I'm in!

I should think not...

I want one of these. Have been looking for several months. The V tail is great but if I want to go for a 2 hour flight I'll end up in Dallas. Some days all I really want to do is go putter around. I know someone who is selling his helicopter because he can almost fly as low and slow in his cub. So for all you cub experts a few questions.

1. What years (if any) to avoid?
2. Any bad ADs or life limiting things on certain models.?
3. Know of any for sale not listed on the usual sites?

Thanks
Brett

My wife says slower is better so hurry up and get one.

I prefer metal propeller, metal spar. Make sure you have an expert check out the airplane real good to make sure a wooden spar is up to par. Try to keep all parts Cub. More expensive but it keeps the value of your plane up.

Doug

So far, my Cub experience is limited to Other People's Pipers, but I was surprised by how well Jack Brown's 65 horse Cubs on straight floats fly (with two people). You would think they would fly like pigs, but they are really sweet.

I will own one at some point in my life - it's the way it must be.

Mine is 65 HP and I am shocked that this could handle floats and two people. I am starting to lose weight today. If I could do it over I would by a higher horsepower Cub.



So far, my Cub experience is limited to Other People's Pipers, but I was surprised by how well Jack Brown's 65 horse Cubs on straight floats fly (with two people). You would think they would fly like pigs, but they are really sweet.

I wouldn't be stuck on just a J-3; fun, nostalgia, etc... yes.
But, the are many good similar models from that era.

Most important is condition and properly documented mods/upgrades. Find an expert in the exact model. Paint vs. "dope", corrosion in the tail/longerons, wood spar all very important to know what you've got.

If you plan on keeping it, price becomes less of an issue than condition or quality of workmanship. Buy what you want, DO NOT plan on doing the restoration/upgrades unless you are doing the work. Very labor intensive, $$$!

The Jack Brown folks say the floats generate almost as much lift as drag. I don't know if that's correct or not, but the plane does fly very nicely.

That is awesome Drew. I would love to try it someday.



The Jack Brown folks say the floats generate almost as much lift as drag. I don't know if that's correct or not, but the plane does fly very nicely.

Brett,

I owned a 1946 J3 for several years and it was powered by a C-85. It had a metal spar and I bought it as a nearly complete project. I would encourage you to buy a fully restored plane done by someone with extensive CUB knowledge. As simple as the plane is there are many nuances that contribute to the planes value. I was fortunate enough to find an excellent example that the restorer had spent a ton of money on and just needed to bail out. It still ended up costing a lot of money to finish because the parts are so high. I ended up with over $40k in the plane but sold it for $47K after enjoying it for a couple of years. The plane was literally new from prop to tailwheel and had electric start and wind generator. The two things that I would prefer on a Cub if were shopping for one would be wing mounted fuel tanks (stc'd).This gets the fuel out of your lap, and electric start (only available if you upgrade from C-65). Removes the danger of hand propping!!

The short field performance with the 85 HP was outstanding. The places you can get in and out of will amaze you.
As far as other taildraggers being as much fun; I would disagree. I have had Champs, Chiefs and C120/140's, none were as much fun primarily because of the open door but alot has to do with the seating position as well as a stick instead of the yoke. CUB flying is unique, but since I can only have one plane I prefer the Bonanza!!

Hi Yves-

I do not have any experience with a converted Colt, but I do have quite a bit of time in a PA22/20 Pacer. It is a blast to fly, but not quite the same thing as a Cub. The higher wing loading of the short wing Pipers helps in terms of speed, flying in turbulence, etc., but you do not get that lazy, floating along with the door open sensation. A Pacer will be more effective than a Cub at ensuring that you have good directional control skills during landing, however.

Regards,

Bob

Cubs are great. You might also want to consider a Tcraft, of the L2 vintage. Very similar to a cub, has the same engine (65 continnental) and has the advantage of a much larger cockpit. You solo it from the front, and it has that same lazy wandering around feeling. I personally like the improved visibility from the front.

Bob II,
I had to read that a couple times to know we have the same opinion. Nice way of saying the Pacer will "keep your sharper!!!", especially a converted 22/20.

I used to fly a 1940 J3 that had the 65HP Lycoming engine, O-145. I was told by a couple of mechanics that the lycoming 65HP engine isn't as powerful as the cub 65HP engine. Apparently, the horse power rating may have included a bit of wishful thinking on Lycoming's part. It's an odd engine - the cylinders are part of the case casting. It was still a lot of fun to fly - solo.
Dave