Seriously,
I like tinkering on an airplane and my Maule has been taken about as far as it is smart to go. I'm at the point to where a lot of money is required for little gain. The IO-540 isn't cheap to feed either. I've got a kid that is about a couple of years away from learning to fly, and the Maule isn't my idea of a trainer. I'm not intending to replace the Maule, but rather augment it.
I'm looking for a good type of two seat taildragger that doesn't burn a lot of fuel, and can burn Mogas. Speed is not important, STOL and off airport capability really isn't either. Price is important, so Cub type aircraft aren't being considered. I'm looking for a fun, classic type of aircraft to just fly around locally and with the idea of it becoming my Son's, if he will exhibit the required maturity. I'm not afraid of fabric, but I am leery of wood. I'd prefer sticks, but don't have to have them either. Dual controls are a must though. I want to stick to certified aircraft.
I've been thinking about a C-120 or C-140 or a Luscombe. I've flown a 140, but I know very little about a Luscombe.
I'm looking for advice and not on just those two models either. They seem to be about the best values, but there may be reasons (bad ones) for that, that I'm unaware of.

For the task you outlined, it would be very hard to beat an Aeronca 7AC Champ. Find one that's in rebuild, or recently rebuilt, with new spars, and take care of it. Nothing to fear about wood spars, IF you know what they've been subjected to.

There's a fellow here doing a beautiful rebuild on one, with new spars, and new fabric. He's going to be asking a lot of money for the type, but when he's done it'll be a new airplane. And, I believe it is legal in the LSA class as well.

The little Cessnas are fine as well. I'm in the process of checking out a couple of kids who bought a really nice little 140A. Nice little airplane, though to really work well, they need a few upgrades, in my opinion, but same with the Champs, or...

Luscombe's are great little airplanes, but they are a little challenging to handle on the runway. I wouldn't want to try to train someone from the git go in one, myself, though it has been done, probably many times.

The Champ is one of the gentlest, nicest handling little airplanes you'll find.

My thoughts.

MTV

The engine is a bit long but somthing like this would work pretty well.
http://www.usedaircraft.com/boardview.c ... tCode=C151

Tim

How bout a Pacer? Cheap as chips and twice the fun.

Champ's are great as are the little Cessna's.

One drawback to the Luscombe is the brakes. They are only on the left side and are offset heal-type brakes. Easy to get your feet in the wrong place until you get the hang of it. I know of one or two folks who got a little energetic and went over on their back!

I had a Luscombe 8A for a couple of years and they are sweet handling aircraft but the CFI has got to really trust the student to stay off those brakes!

The Luscombe will slip like all get out and float forever! (No flaps and 35 foot wings) but with a little practice will land like an angel!

As a trainer though I think a Champ is a great way to go and here is a little story to go with that.

When I was a student pilot my wife would come down to the airport and sit at a picnic table to watch me practice T & L 's in a 7AC Champ. One time I really smacked the ground hard and bounced way in the air. I pushed in the power and went around since I was practically at pattern altitude anyway. When I finished for the day and walked over to pick her up, she was sitting in the car with her back to the runway.

I asked her what was up. She said "Remember that one landing when you bounced real high?" I said "Yeah". She said two old guys were sitting at the next picnic table over and one turned to the other and commented "Yup, seen 'em hit like that and pop the windshield right out!" She says "That is when I went back to the car."

Tough little birds those Champs!

Or, go with the citabria and have fun with aerobatics not to mention "decent" performance. There are some 7ECAs and 7GC--s that aren't that much more than a Champ. When I finally find the right Cessna 180, I hope I will be able to hang onto the 7GCBC for the fun aspect.

I agree with MTV the little cessnas are great and all metal spars nothing has more bad bounces with students at the controls , you nearly cant hert one. Champs are great also but if you crack a spar it gets expensive,and its not to hard to do expecially on skis.
I find it odd no one has mentioned a taylorcraft doors on bolth sides fast as a 120-140 takes off as short as a cub and compared to a tcraft a champ flies like a truck. Some idiot put the brakes below the rudder pedals on bolth of them though!

I'm trying to stay below $25,000. That unfortunately seems to knock out Citabria's and Pacers. T-carts seem to be available in that range though. I like the looks of a Luscombe, but I'm afraid it may not be suitable as a trainer. I need to find me a Chief to fly.
I have found a 170 that has been stripped of paint and it seems the owner lost interest and it has been sitting for some number of years in a pole barn behind his house. He now has a "flying flea", really bizzare looking flying machine, but the 170 hasn't run for a couple of years. Any idea what something like that would bring?

If you get a two seat plane, regardless of make, I'd highly recommend trying to find an upgraded engine. The 0-235 has made my 140 a much, much more usable airplane than it would have been with a stock engine. It burns a little more fuel, and cost a little more to buy, but it's actually a usable plane. A stock 140 simply couldn't carry two people and enough gas to go anywhere during the warm months of summer.

If you could find a champ or a 120/140 with a 125hp lycoming you'd have a GREAT plane...sort of a minature super cub or pocket sized 180.

The T Crafts are, as noted, a great little airplane for the money. They are a little hard for old, decrepit, and not very flexible guys like my ownself to get in and out of. They also have a little harsher stall characteristics than the Champs/Cubs/Luscombe, etc. Not to say dangerous, but they have a semi symetrical wing, which tends to stall just a bit more abruptly. Easy to deal with, after a good checkout.

