Hey folks I'm new here and have been voraciously reading and enjoying every thread. I am strongly considering building but I still have the option to purchase. Before I found this board I considered the Maule M-7 235c to be a good bargain and a plane that would fit my needs nicely. I also think they're handsome. After doing some reading here I've noticed some Maule; for lack of a better word, bashing. Are you folks just kidding about the Maules or are they really poor airplanes? Thanks guys

Winchester 73 wrote:Hey folks I'm new here and have been voraciously reading and enjoying every thread. I am strongly considering building but I still have the option to purchase. Before I found this board I considered the Maule M-7 235c to be a good bargain and a plane that would fit my needs nicely. I also think they're handsome. After doing some reading here I've noticed some Maule; for lack of a better word, bashing. Are you folks just kidding about the Maules or are they really poor airplanes? Thanks guys

Come see me. You'll want one! Seriously, if you're ever close, come see what Maules are all about. You're welcome anytime.

Hey thanks. I might take you up on that offer. My wife and I are going to head to the Maule plant in Georgia here in a few weeks. I just hope they don't talk me over my budget. I am adamant about keeping my plane in the extreme low six figures. If I decide to build I want to be under six figures. After we leave Georgia we are heading to Fl to check out the Aircam. Were going to make it a camping trip in the Airstream we never use.

Winchester 73 wrote: After doing some reading here I've noticed some Maule; for lack of a better word, bashing. Are you folks just kidding about the Maules or are they really poor airplanes? Thanks guys

Maules are excellent aircraft, and their numbers are highly represented around here.

Early on, the patented answer to "what plane should I get?" was "Just get a Maule," even when someone would ask a very specific question like "should I buy a Cessna 172 or a 182?" So I of course had to butt in and help people remember that it's not the answer to every question. And thus the blackballing of the word M**** was jokingly born.

There really is no genuine Maule bashing that I am aware of, it's just an inside joke at the expense of those very enthusiastic, very vocal Maule owners.

If you are going to purchase a production aircraft for backcountry, you need to consider Maule and the Cessna's ( 4 seaters---am I clear here ? I'm not talking tandem or single seaters--ok? Husky's, super cub's etc)
If you want to build and have the equivalent experimental aircraft, you need to look at Tundra and Bearhawk.
Bearhawk and Maule are tube and fabric and perform as advertised. Cessna and Tundra are all aluminum. If you check out the links on the "Why not a 180" and the "Tundra", you'll get an appreciation for the different perspectives that we pilots have.
( Yes, I know Bush caddy, Highlander, etc---I'm talking Cessna 180 equivalents)--
They are all great flying machines--they have very different acquisition/maintenance costs--
Enjoy the process--

I just put the interior back after my annual. I'm leaving Thursday morning to fly from Baltimore to Atlanta and back. A friend is picking up a puppy. At the end of May I will make the journey back to Dothan Al. with my wife, 17 yr old son and 16 yr old daughter.

I could never express how happy I am with my Maule. I don't think the bashing bothers Maule owners. You just have to have one to understand. It truly is a pick up truck in the sky. They carry a lot ,fly slow or reasonably fast, have short field capability and great to go fishing & camping with. It will take all the gear (& solar shower).

They are easy to work on, Just need a tractor supply near by and a leatherman (Just kidding.) The guy and gals at Maule are great and I try to buy from them when ever I can. It will be my last plane, it's just the right size. The damb thing just does it all. It just might not be in style or flashy.

I'm going to sit back now and enjoy all the Maule bashing.

P.S. Never met a Maule owner who didn't love them and if they got rid of it they always seem to have a warm spot for it.

TomKatz wrote:
They are easy to work on, Just need a tractor supply near by and a leatherman (Just kidding.)

My A&P would like to hide my leatherman..... it drives him nuts that I use it on my Maule all the time. All Maules should come with a leatherman.

sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

I am a previous maule owner and like them. I sold my last maul 15 or so years ago because of a divorce. I would own one again. I currently own a c-185 and a light 180hp cub. They all have their good and bad points. I think you will be happy with a maule.

If you are considering an AirCam in any way, send me a message. The AirCam is by far, the funnest airplane I have ever flown. I did not build one, but have around 500 hours flying them off airport. The ultimate machine.

The Aircam is on my shortlist. I like the idea of an open cockpit high prop stol plane. I figure with a heated seat , heated suit and proper leather; Winter flying should be comfortable. Do you think I'm misguided? I don't want a seasonal use aircraft which is really my only holdup on the Aircam.

Winchester 73 wrote: I don't want a seasonal use aircraft which is really my only holdup on the Aircam.

Climbing into the cockpit of a conventional aircraft with just a jacket, pants, and hat on to go flying in the crisp, cool air of a clear winter day is a wonderful thing. It even gets warm from greenhouse effect of the sun through the windshield.

