I was pretty surprised by the variance in fit in cub world. I fit pretty well in a top cub (Cubcrafters built on Piper TC), although heel brakes were sketchy because my legs are so long. But didn't come close to fitting in an actual PA18 (If you read Mccall Mtn Flying's disclaimer on refunds if you don't fit in their cub, that's thanks to me). Carbon cub is pretty good, xcub noticeably better than CC or Top cub. Go figure.

I am going to go against the grain a bit and recommend you don't by a factory new anything. Several reasons for this. Would you buy an16 year old a new vet when he wants to learn to drive? Chances of you bending your aircraft when you start getting into the off field playing are pretty good that is why insurance is going through the roof right now. A factory new plane can also have issues just look up the issues that some of the carbon cubs have. Not picking on them but any new product is going to have issues. The 40-60 year old aircraft have issues but they are well known and should have been fixed. If you want to fly taildraggers go get a beater with a heater. Cessna 170/pacer/ect. 50 grand will get you a decent aircraft with a good motor. Go fly and learn. Go to every fly in you can find and get a crew to explore/learn with. Once you have a few years and 4-500 hours under your belt you will have a much better Ideal of what you want/need. For that price point in aircraft they seem to hold value well as long as the wings stay on. A lot of the new to market stuff lightweight stuff is not really made to fly in the rain or cold weather (lots of leaks and drafts) So when you find something you think you might like put a hose to it for a while and see what you get. Bottom line is no matter what the sales guy says you can't buy an accident proof plane. A 350,000 dollar plane will wreck as easy as a 25,000 dollar one!!!!! It is all in the training and experience of the pilot. Another note from your basic mission requirements so far 2 people/fuel/camping gear/backcountry safety gear. You are looking at 600-800 lbs, Keep useful load in mind. The cub you had was by far the best choice for the described mission. Bit pricey for a new pilot but ya can't take it with you so what the heck. No right or wrong just stuff to think about. DENNY

Denny's perspective is solid and I always pay attention to his posts. The two biggest reasons I advocate for a newer plane are: 1. Downtime sucks. A newer plane is less likely to have incurred maintenance issues so downtime will be less. Yes, recently gone through airplane can be every bit as good as a new one but that's where point 2 comes in. 2. I think this market bubble we are experiencing will eventually burst. That's going to leave people upsidedown with the airplanes. $200K for a 60 year old PA18 or C180, or $30K for a 60 year old Luscombe, etc is crazy. It wasn't that long ago a Luscombe was worth maybe $20K and a good C180 cost $75K. Buying a new/er plane for similar money will probably insulate the buyer from the market bubble. Maybe.

Thanks to everyone who's offered their advice so far, I very much value and appreciate it.
Thanks for the advice on getting good TW training and learning my plane from the mechanical side of things. I'm definitely on the same page as I would ideally love to learn from someone of legendary status in the stick and rudder world. I've been told to be careful as most TW pilots can't necessarily teach TW properly. Thanks for the suggestion on Butch Washtock. He's not far from me, I will look into it a little down the road and if I'm lucky maybe he will be willing and available.

A high power-low weight airplane can teach poor habits, particularly in the canyons. I think most longtime backcountry pilots and instructors would respond to the suggestion of a Carbon Cub as a first aircraft by pointing out how critical it is to read and utilize the wind, master factoring DA, leave oneself an out, and not overly rely on performance to save the day. There’s a reason glider pilots do so well when they switch to powered flight in the mountains.

I’d much rather see a new pilot fly around the mountains and backcountry in something like a Cessna 140 or 170 or 7ECA, etc., or even a 172 for a while to develop those critical skills, then get the fire-breathing beast.

Opie wrote:If budget is not a concern and you like the confidence of a newer airplane, for your mission and budget I think the nose wheel carbon cub makes a lot of sense. Extremely capable, they say more capable that the tail wheel version. You can spend more time leading to fly in your backcountry without first perfecting the tail wheel. Second positive is that after a time you can convert the airplane to tail wheel down the road.

Thanks again everyone for the input. I wanted to update you with what I decided to do. This is a very difficult decision, especially since I can't try all the different aircraft out to see what would really work the best for me. This process is mainly getting other's feedback and then making the best educated decision/guess that I can.

I really wanted everyone to tell me to get the Carbon Cub. Truthfully that's what I desire the most, but again that's just a guess since I don't realistically know what I really want. I know that I just love watching the Youtubers landing on sandbars and camping out in remote locations, their tent tucked up nicely next to their tail wheel. Maybe one day..

