My son's learned to fly in a 1964 Super Cub. They purchased it for $25,000 in 1989 and it was a nice one, probably be $75,000 or more today. They sold it in 1991 and bought a 1957 182 run out, out of annual for 10 years, for $15,000 that they have restored. I purchased my 1971 185 for $25,000 in 1976. 1,000 hours on it. I carry $145,000 insurance on it now and have had it insured for that amount for many years. I've done a lot to the 185 over the years and painted it twice. Both planes, Super Cub & 185 were purchased for the same amount but 13 years apart. The 182 will do a lot more than the Super Cub, but is worth less than the Super Cub these days, funny things about airplane prices. A Super Cub is good for what it does as is the 185, two different airplanes. I've owned two ragwing 170's back in the sixties and a cream puff 1954 180 I bought in 1969. My favorite is still my 185, just love the 185 after 37 years. I'm suprised at what the old Super Cubs are worth these days. I flew skydivers back in the late sixties and the early model 180's we had were bought for $3,500 to $4,000, cream puffs they were not. Look what a good early model 180 is worth these days. I don't think you can explain the cost of these airplanes these days as the OP ask at the start of this thread.
Ron

There is a song...
"It ain't no thinkin' thing....."

Keep the comments coming.
They're all appreciated.
The only Cub I've been in was the original Carbon Cub and I was in the back seat.
Guess I'll have to spend some time in one.
Sounds like a good plan
Thanks
Mark

SkyTruck wrote:Keep the comments coming.
They're all appreciated.
The only Cub I've been in was the original Carbon Cub and I was in the back seat.
Guess I'll have to spend some time in one.
Sounds like a good plan
Thanks
Mark

How big a guy are you, Mark? At 6'1" I personally am on the edge of comfort in the front seat of any Cub and have found the Scout to be a much more comfortable fit, while still retaining some of the tandem fun if not the ultra low-speed wing characteristics.

Big enough that I would only consider the wider fuselage or a modified PA-12.
I'm up in Montana through New Years and have an opportunity try one on.
I'll report back.
Mark

Econ 101. Price is set by supply and demand. Individual demand for aircraft performance varies quite a bit while supply is more limited. That's why this discussion is mostly about personal preferences.

My preference is to get in and out where few others can. It is sport aviation in that regard. Not load hauling, getting there fast or camping. So I want a Cub. I also appreciate 5 gph and low maintenance cost not withstanding the price of entry. Mike

I had a used aircraft buyers guide from 1984. The black book price for a 180 was 27k. Remember reading a book about a guy who tricked out his PA-12 with a 180hp. Price back in 1976 was $6000. By the time he wrote the book in 82 he said that price had climbed to 18k for the same install.
That was about the time the lawyers were smelling money in aviation. Put some companies out of business. Liability is most likely responsible for such extreme price escalations. As new aircraft prices soar, so do follow the used market.
As for the price of the venerable super cub. Things are worth what people are willing to pay. Simple as that.

Sky Truck,

Don't give up on your heavy metal aircraft so easily--Unless of course you are thinking about a straight tail Cessna 182. A buddy of mine in Hamilton, Mt. has a stock 58, 8's on the mains, 6 on the nose, Sportsman STOL. It is absolutely amazing in the hands of a professional. Fly it light, fly it right, fly it tight!

He takes it to Church and back on a regular basis.(Frank Church River of No Return Wilderness) He can comfortably go in and out of all of the "Cub only strips", including the Big Quad, all with a 200+ pound passenger as well as over 25 lbs. of safety gear, and enough fuel to return. His aircraft is not a beater, but looks like it came off the showroom floor. The Flying Hawkes would love to have your Cessna 185, but he makes it happen with what he has. He can get a kitchen pass and run to Church with a buddy in the morning, return and load up the family and be in Utah all by noon. The versatility and reliability of the Cessna is incredible. There is More To Do in Montana, it borders Idaho, a Pilot's Paradise.

Now, I didn't bash the cub, the only thing better than the above, would be to have both. Unless you are going to do the extreme off airport landing thing, your load hauling, real estate covering, all metal Sky Truck is hard to compete with. (A PPonk 180 would be nice)

Never Weaken!

