Ok guys,
The time has come and I think i'm ready to do something and I'm having troubble making up my mind. First let me say I have never flown either of these planes. But I am trying to decide between a PA-12 and a PA-18. My major concerns are (in this order) A. Cargo room B)Cost C) Performace, Float plane is also a major factor as either will be on floats. I will likely buy a project one of either of them as to finish up an A/P certificate. So what is the big difference other than $50k, I know the 12 has more room, I'd want either with the lyc o-320. And most likely would get a 12 with flaps and 18 tail. Anyone on the east cost have either of these planes (west cost input appreciated also but i need to get a ride in some of them) What does everyone else think.


Mike

This has been hashed out over at the Scub... site a bunch. The bottom line is you need to evaluate exactly what you want the airplane to do, and then what you can "live with" Their capabilities overlap a bunch. But, there are a few things either one will do that the other won't.
There is no comparison cargo wise, and the '12 can have extended baggage's that you could put most of an '18 inside of but... space alone does not make a "hauler" you can extend either ones baggage, and do pods to increase the "space" well beyond the ability.
Performance? in what area? An 18 pretty much smokes a '12 in everything except speed, and then if you are making these planes "bushy" that becomes a wash, so no advantage there either.
There are really only a a couple reasons to choose a '12 over an '18 (although they may apply to you) they are:

1) cost
2) ease of entry, getting in and out of an '18 is not for everyone (but then again neither is getting on a horse...)
3) personal preference
4) a need to haul 2 children regularly, comfortably, and legally....

Before anyone gets too excited, I like the '12 just fine and fly one regularly that's O360 powered... but you do not have to be "big rocks long props" qualified to fly your '18 places where flying a '12 is no fun, if not impossible...

I like them both. The angle of incidence is supposedly different, the 12's wings bolt thru the cabin instead of to the fuselage. My bud who builds them both, thinks the 18 is alot ruggeder. I will have to ask him why. Most 18 guys really like cruisers and most 12 guys would'nt trade em for an 18. I think they are both great machines.

A few stream of consciousness thoughts:

A 12 is a bit more complicated to rebuild than an 18.

Resale of an 18 will be better, but you can get into a 12 project "cheaper"

12's that have not been rebuilt often have longeron tubing issues. The steel used during those years has tended to be rather rotten after this much time. Factor tubing replacement costs into the project.

if you are regularly going to use short strips, get an 18.

12's are faster over all and tend to ride better in turbulence.

Floatplane rigging for a 12 is more expensive to come by (with used floats anyway).

12's take a lot more trimming.

12's have all the room in the world. With extended baggage you can sleep in the airplane.

(DO NOT GET OVERSIZED 30.5 gallon TANKS if you don't live in Yellowknife)

18's have a "happier" feel, but roll control in a 12 is better.

Both great airplanes!

Looking back at your prioritized list of 1. Cargo, 2. Cost, 3. performance....you are describing a -12. I went through this same exercise 5 years ago and someone told me..."a -12 can do 90% of what an -18 can do in performance.....and you probably should not be doing that last 10% for some time anyway". I owned a -12 for several years ... I recommend the lightest one you can find with 0-320 and the other things which follow....Do have a look at those longerons....all these ac's are 60+ years old....stay away from heavy airplane toys and you will fill your list well. Ralph

OK guys, I have to weigh in on this one.

I own a PA-12 that has most of the Alaska mods; 0-320 160 hp, flaps, vortex generators, heavy duty PA-18 gear, PA-18 tail, 31" Alaska Bush wheels, 61 gal Atlee tanks, extended baggage.

95% of the places I land are off airport sights.

Since your priorities are A) Cargo room B)Cost C) Performance I would go with the PA-12. The PA-12 has way more cargo room than the PA-18 (both w/ extended baggage). If you decide on the PA-18, a cargo belly pod would greatly increase the cargo room.

For cost, depending on the level of modifications to the plane and time on the engine, condition, etc., the PA-12 will likely be cheaper.

And now performance....The guy that said the 12 can do 90% of what an 18 can do, is right on the mark. So, evaluate what kind of flying you plan to do. If you are going to do a lot of "pioneering" of short, off airport sights where no one has landed before, I would go with the 18. 18s are generally better suited for this. Not to say you can't do that in a 12, but you'll have less margin for error and will need to be a better pilot.

A lot of where you can go in a 18 Vs a 12 comes down to pilot skill and level of risk you are willing to accept. I know professional pilots that can land an 18 in spots that others w/ an 18 cannot land (ridge tops, glaciers, etc). Put that same pilot in a 12 (modified of course), and he could still land places that some people with an 18 wouldn't feel comfortable landing.