Very similar to my C-140 questions. Also thinking about a Luscombe. Similar small, two seat, inexpensive to operate. Not looking for an LSA rated one necessarily, but wouldn't rule one out either.

Again, I have a few questions for those that have owned or flown Luscombes.

1) What is the cruise speed? Please specify engine that you have used. 85 hp, O-200, O-235, etc.

2) What could you put in there for baggage? Is it similar to a C-150/C-152? I'm not so worried about the weight as the wife and I don't weigh a lot. More concerned about being able to use the plane to actually go places.

3) Takeoff/Landing distances as gross?

4) Is one model highly preferable over another? Was thinking to go with metal wings since I would be storing outside, but are the fabric wings significantly better for any reason?

5) Anyone have a preference between C-140s and Luscombes?

Thanks Everyone!

Jesse

It has been a long time ago that I sold my Luscombe but I'll try to remember. Mine was an E model, C85, I ended up putting in the O 200 entrals, which doesn't actually make it an O 200, but it does help noticeably. It seems like mine would cruse at about 110 mph if you pushed it. Mine was all metal, don't know anything about the rag wing, some say the rag wing is faster. My Uncle had a C 120 with an O 200 and he could take me, but not by much. Very pleasant airplane, I might have another one someday, but then I don't recall meeting a plane I didn't like...........RB

I flew a 65 hp 8A for a couple years. Two wing tanks and two 170 lb people and you where at gross.
100 mph cruise, heavy ailerons, light rudder and elevator, Landing gear won't take any side loading.
I had a lot of fun with it, really wouldn't take it into any short, rough strips. Looks like some of the parts are getting tough to find (wheels,brakes)
and not a lot of STC's like Cub's. How about a 85hp Vagabond? I might be a little biased.
Dave

The 8F came with a C-90 and flaps!

Stick controls between your legs...much like many modern side-by-side kit designs. I've peeked in Whee's 8E, it's a nice 2-place bird. If the 8F has flaps and a C90, that would be a nice setup.

I don't fit in a Luscombe at 5-11 and about 210 pounds. Every one I've ever flown has seemed cramped and uncomfortable to me.

But... I've been friends, drinking buddys, partners in crime, you name it, with Don and Donna Warner for 30 years now. They are the semi-head honchos of one of the Luscombe groups (I can't remember which is which after the split with Doug). They'd be a good source of info for you.

http://www.luscombe-silvaire.com/team_luscombe.aspx

Give 'em a call and tell them Gump sent ya.

Gump

Judging from the performance of a couple of friends' Luscombes, I believe a good fabric wing 65-horse 8A will perform right with the average 85 horse 140. Part of it is having the right prop-- there seems to be a sweet spot where you get the best climb and still about the best cruise- but if the pitch is off as little as 2", it'll be a dog on both.
The 140 might be more satisfactory for rough-field use. If you can find a good 140 with a 290 that isn't too heavy, that'd be a good one. A good light 140 with a stroked 85 or a 90 would be good too. Just remember, the less horsepower you have, the more critical weight is.

My two cents. I was in the same position back in 70's. Could not figure out which one to get. Finally got a 1946 C140 with 85hp.

My situation was a little different. Flew out of FoxField in Lancaster, Ca. High desert----bout 30 minutes from Edwards Air Force base. Pretty windy...a lot windy.

Luscombe looked like it could be a little squirrely in the strong crosswinds we had there almost all the time...even though I think it was a little faster than the C140. Almost always had to do wheel landings.

Another reason: parts. I figured there would be a lot more parts available for the Cessna.

Was happy with it the 3 years I had it...although whenever I went west toward Gorman Pass/ Bakersfield the cars on the highway were always passing me up.

P.S. You're right about the flaps--they were useless...just slip it to loose altitude on landing.[googlevideo][/googlevideo]

Flaps aren't only useful for landing slower/steeper though. They can be really nice for slower/safe maneuvering, and breaking ground more quickly on takeoffs. How well the old hinge flaps on early Cessnas perform in that sense...I'm not sure.

Been a Luscombe owner for a few years and have no complaints. I don't really know any different either. my Luscombe is the only plane I've flown.

