Does anyone have real world ownership cost numbers on an Aeronca Chief? I know they're low but I'm trying to build it into a budget spreadsheet. For insurance: 25 tailwheel in a 7DC, 3100tt, $20k hull.

They can be had for a few thousand less than a Champ and can carry a little more. I want a pre-war model with sticks, not yokes.

I'd just fly without insurance, do so with my champ.

cost-wise for the champ:
hangar $0 (kept at the farm)
insurance $0
annual inspection $250
annual discrepencies and maintenance, oil changes, maybe $400
Fuel avg 5 gal/hr (unleaded autofuel)

basically it costs less than my wife probably spends on chick paperbacks

maybe it's just me but I've always found the chiefs to be more squirrely on the ground and generally unpleasant to sit it compared to the champ. Of course, all these things have been wrecked so many times, who's to say that the examples I tried weren't bent in some way.

Thanks. That's even less than I expected.

Everything I read says the Chief is short-coupled compared to the Champ.

Don't overlook the Cessna 120/140. They are cheaper than the figures you quoted, come with factory metal spars and generally include an electrical system. Get a light one and they fly pretty good and are cheap.

Robert

Strictly personal preference and perhaps not reflected by the market as a whole, but I don't perceive those to be positives. I like wood and I like simple.

I don't disagree but I'm amused at the number of ads for Citabrias and the like that mention metal spars and a starters. If those things are important to the buyer, most of the 120's and all of the 140's came with these. I do have a fairly light 120 and concede many have become fat over the years. The little 120's are cheap and I've learned to like mine.

Robert

I've owned a really nice, totally restored Champ for about a year and a half. Annual was $300. On- going maintenance expense for the last eighteen months has been about $205 for a set of tires and rags and windshield cleaner. Figure $15 an hour for fuel as it burns about 4.5-5.0 gph of premium, non-ethanol auto gas. I have insurance on it until me and my boys all get comfortable then I plan to drop it. We were all high time pilots but low time tailwheel guys. Insurance is expensive at $1300 a year. ($30k hull). I've flown it 70 hours in the last year and my son is just getting his checkout now. Don't think we'll renew the insurance after this year.

Aeroncas are great little, tool around the local area airplanes. You'll have a blast without spending much money.

http://www.leebottom.com/FLY%20IN%20Challenge.html

Gotta love this!

Also available "metalized", no fabric, eliminating a fairly big maintenance item.

Cost of a recover can equal or exceed an Aeronca market value.

The metalized 120, no fabric, no electrical system, no flaps, is about as simple as any plane can get.

Mike C.

The wood spar doesn't phase me. I'm comfortable with wood as long as it's been maintained and hangared.

I have a few hours dual in 120/140s and just don't like them. They seem to bounce very easily (user error...). I plan on getting a few more hours dual in one before dismissing the breed completely.

I can't get a metalized classic! It's the principle of the thing!

I've never seen a Chief with sticks. didn't know they existed. interesting.

I've never seen one in person but I have seen a couple on Barnstormers over the last few years. The story is that they were built in 1939 at the request of an Aeronca salesman who thought the stick would sell better. Looks like he was wrong.

The two friendliest single engine piston airplanes ever built are the Champ and the Bonanza. Both perform extremely well within their design limits. I know a lot of Cub owners/drivers who will say that the Champ is a better airplane. Ford/Chevy? Probably so but I'm not very fond of riding in the front of a Cub; it's just too small. They are fun to fly though, same with the Chief but it is pretty tight quarters. I could also add to the list: Tcraft, Luscombe, 120/140.... I love them all but am very selective in what I'd own. Ever try to mount a Tcraft?

I've never flown a T-Craft but I've read enough to know that to actually fit into and fly one, the airplane would have to be built around me. Getting out of it is simply the reverse of getting in.

I do love the Champ. It is a joy to fly.

Two comments on that:

One, some 120/140 have "wheel extenders" that move the main wheels further forward than the gear leg.

http://john2031.com/cessna/120_140_140a/extension1.JPG

This moves the wheels further forward which makes it somewhat less likely to tip the plane over on its nose. It does, however, make the plane more bouncy, that is, it tends to bounce back into the air. So some of the reputation is from wheel extender equipped airplanes.

My brother had a 140 with wheel extenders. He later took them out and thinks it flies better without them, much less bouncy, and there is no real tendency to nose over. It would take really hard braking to do that.

Two, the gear legs on the 120/140 are spring steel with no energy absorption. We call them the Cessna "boing-o-matic" gear (as compared to when Cessna introduce tricycle gear and called it, no kidding, "land-o-matic" gear). So if you land hard, it will spring you back up. The tires are essentially all the energy absorption you get, so larger tires with lower air pressure help.

That being said, the 120/140 do land nicely, and even when you do it wrong, they don't typically bite, but they will tell you very clearly you could have done better.

A worthwhile mod is so called "ski axles" which as solid axles and stronger than the usual hollow kind. My brother had an axle break (while taxiing, no damage, thankfully).


Remember that when you face $25K to recover it, principles cost money! :-)

Mike C.