Battson wrote:

Zzz wrote:Maule

Traitor! hahaha

What are the key differences between the Murphy Elite and the Rebel?

I'm guessing Zzzz's sentiment reflects frustration with the process of building while raising kids, working, operating a website, enjoying a marriage, eating, sleeping and keeping life going. Some of us are builders and some aren't. Z has accomplished 1000 times more with his Bearhawk build than I have on my two forlorn projects so I'm not accusing him of sloth but I know if I had it to do all over again I'd be buying a flying airplane. Just saying. Buy a Maule and go fly mister is just a word to the wise; not a judgment on the Bearhawk.

Battson wrote: Apart from the lower acquisition effort / time, I see basically no good reasons to choose a certified plane for private ops. ..

That's like saying there's no good reason to buy a C180 instead of a Beaver except because they're cheaper.

I would also suggest that you buy a flying airplane, experimental or certificated. Unless you really like building and have lots of free time or lots of years available to do so.

Mister701 wrote:

Battson wrote:

Zzz wrote:Maule

Traitor! hahaha

What are the key differences between the Murphy Elite and the Rebel?

I'm guessing Zzzz's sentiment reflects frustration with the process of building while raising kids, working, operating a website, enjoying a marriage, eating, sleeping and keeping life going. Some of us are builders and some aren't. Z has accomplished 1000 times more with his Bearhawk build than I have on my two forlorn projects so I'm not accusing him of sloth but I know if I had it to do all over again I'd be buying a flying airplane. Just saying. Buy a Maule and go fly mister is just a word to the wise; not a judgment on the Bearhawk.

Naturally, I was just joking.

I would add, that while the build is hard; after all is said and done I am very happy I went that way, for a whole range of reasons...

hotrod180 wrote:

Battson wrote: Apart from the lower acquisition effort / time, I see basically no good reasons to choose a certified plane for private ops. ..

That's like saying there's no good reason to buy a C180 instead of a Beaver except because they're cheaper.

What similarities do you see between choosing a C180 < Beaver, and a certified > homebuilt?

Going certified is an easier option, no doubt. You could get a really nice used Maule for similar money as a Bearhawk. However, it's still a used plane with old paint, degraded fabric, maybe hidden corrosion, mid-time engine + prop, stone-age technology in the panel, and zero freedom to customise without bringing $,$$$. Being interested in backcountry aircraft, the OP will probably want to customise it?

Even then, with the Maule you are still comparing with a brand-new Bearhawk, which is custom built by you to your own specs, and where you retain the freedom to do whatever you like in terms of maintenance and modifications as the builder. That brand new thing is important, and the freedom is even more important. Not to mention to kudos and knowledge which you will inevitably acquire during the build, and your ability to take care of the Bearhawk yourself. That expertise is priceless.

For an apples with apples comparison... A brand new, custom built zero-timed Maule with glass panel would cost you upwards of 5-6 times the cost of a Bearhawk. To add insult to injury, you are still stuck with a certified aircraft with incumbent restrictions and costs. Some of the latest uncertified products are simply superior to anything you can put in a certified bird, EI, FADEC, advanced AP, STOL mods, and the list goes on.

That is where I was coming from. I just can't think of any upsides to having a certified plane for private ops? I would be really interested to understand the way you see it.

Rickshaw84 wrote:Battson! You're my Kiwi Bearhawk Celebrity Big fan of your videos and you're airplane!

As far as a certified airplane... I figure (probably, naively so) a good M4, M5, or C170 goes for 40ish plus a solid inspection and a mid time engine... you can not look at the airplane with modification eyeballs withouts an STC and an A&P... if you want to change anything on you certified airplane's panel you need an A/I... That isn't to say kit plans are cheap but hell I can get the plane I want, with the panel I want and the prop/engine I want without an A/I or A&P... I could be seriously wrong... of which I will be happy to purchase all you guys a beer but in the long haul it seem a experimentals makes more sense (theoretically).