Mine is a 8E with a c-85 and O-200 crank. I plan on 105mph and 4gph fuel burn. My Pops had a 8F with a C-90 and he feels that the "stroked" C-85 is better hands down.

Not much room for baggage but enough space for weekend camping trips with the wife. Lots of guys have done extended baggage but its through a field approval.

if I don't have to clear an obstacle a 1000' strip at gross is doable. Shortest I'm comfortable with when loaded with camping gear and in the idaho wilderness is 1800'.

No model is really preferred over the other. light 8As with fabric are nice. I prefer a light 8E with a stroked C-85...probly because that is what i have. metal wings came around in 1947. they were available on all models as were flaps. I have never flown a flapped Luscombe but from what I am told they weigh more than they are worth.

Fabric wings weigh about 40lbs less and you can do snap rolls. they do have several ad's that you have to deal with but nothing that is too terrible.

I'm 6'1" and 180lbs and fly with my dad who is 6'1" and 200lbs. Sure it is tight but we sure have a lot of fun.

Room for my wife and I and our puppy Duke

Just out of curiosity, how the hell do you fit Duke in there?

Looks to me as if Duke is big enough that he can sit just about anywhere he'd like....

MTV

I was wondering how he fits his wife in there?

Just open the door and say "load up"...he will find room.

There's a pretty sweet looking luscombe on barnstormers right now with and O-320 and 31'' bushwheels!!!.......... The bushwheels aren't included though. Still looks like it would be a fun flying airplane.

Just a couple of quick answers... since Luscombe's have been on my mind. An 85 horse flies just over a hundred miles per hour. Sips gas and the metal one is good if you have to park outside. Make sure the one time, thorough inspection has been done to rule out spar corrosion from improper quenching and heat treating at the factory. (a fair while ago....) I flew my first one from Phoenix to Nome to Boston in 1977. Holds camping gear for two.
The later models with wing tanks only have a bit more room. Don't get fat... and you will be ok.
I also wondered if the rudder skills developed flying the Luscombe go away. Well, I went out last week and bought another one. It has been 33 years since I sat in one. Got to the hold line with no problems... and just gave her all she had. Push the tail up and away she goes. Landings are no different than any other light plane. Just make it do want you want it to. Don't just sit there and see what happens. Dance with her. Sit like a lump and she will bite you. But, then they all will eventually. The Luscombe will just do it quicker.
In summary, whole lotta fun and not much money, compared to other vices. Let me know how your research goes.

Right now, I think a C120/140 and a Luscombe are a the top of my list. I dont mind having to use the rudder. The J3 was a lot of work but very rewarding. Made me realize just how sloppy and lazy a 172 can make you over the years. Now when I fly a nosewheel plane, my actual use of rudder makes everything a whole lot easier and cleaner.

I'm probably still a year from making a purchase, but I still think about it at least 5 times a day.

Im in the same boat! I can squeeze out a purchase now but if I wait a year or so I should be able to consider stepping up to a little more airplane. Don't know if I can wait - but think that is the best way to go. I've had a 172 before and miss her dearly. I am however looking forward to moving to a different bird! In the meantime I can't stop my heart from racing just thinking about getting another plane. Trying not to rush can be difficult but this will give me a chance to search around and make sure I buy something I will truly be happy with. Oh man. I hear a plane outside now...

Don't rule out a C150 taildragger. I don't care for the later swept-tail versions, but a straight-tail (1959-63) or square-tail (1964-65) model makes into a nice taildragger. Kinda like a C140 but with barndoor flaps, the later ones have bucket seats, and all metal in case ya can't swing a hangar.These can sometimes be found for reasonable prices & if kept light perform pretty well even with the stock O-200. 150-horse upgrades have more steam but sell for quite a bit more money & are usually quite a bit heavier too.

Friend had a Texas Taildragger conversion on a swept tail C152. Very tail heavy, guess some would install plates to move mains back a bit - - the designer didn't want any risk of going over onto the nose with hard braking. Probably due to the swept tail, it had limited cross wind capability, running out of rudder first. Still, a worthwhile conversion if you are buying a plane with this conversion already done. Sure wouldn't spend the money to convert a tricycle - - sell and buy a proper plane