Older champs and chiefs had wood spars in wing, make sure you get someone who knows about them to do pre buy.

Love the way they fly,

I like the Champ myself. Have a few minutes in one with a Conti A-65 and did my BFR and some fooling around in a "Super Champ" with 150 ponies a couple of years ago. That was a nice backcountry airplane.

I wouldn't turn my nose up at a Chief though. Folks who have them seem to have a blast.

Also consider the Piper J4 Coupe. You don't see them too often but when you do pricing seems to be reasonable. There is a guy in Talkeetna who restored one to a real cherry, had me drooling on the ramp.

There is a nice, basic Champ in TAP right now for $16k, claim a total restoration in the nineties. Sometimes that means "wrecked and repaired" but for $16K...

According to The Pilots Guide to Affordable Classics by Bill Clarke, The Aeronca Chief 11AC is 3 mph slower than thank the Champ 7AC. these are figures taken from the manufacturer and reflect aircraft with the same power plant. It is also born out by my own experience (I instruct regularly in a '46 7AC and have flown a Chief), but I would agree that rigging and fabric and engine condition could make all the difference. I have flown all the 65 horse aircraft (except the Vagabond-something I would love to do) and have always had fun.

Actually I'm surprised that there isn't more of a speed difference since the Chief is a side by side and the Champ is tandem. It comes down to preference in seating for the second person. My wife doesn't care for the view of the back of my head. She got tired of that on my motorcycle many years ago.

Flying a tandem is great for two pilots in a VFR environment. For flying with a non-pilot or a GF or wife, side by side is best.

The tcraft is side by side and is faster than the 65 horse Champ, Chief or J-3 (and lands about as slow as the J-3 even though it cruises almost 20 mph faster). I like the t-craft best of the bunch even though it has a wheel instead of a stick. It is a hard plane to get in and out of if you are big or not so spry. You also might be able to get a t-craft with the old "ships wheel" style of wheel, that is really classic. Wood spars on these aircraft, a mark in favor of the Luscombe and Vagabond with their aluminum spars, unless you find one with new wood spars. The spars on the Champ I fly are 65 years old and I treat the old girl accordingly.

I can't believe you guys don't like the new and improved Stinson. Bet it still flys a lot like a taildragger.

Ha ha good one Zane I think Im the only one who got it ?
chief's are allot of FPD (fun per dolar) taylorcrafts are better though.
When I was looking at small 2seaters a respected old pilot told me "compared to a t-caft a chief flyes like a truck"
seriously all of them have been around for 60 years for a reason buy the best one you can aford and enjoy the hell out of it!

Jaerl wrote:I can't believe you guys don't like the new and improved Stinson. Bet it still flys a lot like a taildragger.

You know... There's no excuse for the little wheel to ever be up front...BUT... That Stinson doesn't look TOO Island-of-Dr-Moreau like so many tricycle conversions do. Ok, what's next?

Richard - the J4 suggestion looks like a good one - thanks. And I like the stick! Came across this interesting write-up http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepJ-4.2.html

Terryd23 wrote:Richard - the J4 suggestion looks like a good one - thanks. And I like the stick! Came across this interesting write-up http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepJ-4.2.html

Here's a pic of the one based at PATK. Not a great photo with the covers unfortunately, and of course a photo doesn't do it justice:



I'm a tall guy and the thing I have against Taylorcrafts, Luscombes, the J3/5, and to a lesser extent Champs is getting out of the damn things without falling out. The Coupe seemed to offer better entry/exit as does the Chief.

Ok I have a few (what may be elementary) questions that I'm hoping to get your help with. Here goes! How long does the fabric on a plane last? Is it recommended that it be replaced every so many years regardless of condition or does it only need to be replaced if certain wear is evident? What should I be looking for for sign of that wear? About how much does it cost to replace if need be? Should I completely avoid wood wing spars? Do they tend to dry out and lose strength over the years? I'm not very familiar with these beautiful old classics. I may be going to see a Chief this weekend and am trying to edumacate myself so I at least have an idea what to be looking for.

You guys have already been very helpful. I really appreciate it!

I agree with everyone else that say the Taylorcraft is better

Terry - there are LOTS of variables regarding your questions.

Fabric life depends upon if the airplane is left outside in the elements or has been hangared all it's life. (and North or South also makes a difference due to heat and sunlight factors and of course climate control blah blah blah...)

The newer fabrics like Stits, Ceconite, Stewarts and various others will tend to last quite a bit longer than original cotton & dope (like the Chief's were born with). So I would say as a general rule of thumb, fabric life can be anywhere from 10 to 30 years depending on how it's treated. (any longer than that and you might want to get in there and poke around anyway looking for tube corrosion etc, etc...the newer style fabrics don't really fall apart as much as paint cracks off and they start to get really ratty) That said, I know of a 1958 A model PA-18 nearby that still flies with the original cotton covering (I wouldn't do that). There is also a punch test that will let your A/P determine fabric life.

