Most people on this forum tend to like 182s and we always see posts of people looking to buy a plane. Most responses always point towards the 182 given ones 'actual' mission versus dream mission. But is there a reason more people (if one is looking for a trike like the 182) don't take a look at the Maule MT-7 180 or 235? The numbers on these things are great, you probaby dont have to worry about a weak nose wheel attachment, and they tend to be 45+ years younger than the 182s on the market. They're not cheap, but they're not much different than the Cessnas in this market. What are your guys thoughts?

PS I have a feeling that owning a trike Maule might be some sort of sin though. Forgive me.

I'll bite.
Having owned a 1948 170 and a a 1958 182 before purchasing my M7-235, I don't see any reason why a person would not consider a Maule. I haven't flown an MT, but have been told there isn't much difference between the Trike and the Tailwheel models. There are not many planes out there that have a top speed of 155 mph and a stall speed of 40 mph. The Maule is lightweight and most have around 1000lb. useful load. They can carry way more fuel than is comfortable between rest stops, the M series have enough room and seating for 5, with the MX series 4. The later models have a rear suicide door, which opens opposite of the passenger door to allow for large cargo to be loaded.
I was a dyed in the wool Cessna fanatic. I learned in a 1946 140, borrowed a 1960 152 for a couple years, bought the 1958 182, and moved to the 1948 170 to learn to be a tailwheel pilot again. I took the 170 to an idiot to get new fabric and paint, and after 3 years of waiting for completion decided to buy a 180. I wanted the 180 terribly bad, but just could not afford to own one. It was not just the purchase price, but the pricing of used parts is basically rape.I do feel that if I had kept the 182, I would still be a Cessna fanatic, but the Maule turned me.
Luckily, I stumbled upon Patrick Romano's YouTube videos and made contact with him, and he told me to call Jeremy Ainsworth. Jeremy has a vast knowledge of all Maules, and if you need help, he will gladly share. (maules.com on maulepilots.org) All of my observations have zero scientific validation, it's just that I fly for fun and my M7 makes me laugh out loud.
It's sorta like the old story, sometimes it is better to not let strangers know you are a Maule pilot, just tell them you're a piano player in a whorehouse!

Dont know about performance , but cabin space , the Cessna is way more comfortable , I can fit two mountain bikes , I fit mine fully assembled, only drop the seat, second bike remove front wheel, (have Atlee Dodge seats).
You can seat comfortably in the rear seats.
With extended baggage you can fit surfboards no problem.

Fun factor I bet the Maule is fun, my 182 is also fun.
Performance would be interesting to compare an M 7 to a modified 182.

Best thing would be to go fly an M7 and compare it to the 182.

182s are great and Ill own another in a few weeks here but I was just looking at some of the MT-7-235 and there is something really appealing about the newer planes, skylight, glass doors, pretty much the same performance numbers as a 182 (depending on mods), low low tt, no crazy AD list.

What are the flight characteristics on the Maules?

182’s are very nice to fly. I’ve only flown a Maule a few times, but also nice and fun.

However, depending on your height and age; the Maule’s are simply and undeniably harder to enter and exit. Also, I remember there’s a knee room problem on the lower outboard part of the instrument panel. I noticed this 30 years ago while test flying a new Maule at the factory. “No sir, can’t fix that, there’s a structural tube behind that panel that’s hitting your knee, you are pretty tall,”

That really was a nice visit/factory tour/test flight though, nice people.

Bought a then 30 year old 180, still have it.

Maules have a reputation for being expensive to insure. Is that true of the nosewheel models?

It is important to make sure the Insurance underwriter (via the broker) knows and understands that the insurance request is for a Trigear model not the Taildragger. This makes quite a difference.
The cost of a bent wingtip, aileron, gear, whatever, for a Maule is a sixth of an equivalent Cessna part.
There are thousands of Cessnas on the Insurance books and only a few hundred Maules so the insurance claim payouts, though cheaper, are amortized over much different amounts of claims.
Because of age and cost between Cessna and Maule, one can compare a 235 or 260hp trigear Maule like a C172 on super steroids regarding what they can do, then one can look at the Maule door system comparable to a C206s.
Very few aircraft have the advantage and versatility of double rear door size and just a few minutes for door off operations.
And then there is the now 2200 tbo of Lyc engine v 1500 or 1700 on the Continentals.
Balancing higher insurance cost versus lower maintenance cost should be considered in purchase planning.

