Just Cub based kits. There are some spectacular kit airplanes out there but I’ve always had my heart set on owning a Cub since I started flying. And when I got my CSES a couple years ago in a Cub that just sealed the deal.

Dealing with my renewal quote for the Cub, I was wondering why the rates are so high.

Well, it turns out a lot of very expensive Cubs are getting torn up off airport. Steve Pierce of Graham (great guy and great mechanic) did a video seminar yesterday on his misadventures as a pilot and mechanic. It is long, but a good watch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwcUfuT ... e=youtu.be

Hi Bob,

What's his opinion with the Titan product? Which prop did they choose?

TIA

Thanks Ed

Yea, me again. Don't forget the Cubcrafters EX-2, EX-3 can be flown either LSA or EAB. My EX-2 was 859 lbs empty and 1865 GW as EAB. Outstanding.

--paul

Hi Bob,

What's his opinion with the Titan product? Which prop did they choose?

TIA

I did like the CC's but it was just to expensive for me right now. They are stunning airplanes.

[/quote]

Hi Joe-

So far, he is very pleased with the Titan engine. The fuel flow was initially a bit low, leading to high CHTs, but a switch to a larger carb fixed that.

They are using a Catto prop, which seems to be working very well. After a visit to their facility, I wish I could have them make me a prop for the Bonanza.

Regards,

Bob[/quote]

Thx!

We had a Lycoming YO-233 (115 hp) with a Catto prop for a few years and now have Titan O-340 (180 hp) with Catto 82x46. The reason for the change is a story for another day.

I am a big fan of the Catto props. No issues and great performance.

The reality is that for just tooling around by yourself, the YO-233 was a better flying engine because of the lighter weight. It performed much better than you would think (I took it to 14,500 out of Aspen with a passenger). I think the performance was in part due to the Catto prop.

The Titan O-340 is faster, better climber and has a bigger "wow" factor, but is also heavier on the controls. We picked up about 10 knots and the climb with a load is outstanding. The airplane is in the air just as the throttle hits max. I can do a partial power take-off and be in the air at 1700 rpm. We have less than 150 hours on the Titan, so I can't comment on reliability. So far the electronic ignition has performed as advertised. Cruise fuel burn (2450 rpm) is in the 6.5 to 7.5 gph range and I get 90 kts tas at low altitude. These are fuel receipt figures, I don't have a fuel flow computer.

Best of luck Joe. I think a lot of us, at least me anyway, are jealous. I'd love to build a plane but it's just not going to happen.

Keep the updates coming!!!

Dave

[youtube]https://youtu.be/5cRGOXA67Mo[/youtube]

Wish I would not have read up on the patrol.
Interesting related story on the patrol's GA30-4135 airfoil - https://www.kitplanes.com/the-airfoil-a ... y-riblett/

Wish I would not have read up on the patrol.
Interesting related story on the patrol's GA30-4135 airfoil - https://www.kitplanes.com/the-airfoil-a ... y-riblett/

Has there been any comparison between the cub clones and Carbon cub types for seat room.

I’m pretty tall 6’1 and my son is tall also 6’3 Either of us fits fine in the front of most Cubs as long as the panel is not too low but with the seat all the way back the back seater is really tight.

Is the hanging Carbon Cub sling back seat slightly further aft or does the position work out a little different? I have not sat in the back of one to compare.

I’m 6’3” and was very comfortable in the front seat of a Carbon Cub. The instructor I was with was nearly the same height and he seemed fine in the sling back seat.