PDA

View Full Version : Build a CUB options



Bill Rusk
06-21-2011, 03:25 PM
Folks

Lets talk about building a Supercub.

Options

1 Scratch Good = lots of options, full flexibility, cheap intro and possibly final cost
Bad = Time, resale

2 Backcountry kit Good = fairly complete, reasonable quality, available, support,
strong, previous experience
Bad = could be lighter

3 Dakota Cub Kit Good = company has excellent reputation,
Bad = not much info, weight?

4 Cub Crafters Good = Quality, Company, complete, support, resale, all good
Bad = Cost, Gross weight limit?

5 Javron Good = Don't know much, Buhler? anyone
Bad = see above

6 Spraker Good = Cheap start, flexibility,
Bad = Time

7 Wag Aero Good = Cost, available,
Bad = Time, more of a J-3 than a SC

8 Rebuild Good = Find a fuselage and redo it, quick start, light,
Bad = FAA issues, small parts nickel and dime you to death,

9 Kit Bash Good = Pick and choose best parts from anyone, flexibility
Bad = Cost

Are there other kits out there I am missing? I would like to have a large baggage, gross weight of 2300 or so (experimental you can set what you want, but if the kit manuf is claiming a much lower GW you might have trouble justifying a higher GW). What other ideas do we know of? I think Legend Cubs are all Light Sport. I need the 2300 GW to do floats, camping gear, and two people. My goal would be 1100 pounds empty with an 0-360 and interior like I had. I was at 1133 with everything and a 0-320. So I am thinking I need to save about 70 pounds from my last build, 35 for the larger engine and 35 to get below 1100. What do you think? I think I was pretty light before with the Smith Kit but I do think I could have saved some weight in the wings. They seemed heavy to me. But, I had no concerns setting my GW at 2300 either so maybe it is a trade off. However I do not remember any Cub in-flight wing failures so perhaps the wing is overbuilt.

Thanks for your inputs

Bill

kevin
06-21-2011, 03:31 PM
Bill, what about an SQ2. They are impressive. I'm not sure if they are part of some of the other kits above?????

DW
06-21-2011, 03:42 PM
Bill lets drive up to Javron and take a look see.

DW

410tj
06-21-2011, 03:52 PM
Bill, check experimental aircraft metal fabrication, they have a web site. He makes a PA-12 fuselage and does about the nicest work you will find anywhere. You could have him change the wing angle to super cub specs and maybe end up with what you are looking for. He is very fair with his pricing. You could then get a wing kit elsewhere and build it light. DW knows him well.

More info?, give me a call. Tim James 503 201 8623

Bill Rusk
06-21-2011, 03:53 PM
I got the first part for my new Cub from DW. A new Steve's Gascolator. Thanks DW.

I agree. Lets do it next week. I'll call.

Bill

bluetoysguy
06-21-2011, 04:03 PM
It might be worth your time to check out Javron in the Brainerd area. We visited Jay and his shop(s) back in May, and I have to say it is pretty impressive. I think there's a lot of flexibility in terms of what he'll build you. He is just kind of getting his full kit with wings and all into production, but he seems very capable and knowledgeable.

Worth a look for sure IMHO.

Marty57
06-21-2011, 04:07 PM
Bill,
From a scratch builder you are right; very flexible but high time. A couple of things about Wag. Yes, Their Sport Trainer is more Cub than Super Cub but could easily be modified for Super Cub Wings. The 2+2 like I am building could be set up like a PA12 or tandem seating pretty easy (39" wide up front, about 36" at rear seat, doors both sides). Use Christians drawings for the sticks and you would be all set. Advantage to Wag is your location; Poplar Grove right? I grew up in Des Plaines; know the area. You could pick up fuselage from Wag pretty easy. Gross Weight is advertised as 2200 so your need for floats would fit. Talk to Tim about 2+2. The Wag set up does not have jack screw or flaps but easy to add as I did. All stock parts will fit for Jack Screw, no changes needed at all, just weld on the fittings for the cables and what not. I am currently doing the flaps for my wing; all stock parts will fit. I'll have CAD drawings when finished (Tim is begging me to do his 2+2). You are welcome to any of my drawings should you go that rout. You can use any PA18 wing on the 2+2 fuselage. Standard SC tail Feathers and landing gear are also used. By changing to tandem, adding flaps and jack screw trim, and building up a SC wings (non certified parts) you should not have any problems meeting the 51% rule and save a lot of time. Give Tom O'Neil a call at Wag Aero, he is there go-to guy. I have every step posted on my web site below or let me know if I can help in any way.
Marty57

aktango58
06-21-2011, 05:06 PM
Dakota Cub: Bill, I like the work on the parts I have from them. Mark came go Graham TX last winter and instructed/directed us pilots on wing assembly, (talk about someone with patients). Mark was VERY smart, knowledgeable, and could cite very good reasoning on why his birds are built with particular changes. Don't overlook them, and it is a 2300 lb cub.

