Let me start this by saying this is NOT a compare Pacer vs. Maule in capability/mission thread.

For those that have flown both a pacer 150 or 160 td and a Maule M4/M5 :: Is one more docile ground handling wise? Considering the Maule came from a Pacer, seems they would be similar.So anyone with time in both care to comment?

Ok I didn't own a pacer but a trip acre. When I bought my m4 I enlisted my buddy don to fly with me as I didn't have much tail dragged time. He described my m4 as a pacer on steroids and he taxied and landed the m4 He owned and flew his pa20 135 all over Idaho and took it to places I wouldn't consider with the tri. He said the Maule was way more docile in ground handling than the pacer and as the gear wasn't as close coupled as his pacer was a bit more forgiving. That's all I can say on the matter other than I haven't looked back and love my m4

iceman wrote:Ok I didn't own a pacer but a trip acre. When I bought my m4 I enlisted my buddy don to fly with me as I didn't have much tail dragged time. He described my m4 as a pacer on steroids and he taxied and landed the m4 He owned and flew his pa20 135 all over Idaho and took it to places I wouldn't consider with the tri. He said the Maule was way more docile in ground handling than the pacer and as the gear wasn't as close coupled as his pacer was a bit more forgiving. That's all I can say on the matter other than I haven't looked back and love my m4

This is what I heard, pacers are more squirrely -- about 1/2 the insurance cost than the maule until the tailwheel time comes up.

I've got some time in a Pacer and a lot of time in a Maule. Some things are pretty much the same, some are way different.
Most pacers that are wild on the ground have a bent gear!! Otherwise they should act like there supposed to. Same thing for a Muale. Way more flap to use on the Maule, Lots of Maules have double puck Cleveland's on them, most pacers have been upgraded to single puck Clevelands. Way more wing to use on the Maule. Most Maules you can pull the yoke back with full flaps and just add a little power and you can come down in a full blown stall, or mush like a Stinson, keep the wings level with the rudder and push forward when you get close to the ground and land! SIMPLE!!
I have tried that a few times with a Pacer and I am just not good enough or quick enough to get it to the ground nose up and straight?? My bad, just can't do it??!!
No comparison in the room inside, You can stuff at least twice as much stuff in a Maule.
The other most important factor for us pilots that are not the best and screw it up some times is that most Maules have enough power to get your ass out of the jam you just put it in!!
Kinda the same as a 170 and a 185, both tail dragging spam cans, just the 300 horses that the 185 has let you save your self!!
If you can use the Pacer with it's interior space limits, and the lower power and braking, they are a helluva bird, Have fun!
My $.03
Oh yes, if you are tall and have long legs, the step in the roof of the pacer will adjust the back of your head in any real rough turbulence !!
GT

Don't have any Maule time to speak but I do have a little Pacer time, the one I flew (converted tripacer) tracked straight as a string. If a Pacer is squirrelly it has something wrong with it- most likely wheel alignment ("toe-in") issues. Bent gear as M6RV6 sez, but usually it's pretty subtle & nothing you see with the naked eye. No alignment shims for a Pacer like there is for a Cessna, so the way to correct misalignment seems to be applying a little english with a long piece of pipe slipped over the axle.
Most of the "pacers" you'll see out there are actually tailwheel-converted tripacers. I can see where it'd be easy to get things a little out of line when welding on the new gear fittings, so it's not too surprising that some are a bit squirrelly. I know the guys who converted the one I flew & they took a lot of pains to get it just right, so it was no surprise to me that it handled well.

I had the 2 place Colt (O-235 powered) converted to Pacer with the Univair kit. It was one of the sweetest, most docile little taildraggers I've ever flown. Ground handled nice, and was a breeze for wheel or three-pointers.

The trick to the thing was managing approach and touchdown speeds, and keeping them SLOW! The guy I bought it from hated it, and thought it was an evil demon on landing. He also crossed the fence at 75+ and would drive the poor thing on the ground at high speed. Tried to bit him every time. At 60 it was a pussycat.

Gump

No Maule time but quite a bit in different Pacers, converted and original.
If the gear is straight, the tail wheel spring has the correct arch and the tail wheel steering springs
are good, they are pussycats. If not, can get really ugly.
Dave

I've flown a Clipper and a couple Pacers. I consider myself a low time tailwheel pilot, with most of my time being in the "easier" tw's to land, Cubs, Citabria, and Stinson. Anyway, I think Pacers aren't squirrely at all. I had no problem landing the Clipper and it was the first time I'd flown in nearly a year. I think Pacers have gotten a bad wrap from incorrect conversions. It's pretty easy to put that gear on, tweaked the wrong way, and they're a handful then. Sure, by fact the distance from the mains to the tail on one is shorter than a Maule, so I guess by the book you could say the Maule would handle better. Just don't rule out a Pacer from the false reputation it has, they're fun to fly, and not hard to land at all....I mean come on, I can land it

GumpAir wrote:I had the 2 place Colt (O-235 powered) converted to Pacer with the Univair kit. It was one of the sweetest, most docile little taildraggers I've ever flown. Ground handled nice, and was a breeze for wheel or three-pointers.

The trick to the thing was managing approach and touchdown speeds, and keeping them SLOW! The guy I bought it from hated it, and thought it was an evil demon on landing. He also crossed the fence at 75+ and would drive the poor thing on the ground at high speed. Tried to bit him every time. At 60 it was a pussycat.

Gump

Same as flying the Clipper. Couldn't have described it better!

CW

Thanks all!

It's the pilot not the plane.

OregonMaule wrote:It's the pilot not the plane.

Often but not always-- sometimes it IS the airplane.