Great videos man! alway enjoy watching them...

P.S. the Rebel is a strictly 2 place while the Elite has a cantilevered horizontal stabilizer, third seat in back, and a heavier gross weight capability. stated as 1800lbs.

Hey you are too kind... I am really glad you liked the videos; guys like you are the main reason why I go to all the effort of making them! I figure, it's too much fun not to share it with others, others who want to get into the same kind of fun.

Thanks for explaining the difference between the Elite and Rebel.

Mister701 wrote:I'm guessing Zzzz's sentiment reflects frustration with the process of building while raising kids, working, operating a website, enjoying a marriage, eating, sleeping and keeping life going.

I actually didn't mean for any of that to be construed from my comment. I was just being a smartass and making a joke somewhat in reference to the decade-old "just buy a Maule" joke we have here.

Bearhawk > Maule all week long, but i appreciate you noticing my plight.

What is the Real world cost of a Bearhawk 250hp with all the bells and whistles for bush ops.
Proffessional build ?
Home build plus what , 1500 hours ?
Seriously, I'm interested.

maules.com wrote:Proffessional build ?

Is this option available for Maules?

Just kidding. Fine aircraft.

Zzz wrote:

maules.com wrote:Proffessional build ?

Is this option available for Maules?

Just kidding. Fine aircraft.

Haha, that's pretty funny!

maules.com wrote:What is the Real world cost of a Bearhawk 250hp with all the bells and whistles for bush ops.
Proffessional build ?
Home build plus what , 1500 hours ?
Seriously, I'm interested.

The most you need to spend is $100k USD for a kit-set build.
That money gets you a very nice machine, everything new, zero time big Lycoming -540 engine with FI, outfitted for bush ops.

Of course if you are prepared to use second hand parts, it can be a lot cheaper, but that may not be apples with apples depending on what you're thinking about? I think the cheapest scratch-builds are probably around $60k.

Naturally you can also spend as much as you want, the sky is the limit! There is always someone willing to take your money. The most expensive BH I have ever heard of was $130k USD.

Yes, those numbers assume you are doing the building work yourself. Most do build that way. Many will ask "do you value your time", whether you do or not, no money leaves your bank account.

Despite the Bearhawk being one of the more challenging builds, I do believe most people who are licensed to fly a plane usually possess the discipline, responsible attitude, and attention to detail necessary to build a good aircraft if they apply themselves. It's a lot of work, but it's not technically difficult, heck - you can find all the answers on the internet...

Of course if you employ a professional builder, you can probably add another $80k.

Thankyou Battson, that gives me some idea.
So for a very nice one $130,000 plus $80,000 or 1500 hours of builders time if one paid oneself $53 per hour.

I was in NZ 3 weeks ago roaming around Sth and Nth islands, thought about looking you up but didn't know where you hang your hat.
I have a friend thinking of shipping his Highlander down here to fly it around some and enjoy your countrysides.

Everyone has been really helpful (and entertaining) while motivating the hell out of me to really do my homework...

That said in a perfect world I would love an M5 covered in Oratex with the interior and panel ripped out to bare minimums but to do that I need to take a certified airplane and make it an experimental... a very elusive proposition.

not to mention after doing the aforementioned, plus the cost of the plane I figure you're real close to the cost of brand new homebuilt, plus now I can do whatever I want with the panel and the experimental avionics world is my oyster and I won't need an A/I.

Time is an enormous factor... I mean you are building a freaking airplane but... it's your airplane! and you know every nook and cranny of that aeronautic english muffin.

I guess at the end of the day its the experience that draws homebuilders to do homebuilds.

really interesting perspectives thought.

much appreciated folks!

maules.com wrote:I was in NZ 3 weeks ago roaming around Sth and Nth islands, thought about looking you up but didn't know where you hang your hat.
I have a friend thinking of shipping his Highlander down here to fly it around some and enjoy your countrysides.

Oh that's a missed opportunity - I would have really enjoyed meeting you and taking you for a flight! If you ever come back, please feel free to look me up!

