The Maules (and note the plural) are great floatplanes, in pretty much all their variants.

Hueson,

A huge factor in seaplane performance is the model of floats installed. So no discussion of performance is really useful without that variable.

Also, pilot technique is so much more of a factor on float performance than it is on wheels.

For many years, I flew a Cessna 170 B with 180 hp on PeeKay B2300 floats. Once the pilot learns what the floats want, that plane, at 2200 lbs, near sea level and standard conditions would launch in less than 1500 feet consistently. Stock wing.

I've flown Huskys on Baumann, Wip and EDO floats and they will safely clear a 50 obstacle in 1300 feet. Amazing performers.

The Maules are good performing seaplanes. I'm not a huge Maule fan, but I'd never knock their float performance. My two favorite Maules on floats were an M-6 that'd been recovered and painted, on Aqua floats and an M-7 on Baumann 2650s. Both of those had 235 engines. Even the shorter wing Maules do okay.

The Aqua floats are common on Maules. Good floats, but the way the plane is mounted on them, they APPEAR to be heavy forward. Taxi along and get distracted and you'll look out to the toes of the floats under water.

Like other types of flying, they work best if you keep your head out of your butt.

Your plane will work great and take you a lot of places loaded intelligently. What floats are you on--EDO 2000?

MTV

Here's a short clip of my 180hp 170b on edo 2000's.

N419A wrote:Here's a short clip of my 180hp 170b on edo 2000's.

Not much load in that one.....

MTV

Very nice! I was pleasantly surprised by how quickly it was off the water.

Love the video
Topics always seem to drift off direction
I was just curious what size lakes most felt comfortable getting out of?
And what hardware you were doing it with
I don't need to get out of my lake at gross but I do want a 4 seat aircraft
Most of the time I will likely have. 500 to 600 lb load
But I want the option to carry 4 and 40 gallons or so from other lakes
Everyone seems to have only good to say about c180
Maule seems to be a love hate kind of thing
Getting pretty old with stinsons and aeronca sedan
Just discussion
Thanks

N419A wrote:Here's a short clip of my 180hp 170b on edo 2000's.

Good work!

Ya, the edo's make the 180hp 170 a good performing plane with the 2106 gross. My plane is 1463 lbs on floats so that leaves about 600 lbs of usable. That takeoff was me and half fuel so around 1800 lbs. It still preforms good at gross hauled three loads at gross getting my moose and camp home a few weeks ago. That was off a 2000' lake on a calm day. I'd love to have a 2300 lbs gross, but then I'd have to add more horse power to keep the same power to weight ratio, then bigger floats. I'm still learning the limitations of my plane on floats.
Paul

My first float plane was a Maule M5-235 with Edo 2440 floats. 235 Hp, was a true 4 person float plane technically, but two adults in the back was super crowded. Two young kids was fine. I had a 78" prop on it which wasn't a good seaplane performer so I would had loved to had a better prop to see what it could do. I would go out of a .7 mile lake with about 800 lbs but that was my limit. A better prop would have been better. A 1000 lbs and hot weather and it was over a mile take off run.

I now have a C182 with a ported IO-550 in it (somewhere north of 300 HP) and a 400 lb upgross kit. My legal useful load is 1200 lbs and I also have wing extensions, sportsman STOL and Aerocet floats. I fly out of that same lake with 1200 lbs no problem. When I take off, I point the nose up, and climb. I've never actually measured it but I'm thinking I'm off the water in about 1500 feet and clearing 50 foot obstacle in another 100-200 feet. I wouldn't want to try on a lake much smaller, just cause there is not much room for error.

Best performer I've seen on floats is a 180 HP super cub, but if your looking for 4 people, good luck

Hello all, I'm new to the group as well. A Float pilot also. Some interesting topics and conversations on this site.

canuck180 wrote:Hello all, I'm new to the group as well. A Float pilot also. Some interesting topics and conversations on this site.

Welcome Canuck. I see you fly out of lac du Bonnie - I fly out of falcon but my hanger is in lac du bonnet - furthest one north on the field.
Garth

canuck180 wrote:Hello all, I'm new to the group as well. A Float pilot also. Some interesting topics and conversations on this site.

Welcome here Canuck. Always great to have more Canadians. Lac du Bonnet is beautiful!

David

I'm just a float pilot. Welcome to the group. Just my biased opinion...go for the C-180.

Hueson wrote:I have seen planes in the lake where I am
Just trying to put the biggest margin of safety if I ever decide to dock in there
Looking right now at a Maule c5 235 or a c180
Both should perform better than what I am used to

Just noticed your reply Garth. How's that 182 treating you?