Another option: if you get a flier, do a rummage sale cub- collect parts from the corners of every hanger around and build the cub from left over pieces!

You have started with one freebie, maybe there are more out there you just need to find!

Iflylower
06-21-2011, 05:09 PM
Do it right!

Take the best of all worlds. Build the dream. You know so much more than before. Assemble, don't fabricate -you've done that. Get this in the air in minimum time. Were here to help!

qsmx440
06-21-2011, 05:11 PM
Bill one or two thoughts. Did you enjoy the build so much you want to go through it again? I'm enjoying each new process but when it's done I will want to do something else. If the answer for you is "yes" then I'd think you would be biased towards scratch or picking parts and taking years. If the answer is no your really just ready for the "flying" part of building then a really complete "two weeks to first flight" type of kit would make sense. I was exagerating both those points.

Bill Rusk
06-21-2011, 06:23 PM
Bluetoysguy - thanks. Planning a trip up there next week.

410tj - I remember him a little. DW knows him. I'll look into it. Thanks

Marty57 - Your work is fantastic. I will rethink Wag. Good points

George - I'll call Mark and talk to him tomorrow. Will report back

Cal - that is really where I am leaning

qsmx440 - Well yes and no. I did enjoy the build and I was planning to build again someday. I was hoping to fly my cub a little more before I started my next project but ....oh well I may be back in the barrel sooner than I planned.

D.A.
06-21-2011, 08:58 PM
Well here's my 2 cents worth (might be overvalued). I don't think there is a wrong way to go, it just depends on your mission statement. However, I would however, like to compare the Spraker to just building a jig table and grinding, cutting, fitting, coping and tacking yourself. I've laid out the line geometry for a 20s biplane in a long afternoon. After that you just need to add whatever blocking you want to position your tubes, which could take another few hours. I know a guy that insists that if he's got all the materials and tools at the ready, he can start Saturday morning and have a tacked Cub frame on saw horses by Sunday afternoon. With online programs like MetalGeek, the coping process is cut to a fraction of just eye balling it. Once you've got it tacked, you're at the same place you'd be with a Spraker. Every time I figure it, I come up with a different number (see what I mean about the 2 cents) but there's something less than $1000 worth of tubing in a Cub fuselage I believe. I also believe Spraker charges $2500-ish + shipping. Now, nothing against the Spraker fuselage, a lot of guys have jump started their project with his work, it's just that you're paying somewhere around $1500 + shipping for his coping. To some people, having the frame tacked in place is a great boost, otherwise they might spend 6 months getting to that point, but if you can knuckle down and just blow through the coping and tacking yourself, you can save half the price of your new BWs.
Just my 2 cents worth - - - maybe 1.5 cents worth 8)

Bill Rusk
06-21-2011, 09:21 PM
Thank you Tim and D.A.

What do we know about Bushwacker aircraft? They have a kit advertised called the Bushcub XP. Anyone building one? Anyone seen one, flown one, built one? So now we are up to 6 different kit manufactures. (seven if we count Legend)

1 CC Carbon Cub
2 Dakota Cub
3 Backcountry Cub
4 Javron Kits
5 Wag Aero
6 Bushwacker

Quite a change in the last 7 years.

Bill

D.A.
06-21-2011, 09:25 PM
Does Dakota use Airframes Alaska (Airframes Inc.) fuselages?

Bugs66
06-21-2011, 09:42 PM
Guys, I think Spraker is retired. I did see a partial fuselage on Barnstormers for $800. That may be it for him.

