Four-place backcountry capable experimental:
Bearhawk
Zenith CH-801 It's kind of slow but Oh-boy the short field performance.
Wag Aero 2+2
Bushmaster http://www.bushmastermfg.com/bushmaster_history.htm Look here for some specifications http://cutbow.com/bm300/Home.html
Wag Aero 2+2 with Bushmaster upgrades

Two-place:
I'm a huge fan of the Kitfox, especially the Super Sport and the owners, the McBeans.
I visited the Rans factory a few years ago and they are a great bunch of people. I sat in an S-7 and was impressed. Nothing but praise from those who own one.

Let us know which way you end up going.

Zane
The new technology is there for the Superior IO-320, IO-360 and soon the O-400 series engines will be out. All US made. I could have had fuel injection and electronic ignition both on my XP-0-360. It was available. I have carburetor and mags by choice. I seem dumb don't I. The simple system appealed to me, especially since I'm never at an airport and when I go somewhere I'm not at an airport there either. Also Lycoming has the IO-390 at 210hp for the experimental market though that is larger than you want. My new experimental market Superior engine was more than 10,000 cheaper than the same size certified one from Lycoming and with roller lifters, reinforced web crankcase and more advanced oil system, it is a more modern engine and still direct drive with the advantage of being able to get most parts at any airport and the mechanics know it. Mine is the same as HiC's but his is certified.

For aircraft, choices are limited for four place offerings in the homebuilt kit plane market. These are what I considered. Bearhawk, Tundra, and Glassair Sportsman 2+2. The Murphy Rebel is a two place and I plan on traveling wingman with one to Alaska this summer. The owner likes it and I can give you his name for his assessment of it. Easier to build than a Tundra too since it is pulled rivets. The company also makes a Super Rebel now, its a four-six place with solid rivets but the weight class is 3000. They shot right over the 2500 class.

Be very careful to inspect the kits for quality and how much fabrication is left for you to do and check the company for support by talking to customers. I even visited builders in mid project to look at what was involved. Very enlightening. Before you set your heart on a particular plane or a set of performance numbers, make sure you fly one. It was a mind changing experience for me.
Happy Hunting.

Zane, I know you don't like trikes and this is probably one of the ugliest planes made but you can't deny it performs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbEZMYxE ... playnext=1

Jaerl wrote:Zane, I know you don't like trikes and this is probably one of the ugliest planes made but you can't deny it performs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbEZMYxE ... playnext=1

That's actually a neat looking plane. It's different. I like the SUV look of it.

58Skylane wrote:

Jaerl wrote:Zane, I know you don't like trikes and this is probably one of the ugliest planes made but you can't deny it performs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbEZMYxE ... playnext=1

That's actually a neat looking plane. It's different. I like the SUV look of it.

In a VERY ugly kinda way...

Ben
Zenith 801
N801BH

Some others worthy of mention (I think)....though none of them are for hauling the family around.

the Icub http://icub.aero/

and also Zlin Aero's "Savage" http://www.zlinaero.com/eng/cub.php

though personally, I am rather partial to the Ridge Runner (having second one custom built right now) http://www.realflying.com/

Stol wrote:

58Skylane wrote:

Jaerl wrote:Zane, I know you don't like trikes and this is probably one of the ugliest planes made but you can't deny it performs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbEZMYxE ... playnext=1

That's actually a neat looking plane. It's different. I like the SUV look of it.

In a VERY ugly kinda way...

Ben
Zenith 801
N801BH

To me, this is not an ugly plane!


And look at this bad azz engine!!

These what to buy threads sure take off. This one is even staying on track.(mostly)

ccurrie wrote: This one is even staying on track.(mostly)

Yeah, except for that Maule guy

NO fair! Posing ANY plane on the ramp at Jackson is CHEATING! Anything will look great with that background.....the backdrop at Stanley Idaho is my second favorite place to take ramp shots, they all come out great Looks are second to performance in my book, if you have both even better.

courierguy wrote:NO fair! Posing ANY plane on the ramp at Jackson is CHEATING! Anything will look great with that background.....the backdrop at Stanley Idaho is my second favorite place to take ramp shots, they all come out great Looks are second to performance in my book, if you have both even better.

