and limitations. We had a Maule M7 for a number of years and had quite a bit of fun with it, much greater utility, comfort, range and speed but no, not a Supercub. Putting the actual working bush pilots aside there is a large market out there for airplanes that can satisfy the yearns of successful midlife yuppies wanting to pretend to be bush pilots (Alaska Bushwheels wouldn't be anywhere near as successful without them) and we had great times flying to gatherings at back strips up in Idaho and Montana.

But then there was inevitably some yahoo punk that would show up in a clapped out old 150 and deflate everyone's ego a bit

 

[Stewartb]

I've had a lust for a Supercub for as long as I can remember but one has to accept the compromises and limitations. We had a Maule M7 for a number of years and had quite a bit of fun with it, much greater utility, comfort, range and speed but no, not a Supercub. Putting the actual working bush pilots aside there is a large market out there for airplanes that can satisfy the yearns of successful midlife yuppies wanting to pretend to be bush pilots (Alaska Bushwheels wouldn't be anywhere near as successful without them) and we had great times flying to gatherings at back strips up in Idaho and Montana.

But then there was inevitably some yahoo punk that would show up in a clapped out old 150 and deflate everyone's ego a bit

I had the pleasure of having a tricked-out PA-12 for several years concurrently with my 180. The longer I had them both the more lonely the -12 got so I let it go. I have no regrets. I'm a Cessna pilot. Put me in a Cub and I'm a Cessna pilot in a Cub. I have many friends who are Cub pilots. I'll never be comfortable doing what they do but they set a very high standard. I'm okay with that. I sure did enjoy it on the fun days. When it was time to haul stuff? I'll take the 180 every time. And so would they.

 

[Silvaire]

I think most airplanes with a stick, tailwheel, and centerline seating are fun. I hate side by side seating and squeezing in a Luscombe is NOT fun for me. I could live with a T8F though. Not many of those around...

the T8F might be good from a collectors perspective but performance-wise it's a hamstrung example of the Luscombe series that was hastily designed in a failed attempt to participate in the war liaison market. Seating in a Luscombe is a fickle arrangement, depends greatly on what you have arranged and your personal physical characteristics. The original bench is pretty horrid, many have had Cessna 150 seats installed and I don't find that a very good resolution either. But there are many with custom seats made with modern foam that are very comfortable. I've also found that having brake pedals installed on the right side significantly buggers up the foot room and comfort of the passenger.

 

[RoscoeT]

Experience!

Ah...of course, more experience will make me fit in the airplane better and find it more comfortable. Such sage advice.

 

[RotorAndWing]

. You really need to get over yourself.

 

[RoscoeT]

Look, a 3rd black pot joined.

 

[Silvaire]

...I sure did enjoy it on the fun days. When it was time to haul stuff? I'll take the 180 every time. And so would they.

I'll have to admit that having "downgraded" from the Maule to the Champ there are things I really like about the absolute simplicity of flying it. But there's no economy in it if you want to go anywhere. Sure it burns half as much fuel but it takes twice as long to get where you're going. If anything it's more expensive because you have to stop and eat more lunches along the way.

 

[Henning]

Hmmmm. Interesting comment. Perhaps this deserves a different thread, but what other "poised to appreciate" airplanes are there out there?

Always looking for a good investment....

150/2 with a modern deck will be the big seller, 172 as well. There is still the operating cost fraction of the decline in the overall market, but there will be an uptick in anything under 6000' gross.

All around, the 150/2 and 172 has always been the backbone of the rental & training fleet for a reason, they are economic winners. Anymore though, the evidence is showing that people are going for planes with glass.

Here is where another issue of legislation in progress is the PT 23 rewrite. The proposal as drafted in legislature and given to the FAA creates an Experimental Non Commercial catagory that allows the owners of certain aircraft to operate them under their own maintenance and modify them as they see fit. It even provides for easy change back to Normal Catagory by replacing the parts to compliant and getting an annual to re authorize it for commercial service at a future time. Thing is it is weight restricted a bit low. Most all SEL GA planes will be allowed, however some of the heavier ones and light twins are not.

Here's the unknown, when this will go forward, and what the weight limit the FAA comes back with. I am hoping that they will follow the 6000lb standard regardless of single or twin like they did with the third class exclusion. Just get everything non commercial under 6000 gross out of their problem set.