NimpoCub
06-21-2011, 09:53 PM
Admirable spirit Bill.
You no sooner got your pants dry & you're lookin' to build another.
You said you want a 2300# Cub & you want your wings lighter? Hmmm.... give that lots of thought.
I like the idea of buying a cheaper/airworthy Cub & sell it when you're done. Building is very satisfying, but you know there are those bluebird days!! :)
Good on ya, even if ya ARE from Chi-town. :)

qsmx440
06-21-2011, 10:14 PM
This is exciting like when your favorite long running TV show comes to an end (Cheers) but the next season "surprise" some of the actors come back in a different but better show with new ideas and adventures (Fraiser)! :pop: Go "No time for tears" BILL :cheers

cubdriver2
06-21-2011, 10:46 PM
Bill,Bushwacker also will sell you a CNC tubing kit that fits together like a glove. I got to fly a 2300lb CC with standard wings on amphibs last weekend and thought it was a slug when flying, heavy on the controls and no fun to fly, I flew a 2002 CC with extended wing an 2100 amphib Wips and it was a blast to fly. Bill I guess I'm spoiled, I get 2 people 4 hrs fuel and camping gear in a 71 year old J4/1320 and it still puts a smile on my face for about 20.00hr. Go lighter and you'll need less power, fuel and money.

Glenn

StewartB
06-21-2011, 11:14 PM
Why wouldn't you duplicate your lost plane? Have your preferences changed?

Stewart

skywagon8a
06-22-2011, 06:03 AM
Bill,
The truck driver who delivered my TCOW/Backcountry kit told me that he dropped off a Wag kit on his way to me. He said that my kit was far superior to the Wag and that he was very favorably impressed. He was an airplane person and home builder/contractor who was delivering airplane kits for a retirement vocation.

I heard a rumor that Javron is the same outfit which built the Backcountry kits and that they were now building their own. The indication is that there is something going on between the two. That is all that I heard.

Steve Pierce
06-22-2011, 06:04 AM
Bill, Call Mark at Dakota Cub and get the skinny on their kit. Same as their certified Super 18, Airframes fuselage, Dakota Wings and all Mark's new and improved parts like the jack screw etc.

Legend has a new Cub with flaps and the new light weight Lycoming engine. Darin Hart at Legend gave me some details at the Airman Show. You might give hime a call.

flylowslow
06-22-2011, 07:25 AM
Bill, I would do a wide body Dakota and stick with the same scheme you had on your last one (which was awesome!) I bet you could have a flying airplane in less than 6 months.
Denny

tempdoug
06-22-2011, 08:18 AM
My vote. Widebody with a stroker kit put in a 0-320. Kept light.

Bill Rusk
06-22-2011, 09:06 AM
Logan - Yea baby, leave a light on, I'm still coming to see you. I think the Smith wings were heavy even at 2300 GW. Nice... but heavy.

QSMX440 - Thanks, I was not looking for a new gig but ....Oh well.... press on. It will be interesting and we'll make it fun. What the heck is a QSMX440 anyway? Sounds like quantum physics.

Glenn - shoot me a PM with your #. I'd like to pick your brain.

Stewart - Basically, that is what I am probably going to do. I don't think my preferences have changed significantly but the SC world certainly has. I really liked what I had, but to be smart, I am evaluating all my options and getting inputs before I make a decision. When I did my Smith Kit that was the only kit on the market. So much has changed in just 7 or 8 years. They did not have 0-340, 0-375, 0-390 engines, seven different kits to consider, slats, slots etc. It is amazing to me how much the supercub world has changed since you and I found this website. I was reading some posts yesterday from 02 and 03 and it was pretty interesting.

Steve - I will call Mark at Dakota today and will check legend as well. Did not know about their latest. I have heard lots of good things about the light sport legend kits. I would imagine that would carry over into their other products.

Denny - I am leaning away from the widebody at this time. According to Airframes Alaska a regular stock SC fuselage weighs 95pds, a fully modified frame came in at 109 and a modified widebody at 125. Basically a widebody adds 12+ pounds. Plus larger floor boards, interior panels, windshield, skylight, etc which may mean we are up to 20 extra pounds for the widebody. I am not that physically large so I can get by with a normal width fuselage. Also, I found that on my widebody Smithcub that it was too wide for my knees to rest against the sides in flight so I was not as comfortable in flight as a std width cub. This might not be an issue for someone with longer legs, say a guy that is 6'2 tall. I'm 5'8. I spoke to another widebody guy and he said he was considering padding on the sidewalls to make it more narrow thus giving him a way to rest his legs as well. In a perfect world maybe we would have the 2" wider fuselage but then where do you get a windshield, bootcowl, etc., to fit.
If I can lop 20 pounds off right at the start and make it more comfortable at the same time that is a win win situation. But a widebody may be much better for someone that is physically larger. Ahhh the beauty of the custom cub. Thanks for the kind words. It will be the same in many respects.