I’ll try to address all the questions I’ve seen above...

500hr PPL in an MXT-7-180 and insurance is running about $1200/yr. Call the team at BWI (BWIfly.com)

Maintenance is stupid simple and stupid cheap.

No fancy electrical crap to go south and wear out. Johnson bar flaps are awesome.

I’m 6’6” so it’s a tight fit and an interesting feat of human origami to enter and exit but I can’t find a better value for the dollar.

Factory support is awesome.

It’s a slow bird, since it’s 180 and Fixed Pitch, but I plan on 125mph.

Easy to fly once you master landing by the numbers. The hardest adjustment is remembering to shed off all your speed early on final.

VG’s are a must or you’ll get real mushy around 55MPH. Put em on and you’ll have full aileron and elevator authority all the way to the hangar.

As far as the stigma? Every single sky wagon and carbon cub guy will make fun of you, every single day. But the Maule brethren still allow us around the campfire.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Everything BradleyP said.

Fits my mission perfect and perfectly happy with it. But to be fair, you need to compare 235HP Maule to the 182 for performance numbers.

My mechanic has a customer with a tailwheel Maule. A newer one, not sure the model. Its owned by a seasoned citizen who has ground looped it three times. He never claims it on his insurance policy because he knows he will be cancelled and never get insurance again. He writes a check each time for repairs. My mechanic says all three repairs as far as parts go are about the price for parts to fix one ground looped Husky or Cessna. Also built like a tank.

I've owned 5 airplanes over the years. My last plane was a 182 with the Texas Skyways O-550 engine conversion for a beast of an airplane. It was a thirsty devil, but shrugged its shoulders at high density altitude conditions. It was expensive to own and operate overall. I owned that plane while living on the east coast, and flew it from Virginia to Rhode Island through the Hudson River VFR flyway by New York City. Lots of good memories of that plane and the places it took me. The plane itself was boring and as I mentioned before, expensive to maintain and to operate. I sold that and bought a Maule MX7-180C taildragger. As the model number indicates, my Maule has the normally aspirated180 Hp Lycoming O-360 engine. I'm flying the same basic mission (hamburger chasing, airplane camping, and X/C for fun flights) but both my operating costs and maintenance costs have gone down. My insurance costs have gone up, but not as much as the decrease in operating and maintenance costs (I fly ~ 130 hours/year). I now live in Washington State (as opposed to Washington DC) and one of my favorite activities is flying to the San Juan Islands with my bicycle for a day of exploring under pedal power. That trip is soooooo much easier in the Maule. Getting the bike in, and out of the plane is a no brainer. The back seat is held in place with "fast pins", so it takes less than a minute to remove. The Maule doesn't do anything spectacularly, but it does a wide range of things very well and that versatility comes at a reasonable cost (for an airplane). On my flight to the San Juan Islands, I was cruising at 105 knots, 21" manifold pressure, 2250 RPM and burning 7.5 gallons off 100LL per hour. When the 12 volt cigarette charger failed, I called Maule and asked if the replacement was a TSO's item. They gave me the NAPA parts catalog number for the part. $6.00 to replace (versus $84.95 for the TSO'd version from Aircraft Spruce) and stay in line with the Maule Parts list. That kind of cost savings runs throughout the plane. I like Cessna's enough to have owned one, but I like my Maule more for this time of my life.
https://youtu.be/Scxw43_zBh8

Beautiful airplane and nicely done video!

I'll just start off by saying I have not owned a 182 but have some time in them. They are a great plane.. However I have owned and maintained 3 Maules. The first one was an M4-220, the second was an M5-220, and the current one is an MXT7-180. Short of landing on big rocks and really soft stuff, the MXT7-180 will do everything the M4 and M5 will do and in some cases do things even better. I operate in a fairly high DA environment, based at 5800 ft, and often see DAs of 9 or 10000. I cruise at 21-22 inches and 2250-2350 rpm around 7000 msl and burn about 9 gph with a TAS of 125 mph. It is perfect for 2 people, survival gear, and lots of baggage. Loading it up to gross (2500) would make it a little sluggish, but still have good performance.
The MT7-235 would be a better choice for 4 people at high DAs.
I miss the tail wheel, but have a Supercub for the really fun stuff.
Happy flying
Mike