Back to the decision process. As well as the input here on the forum, I also spoke with a few experienced pilots for their opinion. One of them is a Carbon Cub owner himself. Unanimous opinion that I maybe shouldn't do the CarbonCub to start. What I've come to realize is what will probably work best for me to start out in is a 172 or 182. I like the idea of a 182 since I think I'll have a better chance of wanting to stay with it over time. I may itch for something more than the 172 one day down the road. Again, just a guess.

So that leads me to another input request. Any advice on which model of 182 to go with? Engine? Again I'm not focused on budget, I just want the 182 model that has the best proven slow speed characteristics and most reliable engine. Any suggestions? Thanks again.

Yes, there are differences, and those differences might matter. But the 182 is such a great airplane, it really is not important which model you get nearly so much as just making sure you get a good one. An older one in good condition is generally less expensive than a newer one in good condition, and the oldest models have manual flaps, which I personally prefer. But I wouldn't shop based on that alone.

It is really easy to get wrapped up in trying to get the perfect model dream machine. We usually don't do that with cars, so it is a bit odd how easy it is for people to talk themselves into narrowing down an airplane search until it becomes impossible. Search all the aircraft that fall within your shopping range. Buy the best condition one that fits your budget and desires. Sell it later if you find you really want something else...but you can shop for that second perfect airplane while you actually are flying. And if you keep shopping forever and never move on, at least you have something to fly...

...I still have my tripacer. I love that thing. I shop all the time...but I fly a lot.

In just a perfect world.....

Straight tail
Manual flaps

1_Robert wrote:Thanks again everyone for the input. I wanted to update you with what I decided to do. This is a very difficult decision, especially since I can't try all the different aircraft out to see what would really work the best for me. This process is mainly getting other's feedback and then making the best educated decision/guess that I can.

I really wanted everyone to tell me to get the Carbon Cub. Truthfully that's what I desire the most, but again that's just a guess since I don't realistically know what I really want. I know that I just love watching the Youtubers landing on sandbars and camping out in remote locations, their tent tucked up nicely next to their tail wheel. Maybe one day..

Back to the decision process. As well as the input here on the forum, I also spoke with a few experienced pilots for their opinion. One of them is a Carbon Cub owner himself. Unanimous opinion that I maybe shouldn't do the CarbonCub to start. What I've come to realize is what will probably work best for me to start out in is a 172 or 182. I like the idea of a 182 since I think I'll have a better chance of wanting to stay with it over time. I may itch for something more than the 172 one day down the road. Again, just a guess.

So that leads me to another input request. Any advice on which model of 182 to go with? Engine? Again I'm not focused on budget, I just want the 182 model that has the best proven slow speed characteristics and most reliable engine. Any suggestions? Thanks again.

Yoy should be taking a serious look at the 182 that is listed on the forum here. Looks like a very capable and well set up aircraft.

Troy Hamon wrote:Yes, there are differences, and those differences might matter. But the 182 is such a great airplane, it really is not important which model you get nearly so much as just making sure you get a good one. An older one in good condition is generally less expensive than a newer one in good condition, and the oldest models have manual flaps, which I personally prefer. But I wouldn't shop based on that alone.

Check this one out... Really nice 182 with STOL mods... Price dropped to $110K further down in the listing.

Thanks guys but I’m looking for a Canadian registered.

Sorry, forgot you were a fellow Canuck. 182s are hard to come by up here right now it seems. I have a couple customers looking for them as well. We just scooped one out of Kamloops a few weeks back.
I do know of a local one, very nice shape but higher time engine. Making great compression and oil filter looks good on inspections though. Flies real nice.

A1Skinner wrote:Sorry, forgot you were a fellow Canuck. 182s are hard to come by up here right now it seems. I have a couple customers looking for them as well. We just scooped one out of Kamloops a few weeks back.
I do know of a local one, very nice shape but higher time engine. Making great compression and oil filter looks good on inspections though. Flies real nice.

Thanks for that, PM sent.

I'm going to suggest you go a little different route and look at a Tripacer. They are good 80% backcountry planes. They will do 80% of what the all the big names will plus serve as a good all around plane. You get four seats and it's impossible to ground loop a trike. They have a stall speed only about 10-15 mph higher than the factory Supercubs and cruise at 120mph.

Tripacers are in the same class as 172's so they are great starter birds. Simple and cheap to maintain with low operating costs. They are easy to fly and cheap to train in. Plus once your skills are up to snuff they will take out into the backcountry happily.

With a Tripacer you get a plane that is a good trainer, useable cross country bird, decent light hauler, and serviceable backcountry bird. Plus it was built by the same guys that put the Supercub together when they were at the top of their game.