Bill

spinner2
06-22-2011, 09:19 AM
Bill, As you know from our PM's earlier I decided to go the Carbon Cub EX route. The positives for me with this kit are the quality of the parts, excellent support from Cub Crafter's especially Mitch, the kit program manager. The light weight of the finished plane is a big one too. I expect to be around 925 pounds on the little furnished 6" tires. Combine that with their O-340 180 hp engine, electronic ingnition and a lightweight prop for big performance. I don't have experience with other kits but it looks like I'll have about 750 hours into my build. And I've got an easy 50 hours into changes I made to the kit, mostly in the panel and extended baggage and wiring. I didn't get one of their panel packages.

behindpropellers
06-22-2011, 09:21 AM
Bill-

I'm curious what your driving decision was when you first started your (first) kit?

Steve Pierce
06-22-2011, 09:34 AM
Bill, Some things about the Dakota kit:
1. It on the FAA approved kit list, the airplane is certified to FAA standards so you know the real gross weight and to what standard it was achieved.
2. It also went through the FAA flutter test and just barely passed so a bit of weight was added to the leading edge of the ailerons (which are stock PA18) and it passed the ground and flight test with no problems.
3. Almost all the parts are FAA/PMA so you know the standards they were built to and they have a market value since most are direct replacement on a Piper PA18.
4. Parts are available everywhere because they are mostly PA18 parts.
5. Kit comes with most all parts including all hardware, nuts, bolts, rivets, fittings, glass, raw aluminum etc. Only items not included but available at attractive rates are: engine/ engine accessories, propeller, paint, fabric covering materials, wheels/brakes/tires, avionics/instruments, and seat upholstery.
6. The build manual and drawings are amazing with hardware call outs and lots of detail.

I don't know enough about the other kits but do know this one so don't take this as a sales pitch but just a bit of personal experience.

StewartB
06-22-2011, 09:43 AM
Interesting comments. The Supercub world has changed. My aircraft needs haven't. With the exception of 160hp vs 180hp there's nothing I'd do differently if I rebuilt my PA-12 today. The engine decision was a struggle from the time I bought my basket case so that's nothing new.

If I wanted a Cub I'd probably buy one of the many good certified Cubs that are on the market. I can buy existing cheaper than I can build the equal. That's hard to pass up. If I was motivated to build a kit I'd buy a Carbon Cub.

Have fun.

Stewart

Bill Rusk
06-22-2011, 10:00 AM
Dan - Thanks for chiming in. That is a consideration and I know their stuff is absolutely first rate. Planning to get out there next week to talk to them.

Tim

Money. Seven years ago the cub market was red hot. A project on a trailer was 50K. A Cub with a high time engine and 35 year old fabric was a 100K. The market has softened somewhat since then but not much. I am pretty handy with tools (definitely NOT on par with Skup, Calkins, Starr, etc) but I felt I could build a high end cub closer to my budget. I did. It cost more than I anticipated and took longer (gee, what a surprise) but I ended up with the equivalent of a 200K cub for less than half the cost, and it was just the way I wanted, paint, instruments, interior, seats, no rust, no stripped out screws, etc.
I also wanted to learn more shop skills. I had built most of a Hatz biplane but I wanted to learn more. I would still like to learn more and improve my skills. I greatly admire the craftsmanship many folks on this site display. It is very rewarding for me to look at something I built (even if it is not as good as I would like). I had planned on building again once the cub was done but I was also planning to take a break and just enjoy flying my cub for a season or two. Back in the shop sooner than I planned but I want the end product bad enough to try again. I hope I have the stamina to make it to the end.

I appreciate all the inputs and don't hesitate to slap me upside the head if I am out to lunch. Hopefully others will benefit from the ideas, thought processes, and info in this thread. Lets put it all out there for everyone.