Richard

I've often wondered the same. My Maule performs very closely to the cub and carries a heap of stuff. My avionics package is much better than any cub i've ever seen (a function of panel space). Mine is a 2000 copy, so I don't have the age issue to deal with yet. Repairs on my Maule are a non-issue. As an example, I had to have my PTT Button replaced. The part was $2.00. My A/P told me that an equivalent part on a Cessna would have cost hundreds. All this and my plane is still depreciating much faster than a cub (and probably a Cessna too). Myself, I can't understand it, but there are a ton of things I don't understand.

95% of the time a cub would fill my mission requirement… But why bother buying a cub when my operating costs are about the same and my performance and mission envelope is so much wider?

I love the stories of the cost of Maule parts, and how the Maule guys rub it in when ever possible

It reminds me of when I needed what amounted to a teleflex type cable for the winch control for my crane. Like a dummy I went through the crane factory and paid over $300.00 for a new one that lasted less then a year before failing internally. Then I wised up and my local heavy equipment fixer got me one locally through a farm equipment supplier for $37.00 and is also of higher quality! That was 3 years ago and still working perfect. If Maule made cranes I'd look into one.

courierguy wrote:I love the stories of the cost of Maule parts, and how the Maule guys rub it in when ever possible

It reminds me of when I needed what amounted to a teleflex type cable for the winch control for my crane. Like a dummy I went through the crane factory and paid over $300.00 for a new one that lasted less then a year before failing internally. Then I wised up and my local heavy equipment fixer got me one locally through a farm equipment supplier for $37.00 and is also of higher quality! That was 3 years ago and still working perfect. If Maule made cranes I'd look into one.

As close as they come to one!

Over regulation has to be a big factor in airplane values. The cost to the manufacturer to get parts/airplanes certified, is ridicules, that is passed on to the consumer which is not allowed to use uncertified parts on a certified airplane. Next the law suit factor. All of the companies involved in the manufacture of airplanes, parts, or repair facilities must insulate themselves from being taken down by a law suit crazy public, this adds significantly to the cost right down the line, hard to imagine how much. Lastly, lets not forget about the inflation factor, the cost of everything has gone up, especially since the 70's, which brings the value of everything else up with it. This all trickles down..

It is hard for most of us to be logical when we get the burning desire for something new. For most of us, airplanes are not logical to begin with (we of the BCP group have that cross to bare). It is pretty easy to get caught up in the excitement of watching videos and reading tales of modified Cubs skimming across water before landing in small areas littered with basketball size boulders. I guess the question you have to ask yourself, in reality is this your main mission? How many people or how much weight do you need/want to carry? Are you using the plane on longer trips? How easy is it getting in and out of a smaller plane such as a Cub and how long can you comfortably sit in one?

I have had a few planes, including owning a very nice 185 and equally nice Super Cub at the same time. I loved both airplanes, each had their strong points, but when I moved to Canada full time 6 years ago, decided it was time to make a decision to keep one or the other. I kept the 185. In my case, the load carrying/comfort/speed factor, out trumped the Cub. The Cub was fun, would get in and out of somewhat smaller lakes on floats the 185 could not, but it had the # of passengers/load carrying factor going against it. I am 6'3, 210 lbs, the Super Cub is not all that much fun to get in and out of, or that comfortable for any length of time, the PA12 I fly sometimes is only marginally better. There is no comparison on the two for traveling, comfort or speed. That was how I based my final decision and 6 years later know it was the right one for me.

If money is not a factor, buy a Cub as a second plane. I am guessing you would miss not having a bigger plane, since you have one for a reason now.

Steve

courierguy wrote:I love the stories of the cost of Maule parts, and how the Maule guys rub it in when ever possible

It's how we roll...

Aw heck. Life's short. Medical certifications are shorter. Try as much stuff as you can, while you can. No regrets!

How SuperCubs, or any Cub, is worth what people are asking???

"The price of anything is the amount of life you exchange for it."
Henry David Thoreau

WOW, some great replies by everyone! I'll relate my own desire for a SC. My very first airplane ride was at the age of 8 and it was in a SC on floats! From that moment on I told myself that one day I would own a SC. Hasn't happened yet. I am the type that usually uses common sense verses my emotions when buying something, especially an airplane. My first plane was a 150 that I immediately traded for a 172. I got it for various reasons, the biggest was having a family and there was NO way I would have been able to fly with only one extra seat.

