Just curious......I have heard some say (Watts, Mountianmatt, Vick, Shorton and a couple others) that a stinson will walk all over a maule?

uh-oh

here we go...

Not sure about exact performance differences.

One thing that jumps out at me is the advantage Maule has with its rear/cargo area doors. That is one feature I use all the time and I can't think of any better design in that class of aircraft. I do like the looks of a Stinson though.....

Thats true! It is the flying part that is in debate.

UtahMaule wrote:Not sure about exact performance differences.

One thing that jumps out at me is the advantage Maule has with its rear/cargo area doors. That is one feature I use all the time and I can't think of any better design in that class of aircraft. I do like the looks of a Stinson though.....

I think the spring gear looks better

I flew with Matt last summer at JC, Solider Bar, Indian Creek. Our performance was real close. I think he might climb a little faster. But he is on 8.50 VS 29s.

Cheers...Rob

Stinson's just might walk all over us Maule's just 'cause there ain't no spring gear under 'em

UtahMaule wrote:Stinson's just might walk all over us Maule's just 'cause there ain't no spring gear under 'em

Hahaha! They are both great planes as are so many others. It is like chosing between a blonde, a brunette and a redhead. Depends on your mood at the moment!

Skystrider wrote:

UtahMaule wrote:Stinson's just might walk all over us Maule's just 'cause there ain't no spring gear under 'em

Hahaha! They are both great planes as are so many others. It is like chosing between a blonde, a brunette and a redhead. Depends on your mood at the moment!

Damn.......not sure about most of you all, but I'll take any three of them girls any day of the week!!

Vick wrote:here we go...

How about a straight tail Skylane?? ( on me)

58Skylane wrote:Damn.......not sure about most of you all, but I'll take any three of them girls any day of the week!!

Where did you leave the 2 other girls Pat?.....Wonder if they would like a ride in a classic stinson.....or get mauled?

Small Tail Caddy wrote:

58Skylane wrote:Damn.......not sure about most of you all, but I'll take any three of them girls any day of the week!!

Where did you leave the 2 other girls Pat?.....Wonder if they would like a ride in a classic stinson.....or get mauled?

Or both!

I'm glad I have a trusty, honest, gentle Stinson in the hanger, BUT... I do catch myself doing a double take whenever a new flashy Maule flies by.

Never owned either, never flown either, never been in either. When I got out of the parnership in the 182B two years ago, I looked at and studied both maul and stinson. The stinson had a bit more apeal to me but the cargo door and the ease of removing the back seat in the Maul looked hard to beat. Also a Stinson is a bit low on fuel capacity. Still for some stange reson I was leaning towards the Stinson.

Ended up buying another 182B. Saw a Stinson on bushwheels last sumer and started to doubt myself again. They just look so good.

Tim

My .02

I have about 50 hours in a M4-210 and about 75 hours in a 108-2/220. To be honest I love them both and there is no easy winner on this one, just personal preference and budget. The Maule I flew didn't have the cargo door, but if one did that's a nice option. Both have about the same room (back seat in the M4 sucks), same cruise, same range, Stinson handles a little better on landing and T/O and is maybe a bit more rugged. Maule would be easier to maintain, more mods avail, but was a good 10K more on purchase price (which is why I own a Stinson). If I found a M4-210 in the same price range, I would probably have a Maule. Both are fine a/c and with a skilled pilot can be flown into and out of just about anywhere.

I'm sure the M4-145 and 108-165HC is about the same debate with a similar conclusion.

I like Muale's I just can't fit in the darn things.
If they would just raise the yokes up 4" or lower the seat 4" they would rock, and maybe if the ailerons had some more authority in slow flight. I have never flown one with VG's which I am sure would help the ailerons. I have only flown a M7-160, but my 7GCBC smokes it in short field performance and cruse, but it would be nice to carry more stuff along with me. I almost bought the M7-160, In the end I am glad I didn't.
Stinson, I have never flown one but I think they are a nice looking plane.

Mongo wrote:I like Muale's I just can't fit in the darn things.
If they would just raise the yokes up 4" or lower the seat 4" they would rock, and maybe if the ailerons had some more authority in slow flight. I have never flown one with VG's which I am sure would help the ailerons. I have only flown a M7-160, but my 7GCBC smokes it in short field performance and cruse, but it would be nice to carry more stuff along with me. I almost bought the M7-160, In the end I am glad I didn't.
Stinson, I have never flown one but I think they are a nice looking plane.

That must be one performing Citabria!

Mongo
I'm just a little fellow and I fit the Maule just fine, It was a M6 with just a few mods.
I don't even know if I would classify a 160 Maule as a BC Maule.
I rigged and flew a Maule 180 with a CS prop and it scared hell out of me, you know I thought it would act like mine did???
The trick to slow flight in a Maule is keep the ailerons in the center and fly it with the rudder. Keep the yoke back and use power to maintain a constant elevation.You are in slow flight! You get to slow and move those ailerons to far and you can end up upside down spinning the wrong way! Not good when you are close to the ground. Oh buy the way it is surprising how quick things can got to hell when they decide to!
I'm 6'3" and have been up to 300+ but I'm down to Svelte 275 now.
The old Stinson is kind of the Cadillac you know set low , stick your elbow out the window and just enjoy the ride. The Franklin is as smooth as there is. They will make you a great wheel landing pilot because they just grease themselves on.
Both the Maule and the Stinson are easy to let down, just pull the yoke all the way back and keep the ball centered with the rudder and you either have a 500 or 700 fpm decent depending on flaps.
Have fun
GT

I posted this thread only for 2 reasons.
1: as kind of a follow up to the stinson/pacer thread....to stir the stink a little.
2: as I was under the influence of coors light.
Still watching the classifieds for a maule, with or without the the 2 girls Pat left..... somewhere?
Or a big bore caddy!

M6RV6 wrote:Mongo
The trick to slow flight in a Maule is keep the ailerons in the center and fly it with the rudder. Keep the yoke back and use power to maintain a constant elevation.You are in slow flight! You get to slow and move those ailerons to far and you can end up upside down spinning the wrong way! Not good when you are close to the ground. Oh buy the way it is surprising how quick things can got to hell when they decide to!

If the ailerons had more authority you wouldn't have to resort to "Little Tricks".

I am 6'3" and a Svelte 250 I always felt like I had to move my legs out of the way to have full aileron travel.

I have heard that the 180 and up horsepower Maule's perform much better, but most planes do perform much better with more power.