LOL !! I see now. Ben should have at least parked the plane on the grass then.

Z - If you already have OshKosh on your calendar you'll find your answer there, should be able to get a demo ride in whatever you've narrowed it down to. I've gone through the same deliberative process driven by the same premises - want to get out of certificated, want to learn about all the little pieces, intrigued by the astounding array of options available to the non-certificated buyer, and knowing that the spar hasn't been over g'd dozens of times is a bonus.

The Stinson is awesome (especially with the 470), but I want to go faster (and slower), I want to be able to carry more fuel, and I want to be able to work on it myself. What I really want is a Cessna 180, but I don't want to pay $100k for something with 10k hours, a runout motor, and crappy avionics. I want 180 performance & capacity with electronic ignition, an EFIS with integrated autopilot, LED lighting, solid-state breakers, and on and on and on. The Bearhawk meets most of what I'm looking for in those regards. Go for a ride in one and there's no doubt you'll be impressed. The downside based on your stated parameters is you'll probably go over budget by $30k (min).

The one sticking point is the bigger engine that class of plane entails. Fuel is going to become more expensive, the question is how much more and where is the breaking point where I throw in the towel, get out of aviation as a hobby, and buy a sailboat? Maybe just get my personal flying fix with a paraglider? Of course you can always pull the throttle back and fly a big engine economically, but the reality is you will use more fuel and your total budget will be higher. The upside is when you want to fly 3 pax somewhere cool for dinner or you want to haul a new cast iron tub into Johnson Creek you can do it. When I get depressed thinking about the fuel issue I then turn my thoughts to how impressed I've been by the Rans S-7 in all regards and its fuel economy in particular.

Sounds like the first question you need to answer is how many seats you really want/need, everything else will follow from that.

Ben, I almost got to see your plane in person. Todd was going to show it to me when he did my Prop Balance but I had to get out of there because there was a storm just getting to Jackson when I took off. I guess if function is beauty, you do have a beautiful plane! Actually a 701, 750, or 801 is what I want for playing in the woods.

Vick,

Great arguments. The extra cargo volume/extra pax is really the only thing I would gain from the larger class aircraft. Fuel futures and economy in mind, the LSA class planes make the most sense.

Currently all my friends are either skiers or pilots, or both. I just need to talk the ones without airplanes into buying their own so I don't have to haul anyone besides my lady or my old man, or...*gulp*...Junior.

http://www.bushcaddy.com/en/

All I know about the Bushcaddy is from their website, but it looks like quite a plane. Enough models to choose from, something should be about right. I like the looks of the L162 2+2, but even the L160 2+1 hauls quite a load (1100 lbs). Of course, those are factory numbers but it's enough to think about.
-Nate

Aren't bushcaddy's the ones the wings keep falling off?

What about a Murphy Moose?

I love flying our 170B, but also look forward to building a two-place bushplane in the near future. I've built a sailboat I lived aboard and a couple of houses, as well as our hangar and lotsa other projects, so can understand Zane's desire to build his own... Heck, I just like having a fun project!
But: don't overlook the requirement that when you go out to the airport and open that hangar door and look at your baby, your heart should go pitter-pat.
Otherwise, it'll just be another great-performing bushplane.
P.S.: I can't find too much fault with the Highlander, probably with the Jabiru 3300.
B.R.

Zane,

Find a 182 to rent to satisfy your soon to be wife's need to haul more people around, then you can build and enjoy flying anything you want.
I've had the chance this last year to fly some cubs. First one was a Carbon Cub . I know, too expensive to get into it, but wow! Then I got to fly a PA-11. About 90 HP less but still really fun.
I think you could set up one of the Cub kits to meet just about all your needs except the hauling of extra PX's. But on those few occasion's it's cheeper to rent the four place.
Don't forget to put all the goodie attachments on the cub (floats, ski's...) then you can fly and ski at the same time.

Just tryin to help you buddy.
I can't wait to see what you end up doing.
Tom

Being very biased, in your position I would be looking at a light, O-320 homebuilt cub, and an O-520 powered Cyclone. I am almost surprised no one has mentioned the Cyclone... But... being a cheapskate, I chose the certified route... experimental is rarely as cheap a route as people think...