Honest little airplanes, nevertheless, and well worth considering.

MTV

qmdv wrote:The engine is a bit long but somthing like this would work pretty well.
http://www.usedaircraft.com/boardview.c ... tCode=C151

Tim

I like straight-tail C150 taildraggers, but $30K is a bit steep for one with the stock engine. Ad said 190 smoh, btw, so "engine is a bit long" meaning escapes me. ??
This'd be a good trainer, with the added benefit that living outsode shouldn't hurt it too bad- unlike a fabric airplane.

Eric

These threads are great, everyone's got good advice, and of course, everyone already knows the perfect airplane for you.

But here's another vote for a Luscombe. Depending on your field elevation and typical density altitude, you could get an A model with a 65hp engine that burns about 3-4 gallons an hour, of car gas. That's pretty tough to beat. I had a C90 (90 hp) 8E that only burned about 5.5 gph.

They were built as trainers in the 40s, and there is absolutely no reason someone couldn't learn to fly in one these days. It'll teach your son to use his feet at an early stage. They fly nice, slip great, and on the occasion that everything falls into place at the right time, they land nicely too.

I owned mine for a couple years and really enjoyed it, and I learned a lot about flying. People say they have poor ground handling characteristics, but I don't think they're much more difficult than any other tailwheel airplane. You just never stop flying the thing untill it's tied down.

My next vote would be for a Citabria, but I think you'd be spending $10-15k more.

I just sold my Luscombe for under $20k, and it seemed a tough market (for me), so I think you could do pretty good right now.

Best of luck,
John

The T-cart is appealing. My wifes Grandfather, who had passed before I met her was their chief mechanic before WWII. I've got his old A&P books etc. I found a "nose wheel gland nut wrench" for a YP-59A in with some of the old tools. He and a couple of friends built a racer in the 30's. Unfortunately it killed the pilot and he gave up racers.
Did there used to be air races in Ohio?

Low&Slow wrote:I just sold my Luscombe for under $20k, and it seemed a tough market (for me), so I think you could do pretty good right now.

Best of luck,
John

I like the Luscombe, never flown one, the looks just appeal to me. What catagory are they? How aerobatic are they? I would like something for unusual attitude recovery training. The only thing I've ever spun was a 152 and it surprised me how violent a maneuver it was.
What do you look out for in a Luscombe?

Luscombe 8A's are grandfathered in under the light sport rule. There are three main things to look for.

1.) An AD on corrosion on the carry through spar
2.) The original cast rudder hinges were susceptible to cracking and need replacement if not already done
3.) The wings need to have had the extra inspection ports added.

If the plane has the fuselage mounted tank (14 gallons) then the top filler cap needs to have the gooseneck air vent. This provides extra air pressure to keep the gas flowing on take off as there is not enough height difference between the tank and carburetor.

Hope that helps.

A good friend of mine has a Luscombe 8A. Great performer on 65 horsepower-- close to 95-100 cruise AND good climb. Out-climbs my 170 angle-wise, but I've got more forward speed and I suspect better climb rate. His Vx is lower I guess.
Luscombe 8A's are light sport compliant, 8E's are not (too heavy). Small inside, but so is a T-Craft or Chief. I think the 120/140/150 is a bit more roomy-- but none of these are LS compliant.
I don't know that Luscombes should be considered aerobatic, I belieeve it's more of a case of them NOT being placarded against certain maneuvers-- spins, loops, etc. Don't know that they roll very well.
Way before Reno, the Cleveland Air Races were the big thing. Like back in the 40's.

Eric

zero.one.victor wrote: I don't know that Luscombes should be considered aerobatic, I belieeve it's more of a case of them NOT being placarded against certain maneuvers-- spins, loops, etc. Don't know that they roll very well.

Eric

Yeah, that.

I've spun them before, and it's a pretty rapid spin. I've also watched others preform acro in a Luscombe, but I never did any in mine. Something about 60 year old airplanes I guess - just seems like they're better suited for breakfast runs into grass strips than they are for loops and rolls. Just my take.

John

My Luscombe at Johnson Creek. Get one with the round tail....

Anybody see that post that some kid made in another forum about nearly ripping the tail off his Luscombe? I think the story went that some rivets pulled from being weakened by corrosion, and the vertical stab nearly departed. He managed to land safely.

Yes, I saw that video somewhere. I think he was pushing that plane to do things a 60 year old plane wasn't designed for. That kid could sure fly and the video belongs on this site.

Bill

I too would suggest that performing aerobatics in ANY older airplane is a bit higher in risk. The Luscombes COULD be a little worse in this context, since fabric covered airplanes, by their very design have to be disassembled periodically for cover, and if that's done right (a big IF there), the airframe should be subject to a thorough inspection at the same time. Harder to do that with a metal airplane, and even a little corrosion in the wrong spot can ruin your day.

If that's the approach you're thinking of, I'd take a hard look for a 7KCAB Citabria that's had some TLC and a conciencious rebuild. Granted, the price may be a little high, but it's an aerobatic airplane, and because of the lack of flaps, doesn't typically bring as high a price as does the 7GCBCs.

Champs are approved for spins, as are, I believe, T Crafts. Upside downs?? Nope.

Here's another thought, if that's really where you want to go (Unusual Attitude recovery stuff): Clipped wing Cub or TCraft. They are aerobatic, and they are inexpensive. Unfortunately, I believe they are, by definition, also all in the Experimental category. You can find them pretty cheap, though.

MTV