Kids grow up and I was in a position to persue my dream of getting something on floats but really couldn't afford a SC and the 172. Still wanted the SC and looked at way more of them then I care to remember. After 'crunching the numbers' I realized I could buy a much cheaper plane, that would do 90% of what the SC would do, and I could buy it for nearly 1/3 of what the SC would cost. Plus, I could keep my very versitile 172. I bought a heavily modified Champ on floats from a fellow poster on this site. I was extremely happy with the Champ since it really did 90+% of what a SC does. Flew it on several excursions alongside the much vaunted SC and never once needed anything more for my needs. Also, as others have stated, I found out that as I got older and having flown in SC's, they are not the most comfortable plane to be in for an extended period of time. The Champ had more room and therefore more comfortable on those longer cross countries.

Sold it and now have an S7. What an awesome little plane!! Might not haul the same load as a SC, but it will do most everything else one would do in a SC....just ask Tom!!

A friend bought a SC and after having it over a year is rethinking his decision of buying it for all the reasons posters have stated. It is slow, uncomfortable, not very economical in regards to fuel economy. Cruises around 85 on Bushwheels while burning 8 gph. Although he does like how it performs, his 'emotional' attachment has been satisfied.

I hope this doesn't sound like I am knocking the SC, it is probably the best plane out there for the average guy in Alaska that needs its capabilities. I won't be moving to Alaska anytime soon so I can get by without those capabilities. I still would like to eventually have one but common sense gets the better of me and I can do what I need with something less.

It should be mentioned that there is a huge difference in the slow flight characteristics of a 180/182 vs SC. I fly our planes to check on cattle and water systems for hours on end at the edge of the envelope slow flight and steep turns. When the 180 is 60mph or less it has a much higher angle of attack than cruise and the controls get somewhat sloppy, whereas the SC is straight and level with excellent control authority at 45-50mph, neither have VG's and use flaps as necessary (Our ranch is between 4200'msl and 5250' msl, airspeeds at lower altitudes are a little slower for good control authority). For surveying the SC is so much better not only operationally but also for visibility.

If you are someone who is going to fly your plane at the edge of its limits alot, then you will not fail to notice the big difference between a Cessna truck and a SC. The 180 can get in and out of really right spots and when lightly loaded is very capable and somewhat cub-like. That said, on the edge of limits the SC goes all relaxed and easy into a tight spot slow in a canyon that the 180 has me at max 110% don't die focus mode Therein lies the biggest difference. There is absolutely no way I can take the 180 into many of the places I have been taking our SC, when ur ass eats the seat in the cub it's a pretty good indication the Cessna won't go there. As far as surveying our herd/game and water lines etc, there is just no comparison, the SC does a superior job with a much higher margin of safety/control.

I've always heard sayings like a Cessna will do 90% of what a cub will do etc. I often wonder if those pilots have much time pushing the limits in either type, I am not the most experienced by any stretch, but it has been my observation that this is a somewhat bogus and irrelevant statement. There is a much bigger difference in flight characteristics than some give credit, atleast in my experience, YMMV

Inflation sucks and you older guys that got to play this game at a much lower price of entry with fewer regulations just keep on rubbin it in

(Edit: Double Post)

That was such a great reply Skalywag, you could even say it twiced!

The rise in prices of the SC reminds me of "vintage" motorcycles. Back when I raced, you used to be able to buy a running RD350/400 for $100. Now you're lucky it they're under $3k. Same with Honda CB350s. Those things are complete piles of shite (so not really a comparison to a SC...), and the popularity of old crap has made their prices jump. Old Triumphs are worth a ton, if you sort out the electrical and other problems to keep them running. And speaking of turds, old Harleys? Crazy money.

Look at motorcycles like the new BMW GS series. Those are going to over $25K now. Most owners probably do no more than take them down the occasional dirt road.

That doesn't mean I wouldn't love to own a SuperCub...
Another poster said it right. Value is in the eye of the beholder.