Dan

gear wrote:

canuck180 wrote:Hello all, I'm new to the group as well. A Float pilot also. Some interesting topics and conversations on this site.

Welcome Canuck. I see you fly out of lac du Bonnie - I fly out of falcon but my hanger is in lac du bonnet - furthest one north on the field.
Garth

Getting lots of useful information on this thread
Was lucky enough this weekend to have flown in and out on Saturday of my lake
C172 180 hp tuned exhaust and Horton stol on 2000 floats
15degree day about 5 knot wind.
350lbs passengers and 15 gallons
Plane flew out tight but not scary
Off in about 1000 feet and another 1000 to get comfortable altitude
2800 foot lake
Any warmer or different wind and I wouldn't chance it with my comfort level
Same day I had an aeronca sedan fly in
180hp fixed prop and 2000 floats
Less load
I think it did better than the 172 especially angle of climb.
Would think a c180 or a 235 hp Maule would significantly improve on either of them
Or Stinson guys?
People will chime in with the super cub, but I don't want to fly a tandem.
Anybody have experience in comparing their aircraft to the above or comments?
Thanks

If you are not planning on using it on skis, it would be awfully hard to beat a C182 setup like Garth's, lots of juice with a wide cabin, even with a 470 it would make a good floatplane. The 180's-185's are the standard 4 place used around my area and will get the job done with no problem. The Maules are relatively cheap, but for different reasons did not catch on, there a none around here anymore. The Stinson's always had a good reputation locally, except some engine parts availability concerns if equipped with the Franklin, one with a 470 would eliminate that concern. There are a number of 4 place planes available that are quite capable.

N419A wrote:Here's a short clip of my 180hp 170b on edo 2000's.

thats super cub performance

Float season has started now and Still on the search for an easy to handle floatplane
Found an interesting c182 on floats
Has 260hp o470?
Seaplanes west conversion
Edo2870s
Horton stol
At 1970 lbs empty on floats seems heavy?
2800 gross
830 useful
Anyone flown something like this?
At gross it is 10.8 lbs/hp
172 I have been flying is about 13.5 lbs/hp at gross and does fairly well(1966 with 180hp cs prop Horton and power flow)
I thought I have read somewhere that the cessnas all have the same 174 sq/ft wing so wouldn't hp per pound be a big factor in off the water time?
Fuel burn would be more, but a 20% better power to weight ratio should be significant?
Any thoughts

Just thinking about Cessna float performance from a theory of flight perspective
If Cessna 172,180,182,185 and 206 all use the same wing?(I read that was the case)
Other than float design, is the primary factor in take off performance between them all not just power to weight?
Seems strange that from what I have read, many bush pilots say that the 182 and 206 planes don't perform well off the water but the same pilots I have spoken with rave about 180's and 185's?
Just trying to make sense of this

Hey welcome to the group!

Some random comments: I'm a very newbie float plane pilot--got my SES July 2014, in Seattle with Seattle Seaplanes. Of course, in Colorful Colorado, until the First Ever Colorado Splash In coming up on May 14th, there's never been a seaplane legally land in Colorado, so I haven't flown a seaplane since my checkride.

The airplane I trained in was a 172E with an Avcon 180hp conversion, CS prop. With 2 heavies aboard and full fuel, it performed really well out of Lake Union, Lake Washington, and the Poulsbo arm of Port Orchard. That was with 20 flaps. I admit that it took me awhile to learn the pitch angle that the floats, a pair of Aqua 2200s, were happiest at for take off. Once I learned that, it leapt off the water. I can't tell you how quickly in time, because I didn't pay any attention to that. But Lake Union, from where it necks down at the north end to the south end is just about a mile long. We would be airborne in less than a third of that, so I'm guessing about 1600' or so.

Previously I had had one lesson in a 160hp 172 with Pat Bay Air near Vancouver, BC. I don't know what floats it had, but its performance was less than the Seattle Seaplanes 172's, and pretty much demanded that one float be lifted to get off the water. Once off, it handled just fine. When we took off the first time, it had roughly half tanks, plus the instructor and me, so again 2 heavies. I have no idea how long its water run was.

For just banging around, I wouldn't hesitate to fly either of them with 2 aboard, although I'd want at least a half mile at or near sea level. But if I wanted to carry 4, I think I'd want at least a stock 180.

FWIW, the DPE with whom I took my checkride was pretty adamant that 182s make poor seaplanes, due to too small a horizontal tail and a too far forward CG, regardless of how what engine they have. I don't know if he's right, just that he's pretty experienced with seaplanes, and he had a very strong opinion.

Cary