Thanks

Bill

Bugs66
06-22-2011, 10:20 AM
Bill I think you are on the money (no pun) as far as reasons to build your own Cub. For me, money was huge factor plus I wanted to be the repairman for my aircraft and have the freedom of experimental rules. Scratch building is still the cheapest way for anyone into a "brand new" Super Cub. $40K is easily doable. This however is the long road and you have to be 110% committed and work on it every day, really every day and stay focused. If you don't it just becomes a point of contention and will aggravate you every day as airplanes fly over your head.

As far as your choices, as you say there are so many options now. In your shoes and having the assistance of insurance $, I would want to fast track this project. I am really looking forward to see what you choose!

behindpropellers
06-22-2011, 10:29 AM
Bill I think you are on the money (no pun) as far as reasons to build your own Cub. For me, money was huge factor plus I wanted to be the repairman for my aircraft and have the freedom of experimental rules. Scratch building is still the cheapest way for anyone into a "brand new" Super Cub. $40K is easily doable. This however is the long road and you have to be 110% committed and work on it every day, really every day and stay focused. If you don't it just becomes a point of contention and will aggravate you every day as airplanes fly over your head.

As far as your choices, as you say there are so many options now. In your shoes and having the assistance of insurance $, I would want to fast track this project. I am really looking forward to see what you choose!

Bugs... I think you might need to revise your number to around $60K for 2011. Engine parts prices are going up and the materials are also probably 50% more now.

The gap between a nice certified cub and homebuilt cub is getting smaller each year.

Tim

Bugs66
06-22-2011, 10:37 AM
I am not so sure Tim. Ask the guys who found a donor Tri pacer with engine. A key factor is what engine, how inexpensive you find it. Good rebuilder or mid time engines are out there. Ok, I will up it to $45K. ;)

Amy
06-22-2011, 10:54 AM
Does Dakota use Airframes Alaska (Airframes Inc.) fuselages?

As mentioned previously, yup! The beauty of the kit is that, as Steve mentioned, the vast majority of the parts and components are PMA'd so they are made to the same specs and quality control system as the parts we make for certified aircraft. Let me know if you have any questions--currently at Lock Haven and am just on my phone.

aktango58
06-22-2011, 11:23 AM
Bill,

Repairs: with the time you have spent on the previous project, and the time on the new project, why not take a seminar and finish your A&P, find an IA to sign off the work for annual/major assembly, and have a certified?

Of course, then you would have to explain the speed mod fly rod tube on the struts...

Marty57
06-22-2011, 01:08 PM
It's all time vs money and the engine. I will likely be in the air for well under $30K but I have built everything. My biggest cost will be covering and paint; can't do much their to reduce that. The big trade off is time. I have 1800 hours into my 2+2 with a couple more years of work or more $$$.

I think with what's out there today in the home building Cub market you can pick a price and build time first than match time/fabrication and purchased parts to fit the goal. I think a good place to start this type of a build would be a sit down with a good DAR. Outline the proposed pre-fabricated parts you are going to buy vs the parts you are going to fabricate and come up with a plan that satisfies his interpretation of the 51% rule and your desire for this Cub. You don't have to go with one companies kit if you don't need or want everything in that kit. A Cub build is unique in the experimental field today because of all the support out their in parts; both certified and exp. I really like the fact that I can pick and choose what parts I want to build and what parts to fabricate. Just my thoughts here .....
Marty57

kevin
06-22-2011, 01:48 PM
Bill, There are some great advices here. I really don't know much about all these experimental kits out there. I didn't know that there were so many kits available. I have a friend here with an SQ2 and it is incredible. I have seen some of Dakota Cubs' parts and they are top notch. I have been thru Cubcrafters factory a number of years ago and was impressed. Whatever you decide, I'm sure it will be great and will be well thought thru. I think I can speak for all of us here in that we look forward to watching it come along. I will stay tuned!

Kevin G.

myskyjeep
06-22-2011, 10:56 PM
If you buy a nice frame with all the controls, a Bart engine and have the wings covered and painted while your finishing the fuselage you worries are over.
Dave

Wayne Axelson
06-23-2011, 09:41 AM
Bill, If it helps at all, Wayne Mackey put my wings on a diet 2 years ago. We shaved out almost 10 lbs from each wing. It's still heavier than a stock Piper wing, but it will handle 2,400 lbs.

tempdoug
06-23-2011, 11:04 AM
Anyone thats never sat in a widebody needs to just to say, been there done that. There is places for regular and wide but after i went over Brads or Widebody on here, its something that is sortve a must just for a item for making decisions for missions for someones future airplanes. Ive got a regular myself. Only thing i dont like about it is having my arm cramed against my side to run the throttle otherwise all is ok. In a widebody what a difference!!

