Hey folks!

First, I want to say thanks to everyone who keeps BCP chugging along. I’ve found a ton of great info on BCP over the years.

I haven’t really had anything worth posting about until now. I have searched and read many, many threads on these old taildraggers, but I’m hoping you can help me make some specific comparisons amongst several specific aircraft models. I will be getting serious about airplane shopping this summer and want to get my head on straight beforehand.

I will be using whatever I end up with as a time builder. The majority of the time will be spent flying solo around my very rural part of the state. No cross country over 2 hours. I don’t anticipate flying with passengers for quite a while, but once I’m comfortable with it I would like to be able to do so with a degree of comfort.

The airplanes I am considering are a Luscombe 8, Aeronca Chief, and Taylorcraft’s. As of now, the Chief is at the top of my list.

Luscombe 8
I have been flying a Luscombe 8 as my primary training aircraft. It seems to be a pretty decent all around airplane. I will be taking my check ride in it and putting a decent number of hours on it over the next couple months. I like it a lot, except for the cabin width and lack of storage accessible in-flight.

Aeronca Chief
I have never flown a Chief, but I got to spend some time sitting in a freshly restored one last week. I found it to be much more comfortable than the Luscombe; it felt wider, was much easier to get into, and had a shelf with storage compartment behind the seat that you could put a flight bag in and still be able to access during flying.

Taylorcraft BC-12
I have never been in a Taylorcraft and don’t know anything about them, other than folks seem to like them. They also seem very reasonably priced.

Questions:

- Which do you feel would be the most comfortable to fly in?

- Which will be easiest to maintain?

- Which has the most forgiving flight characteristics and ground handling?

- Which do you think would be all around performer?

Some useful info; I’m 5’10 & about 200 lbs. The aircraft will be kept in a T-hangar at a local grass strip close to home. I have an A&P/IA who is very familiar with all of these and is willing to travel to do a pre-buy inspection/annual. I am comfortable walking away after paying for a pre-buy. My CFI will fly it home with me. I will be seeking one out that has a larger engine (85). I will be seeking one out with less than 700 hours and hope to find one with fairly recent fabric.

I mean this with the utmost respect, but I am not willing to consider any aircraft other than these 3 at this time. I would appreciate keeping all discussion related to these 3 aircraft and which one you think shines above the others. They made my list because they are all certified aircraft with side-by-side seating that fit into the light sport category.

Thanks in advance!

A buddy and Ifinished up a Chief a few years ago with a C-85. I loved that thing! It was a total joy to fly, especially with the doors off in the summer. Great performer and easy on gas. Lots of room for that type of airplane. One of my best friends had a taylorcraft, it was a fun, sexy, and beautiful antique. Im 6’1 and felt cramped, that was my only complaint. Both nice airplanes and will teach you stick and rudder skills.

All three are good side by side airplanes for what you want to do. The Luscombe is different in that it is metal, stick but in wrong hand (tandem trainers had throttle in left hand), and significantly faster. For what you are doing, faster is not good. Rough air beats you up more at 115 mph and it is a bit harder to to slow down enough to avoid damage in a ground loop. They all fly well.

Thanks for the replies, guys!

85 hp Tcraft with a short mount is by far my favorite of those 3!! They're around. There's a 1500# gross weight STC that will give you more payload than anything else mentioned, but it won't perform and fly quite as sweet as the short mount, which is 1320# gross. They can have up to 24 gallons of fuel so can go as far as any reasonable bladder. The drawback of a Tcraft is they're not as easy to get into as some, but the guy I bought mine from weighed 325 and managed to get in, so where there's a will, there's a way.
John

Any preference for yoke vs stick? Chief and Taylorcraft have yokes. A person can get used to anything, but when we have a choice... I do prefer a stick.

Zzz wrote: A person can get used to anything, but when we have a choice... I do prefer a stick.

Giggity!

TradeCraft wrote:

Zzz wrote: A person can get used to anything, but when we have a choice... I do prefer a stick.

Giggity!

I knew there would be someone... haha

Perhaps the Vagabond PA-17 should also be on the list of candidates? In C-90 guise it is quite capable.

Being a completest there is also the Fleet Canuck.