Donning a full suit and tucking your balaclava into your collar to endure 90mph airspeed on that same day is borderline masochist. I have many hours in open cockpit light aircraft (Quicksilvers), and on a cold winter day I really, REALLY have to be motivated to suit up. Open cockpit biplanes, where your body is protected from wind chill for the most part areis a different story I imagine (never been in one.)

The AirCam is awesome, and no doubt you could have a ball in it with a fair degree of safety (twin engine), and on a warm summer day it CANNOT be beat... but for regular old flying and going places, not to mention coaxing a woman into your cockpit, take the road more travelled and go enclosed cockpit. That's if you can only own one plane.

"Maules are the best home built airplanes made in America" Vern Miller

Winchester 73 wrote:Hey folks I'm new here and have been voraciously reading and enjoying every thread. I am strongly considering building but I still have the option to purchase. Before I found this board I considered the Maule M-7 235c to be a good bargain and a plane that would fit my needs nicely. I also think they're handsome. After doing some reading here I've noticed some Maule; for lack of a better word, bashing. Are you folks just kidding about the Maules or are they really poor airplanes? Thanks guys

I'm looking at the bearhawk myself. That or the patrol. I've always wanted a cub type plane. And really want to build

My AirCam only gets flown April-October. I have the heated suiting for motorcycling and don't bother with it in the AirCam. Truth is, if you are wanting to fly in the winter, buy the Maule. Suiting up is a pain and cross country flights take a while. Still the best view in town.

Zane wrote: Open cockpit biplanes, where your body is protected from wind chill for the most part areis a different story I imagine (never been in one.)

The open cockpit providing some protection does not help much when it's below 40 outside...the Stearman does not get flown much from November to April around here and we have relatively mild winters in TN. During the summer you would swear that radial is turning the cockpits into a sauna, but in the winter that heat off the engine is unnoticeable.

This blog may give you an idea what it's like: My Fridged Date with Kaydet Kate

By the way, love the Maule...it is basically a cross between a jeep and a pick-up truck with wings. If you looking for an affordable, easy to maintain, and very capable workhorse then you cant go wrong with a Maule, but if you are looking for Cadillac style then look elsewhere.

I've owned a 1986 Maule MX-7-180 for 12 years and 1200 hours. I wouldn't trade it for anything except maybe another Maule with a 235hp IO-540 engine. I've flown other taildraggers (C-180, DHC-2, Citabria, J3, Taylorcraft, Sport Cub, Super Decathalon) and a lot of nosewheel airplanes, but in my opinion the Maule is a unique combination of many features that are important to me: low purchase and operating cost, short takeoff and landing, great useful load, rugged airframe and landing gear, great low speed performance and adequate cruise speed, good fuel economy, easy baggage access, etc, etc. The only semi-negative things are the exhaust system, which tends to crack at the welds due to vibration (mostly with the 4-cylinder engine), and the fact that it's a fabric airplane (except the wings) which means that you'll have to have it recovered and painted after 25 years at a cost of around $25,000.

You can't go wrong with a Maule for what they are designed to do. If you want luxury interior W/AC, plus 160 MPH, look at something else.

I have 800 hours in my 2000 M7 235C since October 2006. I would buy a Maule again unless I could afford Beaver, Kodiak, Otter, Caravan, or a Palatus.



I normally travel with a Mt Bike, big tent, big cot, generator, computer, getto blaster, chair, table, cooler, various totes and bags W/colthes, food, tools, guns. I wouldn't want to try and load into a plane that doen't have the big side doors.

There is a Mt Bike berried in there.






Cheers...Rob

Out of six airplanes I've owned, two were Maules. Great all around backcountry and utility aircraft. I would strongly suggest though, that horsepower is a HUGE factor in Maules. It's great to get it down and stopped in 150' but the 700 foot GW takeoff roll was a little anemic in the 180 HP M5 we just sold. Buy as much power as you can find then go have as much fun as you can stand!

Uploaded with [URL=http://imageshack.us]ImageShack.us[/UR
Maule's Rock!

TundraJoe wrote:If you are going to purchase a production aircraft for backcountry, you need to consider Maule and the Cessna's ( 4 seaters---am I clear here ? I'm not talking tandem or single seaters--ok? Husky's, super cub's etc) . . . snip
--

Hmmm, does this rise to the level of Husky bashing??

The Husky, or the Super Cub for that matter, shouldn't be ruled out - - depending on your mission and what you want, of course. The Husky, in particular, has a very broad envelope, able to get in and out of the short stuff, yet cruising at 105 knots* at half power or less and with big tires while burning less than 6 gph and holding more than 50 gallons (mine holds 54). * I can cruise at 117 knots too, but it takes 40% more fuel and seems hardly worth it.

I prefer tandem seating for the awesome view, and a stick 'cause I like a stick much better than a yoke. The Husky does have a few shortcomings. Cargo space being one, but if you plan accordingly, it holds quite a bit, though not in the league of the Maule. But then again, the Husky can get off in less distance than it takes to land at full gross