[...] I just dont want to buy more airplane than i need or can handle. [...]
Frankly, you sound like somebody who never operated an aircraft in the back country and who doesn't really know what his mission will look like. Admittedly, I have zero experience Super Cubs, I however doubt that they are easier to handle than, let's say, a 182.
Speaking of 182s - why not have a closer look at a straight tail 182, as suggested by Tim? It is a trike, what makes it easier to handle and even the guys a backcountry pilots.org praise it for the versatility and capability in the back country:
https://www.backcountrypilot.org/forum/why-is-the-straight-tail-182-prefered-for-backcountry-9838
This gentlemen lands with his 182 for example at Cabin Creek:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKw3iCiX9o4
Really nice straight tail 182s are offered for 50 - 60k, more basic ones for even less. 180s and Super Cubs are significantly more expensive, Maules are somewhere in between, but usually younger. Expect a bit over 11 gal. / hr. for 180 / 182 or a 235hp Maule, if you pull the throttle back. I would guess that a Super Cup would need a little bit less, but then again it is also slower.
You might want to reconsider, whether you really want to get a loan for 100k, to buy a plane which possibly will not fit your mission, only to save 1 or 2 gal./hr. A 182 would be an excellent and capable plane, which you can use for your hunting adventures, but which also makes a nice travelling machine. Most are also IFR equipped, so that you could also use it to get your instrument rating in it, without having to invest in an avionics upgrade.
Taking costs, capability, availability and mission into consideration, my personal preference, highest to lowest, would be straight tail 182 --> +200 hp Maule --> 180 --> Super Cub.
The Piper (Tri)Pacer Art VanDelay suggests is certainly also something worth looking at. Quite capable and low costs in all regards. I was actually really interested in one myself. We however did not want to get a taildragger (Pacer), and my wife thought that the Tri-Pacer was too ugly. End of story.
Speaking of wifes - getting a not too expensive plane first, without a loan, would also allow you to see how much your wife tolerates your flying habit. Most wifes neither like to see big monthly payments for a toy on the banking statement, nor that their husband is gone every other weekend. And flying 100 hrs / year is a lot of time away from the family, especially when it is combined with overnight stays.