I don't have any input on those three planes, but after buying a old taildragger in April, there are a couple of things I would keep in mind when shopping. Make sure you check the latest weight & balance. I didn't look at one plane that hadn't gained weight over the years. Some just a bit, but several so much that useful load was severely limited. No one offered up this info either. I had to ask. One of the other things that stood out was how many of these hadn't flown in many years. Some were stored, but there were more than a few that had low engine hours, were in annual and supposedly flown regularly, but when I looked through the logs only had a few hours on the tach for the last 20 years.

Good luck & have fun,

Pete

The side by side requirement does limit you a bit but if can be waive I'd add a Champ to the list, it might be easier to get in and out of. Otherwise a short wing Piper might fit the bill as well.

You guys are great! Thanks for all the input!

Hardtailjohn; thanks for the tip! They sound like very capable airplanes and always seem to be well received. I’ll make sure I track one down and spend some time in it before I make a purchase.

Zzz; I don’t have much of a preference. The Luscombe I’ve been flying has a stick, but most other airplanes I’ve flown in the past had yokes. I may not have enough experience to have developed a preference yet.

pburns; thank you for the wise advice. I’ve been concerned about that myself. When I see a low SMOH, I’ve been asking how many years since the rebuild. I’ll make sure to ask how many hours it flew in the last 12-24 months as well. Funny you mentioned the useful load. I’ve noticed folks don’t seem to volunteer that upfront and get defensive when you ask, or explain it away. I get that you can’t expect much, but I’d like to make sure I can at least carry me, my fairly light wife, and a full header tank. Seems doable on most if it hasn’t been loaded down with tons of extras.

Thanks again!

I’ve never flown the other two but I loved my Luscombe. I put 400hrs hours on it flying all over Idaho. You must be flying a fuselage tank model. Models with wing tanks have a good sized hat throw which provides ample room for inflight storage. Some guys have gotten a field approval for “extended baggage” which adds a bit of space to the lower baggage area.

Buy a good Luscombe and they are cheap/easy to maintain.

Whee; you are correct, the tank is directly behind my head.

Could you guys tell me what the process is to eliminate the fuselage tank? How do you get tanks put in the wing(s)? Does that require a partial (or full) recovering and repainting of the wings? How could I ballpark the expense of that so I can gauge my total investment? I know it sounds silly, but it’s important to me to have that space there.

Thanks!

Get airplane. Fly airplane. After first annual, decide how much extra you want to pay for non-required work.

Zzz wrote:Any preference for yoke vs stick? Chief and Taylorcraft have yokes. A person can get used to anything, but when we have a choice... I do prefer a stick.

That is the one thing I really wish the Tcraft had!! There's a few things I'd love to see the Tcraft modified with, Stick, and a jackscrew trim on the horizontal top that list!

Coolidge, you might do a bit of research over on vb.taylorcraft.org if they interest you. There's usually a couple lines on the ones around for sale as well.
John

I'd choose based on which one is closest to you.

You can easily eat up half of the purchase price of an airplane by traveling around the country and doing pre-buys and still have nothing to show for it. All these old airplanes have issues, and you're not likely to find one that's "just right" without looking at a dozen or more. By that time the purchase price is trivial compared to what you spent to find it.

It's simply insane to spend thousands of dollars on travel, hotels, pre-buys and mechanic fees just to buy a $30k airplane because you figured it was the "best" model of the few you chose to consider. Then there's the issue of what your time is worth...put a couple hundred hours into finding a airplane and no matter what you buy it for, it's not a good deal.

Any airplane at a local field, within your budget and in good repair, is a much better choice than the three you've listed.

I might be biased, but I think the Taylorcraft is the best of the three for off airport/backcountry flying. Heck, even with the A-65 my old Taylorcraft would bounce on and off gravel bars and beaches just fine. I had an F19 that I really liked, I only sold it because my family grew and we needed more seats. Find one with hydraulic brakes already installed though.

I always liked this T-Cart flying out of Port Alsworth:

https://hirschmann.photoshelter.com/gal ... zh2s1kumu0
https://hirschmann.photoshelter.com/gal ... 7L_Un5ng50