A good inspection of a wood spar by somebody who knows what they're doing will determine if it's viable with no cracks. If it turns out good, then there's no worries flying a wood spar. Some people even prefer them. And there are a LOT of them still flying - and will be for generations to come.

Brad

Chief on the lake below:





You just never know where you will find a Chief hiding these days...

ajfriz wrote:I agree with everyone else that say the Taylorcraft is better

The T-cart is certainly the classiest jewel of all the fabric taildraggers. Thanks, C.G.

The T-Crate is certainly a nice little bird, but as I pointed out does have lots of drawbacks too!
If your taller than a pygmy, getting in & out is a royal PITA The lift strut is so directly in the way it must have been designed that way by an evil mind. Once your inside, the cabin is shorter by quite a bit, where-as the Chief has an actual seat adjuster similiar to an auto, at 6' I can put the seat so far back as to almost not reach the rudder pedals In my Crate with my newly designed seat moved rear as far as that stupid bar will allow, my knees still hit the bottom of the instrument panel! Next is the trim, doing touch & goes on a short lake or field you really appreciate the quick sliding trim system in the Chief, winding a crank with a few other things to occupying your concentration just isn't as handy. Then there's the balanced feathers...or unbalanced as in the case of the T-Crate. The Crate is definatly sleeker & thus faster by 10mph, maybe even a little more, but are these birds really meant for cross country runs. More important to me, I'm convinced the Chief will get off the ground faster if everything is equal (hp-weight).
Choosing between a Chief or comparible T-Crate is like the old "which is better between the 308 vs 30-06" argument! Each does the same job just a little differently, with plus & minus's on each side!
I think it's more important to find the one that fits your body, & is the best quality buy for $$ your budget will allow.

Littlecub wrote:Good question.......
I had a Champ that was a real peach to fly. I'll add a question. Does the Chief have the same flight characteristics as a Champ? Does it have the same wing? How does it compare 'flying wise'. I personally prefer two 2 window seats, and understand that is personal taste, but that is why I never researched the Chief.
I don't want to hijack the thread, just expand it a tad......

lc

I received an email from a current Chief (previously a Champ) owner and for what it's worth, he said that the Chief is a little more challenging to land due to its' shorter length. The Chief is 20 ft 10 in in length where the Champ is 21 ft 6 in... The Chief's wing by the way is 36 ft where the Champ is 35 ft 2 in... Would that make much if any difference??

senior wrote:The T-Crate is certainly a nice little bird, but as I pointed out does have lots of drawbacks too!
If your taller than a pygmy, getting in & out is a royal PITA The lift strut is so directly in the way it must have been designed that way by an evil mind. Once your inside, the cabin is shorter by quite a bit, where-as the Chief has an actual seat adjuster similiar to an auto, at 6' I can put the seat so far back as to almost not reach the rudder pedals In my Crate with my newly designed seat moved rear as far as that stupid bar will allow, my knees still hit the bottom of the instrument panel! Next is the trim, doing touch & goes on a short lake or field you really appreciate the quick sliding trim system in the Chief, winding a crank with a few other things to occupying your concentration just isn't as handy. Then there's the balanced feathers...or unbalanced as in the case of the T-Crate. The Crate is definatly sleeker & thus faster by 10mph, maybe even a little more, but are these birds really meant for cross country runs. More important to me, I'm convinced the Chief will get off the ground faster if everything is equal (hp-weight).
Choosing between a Chief or comparible T-Crate is like the old "which is better between the 308 vs 30-06" argument! Each does the same job just a little differently, with plus & minus's on each side!
I think it's more important to find the one that fits your body, & is the best quality buy for $$ your budget will allow.

I must be a pygmy because I don't find it bad at all. Mine does have a big skylight and a modified seat though. Of course being 5'8" I can fit and have plenty of room for my old lady (5'3" 105lbs). That pesky trim thing doesn't bother me either since mine has the little flapper under the elevator and a lever under the seat to control it (doesn't matter that it isnt't very effective) BTW I've never seen a chief that performs as well as a tcraft. Even the pre-war chiefs aren't as quick to get off the ground. I'm sure you can tell that I'm not bias

OK - not to sound lazy here but I've been used to the ease of just turning a key to start the engine. How much of a pain is it to have to spin the prop to crank her up?? Is it just a matter of minor inconvenience or are there other issues to consider?

Armstrong starters save weight and are part of the 'charm'. Even for float operation on a lake, I'll go with manual. But in any current/river operation, an electric starter would be a must-have, in my book.


lc

Here's an Aeronca Chief.........mountains, high DA, it don't care.........

160 HP 0-320........38' wingspan, metal spars, big baggage, wing tanks......works good
( built it as a homebuilt from a basket case)

might even be for sale