Having just been in your shoes and ended up going with a 1959 182B as my first plane, I would do it again. I got my PPL December 21st last year, and bought the plane 3 weeks later. Initially I was set on getting a Kitfox, Cub, or other big tired taildragger and never considered a 182. With some guidance from the internet and some friends, I changed my mind.

The points for the 182 are as follows:
1) Very capable back country plane for pretty much anything other than big rocks or super soft stuff
2) Great cross country plane (With big tires can cruise at 120 knot in 5 hour legs)
3) Retains resale value (Cessnas always sell)
4) Available support and upgrades (not as good as experimental, but great for a certified)
5) Cheap insurance (as a 46 hour pilot, full hull insurance, plane value of $ 70,000, price/year. I was quoted $1,600 for a 182 and $6,000 for a Kitfox)
6) Carrying capacity (good from the factory but great with extended baggage and wing extension GW increase)
7) Land-o-matic (I've had some pretty bad landings and the plane made me look good every time)

I too was weary of buying an old plane, but all the flying bits of an older plane are the same as a new one. Avionics, Interior, and engine/prop can all be updated.

I got my TW endorsement just before my private checkride and can say that it is not as easy as you may think. I had a great instructor (Barry Sutton, FL) which made things much easier. Once get the feel for TW it's manageable and incredibly fun/rewarding, but to throw it in with all the other things a new pilot is trying manage, you are increasing your odds of becoming a statistic.

I still would love to have a cub or other big tire/experimental/taildragger, but for my first and main plane the 182 was a solid choice. One of these days I'll start a thread for my plane, for now here are a few pictures.

Before you start looking at planes to buy you really need to find a parking place for it and most important who is going to care for the plane!!! Figure out what airport you want to fly from. Then go to THAT airport and find an IA that will be caring for the plane and do not even think of falling in love with a plane until he/she approves. The internet is full of stories about the pilot that had a fresh annual/pre/buy only to bring the plane back to find out the local IA doing the annual feels it needs 20 grand worth of work!! It if very common for simple things like moving a battery approved by one IA to be unacceptable to another. Ask around the airport and visit all the shops. A good IA is not cheap, but well worth the money you spend in the long run. The IA that agrees to take you on as a client should do the pre buy if at all possible. I paid for 3 pre buy inspections before my IA approved of my first plane. It saved me a ton of money in the long run because the first two had a lot of issues that would have cost a lot to fix down the road. Usually lots of aircraft are know by all the local IA, the good ones sell by word of mouth, so build a relationship and start learning about what it takes to keep an aircraft flying. DENNY

I'm a low time pilot with a '68 182. I'm 6'2". I really like my plane and I agree with Denny's comments. I also passed on a couple planes after getting a pre-purchase inspection. I wished I had my now local IA look at the plane I purchased prior to purchasing. I got lucky as there weren't many problems, but I could of really blown it

I also do owner-assisted annuals and I've learned a lot through the process.

Good luck and the plane up in Canada also looks good.

Bigbird4 wrote:Having just been in your shoes and ended up going with a 1959 182B as my first plane,

Thanks for the input and the pics! Yes we seem to be on similar wavelengths so I enjoyed the feedback. Beautiful plane you have- I'm sure it's capable with the bigger tires and straight tail (plus it looks badass). Enjoy your time with it and let me know if you ever come up the west coast of Canada.

DENNY wrote:Before you start looking Usually lots of aircraft are know by all the local IA, the good ones sell by word of mouth, so build a relationship and start learning about what it takes to keep an aircraft flying. DENNY

Thanks for the wisdom, that was good advice that I hadn't considered.

What Denny said about IAs is very important in our bureaucracy; don't know about Canada. GADOs, now FSDOs, are somewhat independent here and I expect Alaska. I have moved airplanes across bureaucratic areas to get approvals. My IA was familiar with what could be done in his FSDO and also what other FSDO might approve. Same with medical issues. Airworthy is subjective to some extent. I am not a mechanic, so cannot be the authority. I have found authority to be different with different IA and also different FSDO.

36 years ago I was in a similar situation trying to decide what plane would serve me personally and that of my family..
I had gotten the flying bug after being flown into the Idaho Backcountry in a Cessna 206 for an elk hunt. For the next 4 years I picked the brain of our backcountry pilot and others who lived in Idaho and settled on a Cessna 182. Did my training in a 172 so the transition to the 182 was fairly simple one for me.
I still have the 182 and have enjoyed it for years. It is my hunting truck and the family sedan too.

Some day I will post up my story and how I came to enjoy mountain flying so much.