MainlandCub
06-24-2011, 05:16 AM
Yeah, I'm with Doug on this one, but then I don't fly around with my leg leaning against the side of the cockpit. It isn't just the personal room its the ability to have room for "stuff" on the sidewalls, like map pockets, place for your PLB, radios beneath at the corners of the panel and so on.

Also would be good to see the seats further apart fore and aft too.

I don't buy in to the 20lbs, both Legend and Cub Crafters have made wider Cubs that are lighter. In any event I'd rather try and save some weight somewhere else to get the wider fuselage.

Just opinion. Keep us posted on your decisions Bill.

jaypratt
06-24-2011, 08:56 AM
Wider?,,

My Northstar kit Super Cub is 2.5" wider. I like the extra room for gear. Also there is space for a back seaters feet. I wish I could build another Super Cub just for the building fun. It would be a hard choice now.

The Northstar was the only choice in kits in 2002, (when I started building). It is a really complete kit and had a complete hardware order list with good plans. I really like the utility of my baggege door and fish pole tube that goes all the way back to the H/S. The battery is behind the extended baggage, storage under rear seat, and cessna style front seat slider rails, 3" extended gear, X brace, removable boot cowl, L21 windows, bigger Fowler flaps, large inspestion plates on the rear fuselage, big hat rack/storage, metal / removable belly skin. This plane has been thought out and enginered for ease of maintence.
If I could build another Super Cub I would have to include a lot of the Northstars ideas in the next one.
I would Not, have the leftside door on the next one!!

Bill Rusk
06-24-2011, 10:56 AM
Thanks for the update Wayne. That is good and valuable news.

Good inputs Jay Pratt.

Thanks to all for the inputs. I thought about this a bit more last evening. (My son came to visit (thats so cool) but he had friends to catch up with last evening so I got some thinking time).

The interesting thing about this are the concepts, ideas, thought processes, and logic train used in arriving at a solution.


When building a cub you have the basic equation...

raw materials + time^2 = Flying Cub

The process can get held up by delays in obtaining raw materials, kits, parts, etc. and it can be held up by the lack of time for the builder to expend on the project. It is going to take 1000+ hrs to build a plane. It may require 3000 hrs for the first timer because of the learning curve and maybe less than 1000 by a really experienced builder but even with a pretty complete kit I can't see much less than 1000 hrs for me. (I would love to hear from Mackey, Calkins, Pratt and other builders on these numbers). If I could average 20 hrs a week, which given my current personal and employment status I might be able to do, it would take 1 year to invest 1000 hours. The time frame is also dependent on where (on a sliding scale from total scratch to barely 51%) we start this project. Obviously it will take longer to start and build from scratch than from a kit or with completed components. As an experienced builder I might be able to go from scratch in 2000 hrs and from a kit in 1000 hrs. Spinner2 is nearly done with his CC kit and will be near 1000 hrs. I had about 2500 hrs in my Smithkit but a great deal of that was learning curve, and no builders manual. (Backcountry cubs now has a manual)

The other variable in the equation is raw materials. If you are restricted in the financial ability to have the materials on hand to build with at any given moment then that increases the time to build. So we would have to rewrite the equation to have a total investment element which would account for the time required to acquire materials.

About now you are asking ...."Is this going somewhere?"

If I purchase a flying cub to have while I build that will limit the investment capitol for the build, such that the time to complete a new cub would be limited not by my personal time but rather by my ability to acquire raw materials without going into debt.
Furthermore, I well remember the frustration that ensued when I had to take time away from my build to repair and maintain the flying aircraft. Other builders may understand these feelings. Perhaps I am the only one that has this frustration. I want to be working on the cub but find myself spending two weeks doing an annual on the 170. That slows the build. In an effort to focus on the build you need to remove as many distractions as possible. Maintaining boats, a second home, a cabin, golf game and other time sponges could significantly extend the build time to the point that you may give up.