Hmmm! Wonder why the Maule is always the measuring stick everyone wants to measure against. Just sayin!!

Vaughans

it's your airplane! and you know every nook and cranny of that aeronautic english muffin.

This is probably huge for a lot of builders. After a point I would have been happy to cut my "building experience" in half, but now one knows my aircraft like I do, every 'nook and cranny". What I enjoyed also was the innovating, the tinkering, to make it exactly like I wanted and needed, it's like ordering a custom car or truck to exactly what you want, it's your "glove", you can't wait to go out and fly it, you made it perfect for your needs.

Maule

Battson wrote: What similarities do you see between choosing a C180 < Beaver, and a certified > homebuilt? ....
Going certified is an easier option, no doubt. You could get a really nice used Maule for similar money as a Bearhawk. However, it's still a used plane ....
I just can't think of any upsides to having a certified plane for private ops? I would be really interested to understand the way you see it.

I was attempting to poke fun at your "other than the lower acquisition effort / time" comment. Maybe that didn't come across?

I know a lot of people who have started projects and never finished them. A lot of people.
Our old EAA chapter had several members who counted their "build times" in decades, not months or even years. The quotation marks are because they often hadn't worked on them in years, yet still referred to them like they were in progress. The number of members who had actually completed and flown their homebuilt could be counted on two hands.

A guy at my airport owns a number of projects, none of which he has ever gotten much of anything done on, as well as three different intact and flyable airplanes. All three of the "flyers" have been down for over a year after they needed some minor repair or an annual inspection done. He is a licensed mechanic and doesn't want to pay to have any work done that he can do himself- but unfortunately he never seems to have the time to do it.

Another guy I know is building up a tricked-out Pacer, but running his own business takes up a lot of his time and therefore he doesn't get to work on it as much as he'd like. Plus he is a perfectionist. The result is that so far the Pacer project has been underway for about 7 years. The end is finally in sight though.

My point being that building an airplane is a huge undertaking. A lot of people don't seem to get that. Yes, an experimental has a lot of positive aspects re working on it or equipping it-- it's just a matter of whether it will ever get finished. My suggestion is usually to buy a flying airplane-- factory or homebuilt, doesn't matter. I know I would not have the time or gumption to see a build project through to completion, which is why I have always bought flying airplanes. And I think the same is true of a lot of people, whether they want to admit it or not.

That'll teach this poor fellow to ask that question again.

People shouldn't ask questions unless they want answers, not sugar-coating.
Maybe somebody should have said "just build a Bearhawk- you can knock it out in a couple months"?
That sure wouldn't be doing him any favors.
I answered his post just like I would if he was asking me the same question(s) at the airport café.

First i would like to double up on what 701 wrote about poor ole Zzzzz.

I bought several dream plan sets to drool over.but never started.

After buying my first beater plane to get in the air I soon had to start learning how to keep it in the air. This was easier to get done a long time ago back when instructors, A&Ps, and IAs could often be found trolling for work with tools in their trunk, or living on the side of the strip in a camper.

For some reason I always viewed my re-builds as learning projects. Found it more important to learn from those who knew more or at least had done it before. I had grown up doing hard work, but never saw my airplane re-build projects as HARD WORK. Hard work to me was never being able to sit down and ponder for a while about a solution to the latest lesson. I remember a couple fellows who seemed determine to beat their planes into submission and then continue to be frustrated at having to fix something new almost every weekend. They were good role models on how NOT to go about it.

I may have learned my work attitude from an author who wrote about earlier times in Calif. He wrote a book called The Cabin. The lesson came while the author was sweating up a storm with a crosscut saw.
As the author was wearing out both himself and the saw an old time neighbor rode up and said, "looks like your having quite a battle there." "I sure am" Old timer said. "The problem is that your mind is at the bottom of that log while your saw is at the top."

Enjoy the process. Don't always need to yank the yoke, just use the Trimtab.