So, at this point, I feel owning/buying a flying cub will increase the time to complete a build. Both from a materials acquisition point and from a time available to invest on the project. I am Blessed to have a couple of friends that will lend me a cub to fly on occasion so I could get my flying fix and even bum a back seat to a fly-in or two while I build. Thus right now I am leaning away from buying cub to have something to fly while I build. This is not a final decision just some thoughts.

Just some thoughts I wanted to share to maybe help others thinking of building.

Bill

Iflylower
06-24-2011, 11:11 AM
Bill, what was your absolute favorite part of building your cub?

Mine was welding followed closely by covering. I love assembling, because an hours work makes it look like so much got done. I'll tell you later where I'm going with this.

qsmx440
06-24-2011, 11:27 AM
QSMX440 - Thanks, I was not looking for a new gig but ....Oh well.... press on. It will be interesting and we'll make it fun. What the heck is a QSMX440 anyway? Sounds like quantum physics.

Bill

When I got back into flying a few years back, I decided to go the ultralight route. My research turned up the Quicksilver company as the oldest, safest, largest, most support 3 axis etc. brand. I joined my first yahoo group and had to come up with a handle so (having just purchased a 1975 Quicksilver MX I registered on yahoo as QuickSilver MX kawasaki 440. My engine was actually a Cuyuna POS. Just newbie ignorance, but it was to late to change. I now fly a 2000 QS Sprint with a 447 Rotax which is a rocket ship for climb angle. By the way all the folks that say flying is expensive,, you can by a low time Sprint for under 7K with a current BRS. It's a "no wind" 3 axis airplane but safe (as any aircraft) and cheap to buy and maintain (50' takeoff, 800' agl after 3000'horizontal run, 19 mph stall, 35 mph climb, 35mph cruise, 35 mph decent, best view ever! need I go on :roll: just for poking holes in the sky. After learning to fly it (different skills kinda from my Cessna) I decided I could not be satisfied with Cessna performance and that directly led me to here (I had never had any interest in tail wheel, rag wing aircraft) and building my own light SC to replace the quick for longer trips than just hanging around within 10 miles of the airport! And that Bill, as Paul Harvey used to say, "is the rest of the story", boring as it is ..... QSM why can't I ever just give short answers X440 or just plain "Q" ;-)

Bill Rusk
06-24-2011, 01:12 PM
Great story "Q". Thanks. Made me laugh. My handle is not nearly so interesting. I need to learn more about your build. Congratulations.

Bill

DW
06-24-2011, 01:29 PM
Yea where did you come up with the handle Bill Rusk anyway?:)

Bill Rusk
06-24-2011, 02:19 PM
DW, you vewry vewry funny guy.

Actually I was named after my fathers best friend. They remained lifelong best friends until my father passed away. Neat but not much of a story.

Cal

The absolute best part was when my friends would come over and we would work on the plane, order pizza in the hangar for lunch, and work together. That was the best part. I hope I can recapture that.

I would have to admit, fabrication would have to be high on the list. I didn't do any welding on the cub but did a bunch on the Hatz. I like building. I enjoyed the electrical. It was fun to flip the switch and see things work, (just prior to all that funny smelling smoke). I would have to say that painting may have been the least favorite part. Perhaps the Stewarts system will be better.

Bill

Bugs66
06-24-2011, 02:43 PM
I would say painting is the worst. I hated it! Very stressful because that is what everyone sees. I don't think that is particular to any system. Welding and fabric covering are rewarding and enjoyable. I liked fabrication, especially if I could make the 2D part in the computer and print out my template.

spinner2
06-24-2011, 03:27 PM
When building a cub you have the basic equation...

raw materials + time^2 = Flying Cub

The process can get held up by delays in obtaining raw materials, kits, parts, etc. and it can be held up by the lack of time for the builder to expend on the project. It is going to take 1000+ hrs to build a plane. It may require 3000 hrs for the first timer because of the learning curve and maybe less than 1000 by a really experienced builder but even with a pretty complete kit I can't see much less than 1000 hrs for me. Obviously it will take longer to start and build from scratch than from a kit or with completed components. As an experienced builder I might be able to go from scratch in 2000 hrs and from a kit in 1000 hrs. Spinner2 is nearly done with his CC kit and will be near 1000 hrs. I had about 2500 hrs in my Smithkit but a great deal of that was learning curve, and no builders manual. (Backcountry cubs now has a manual)

Thus right now I am leaning away from buying cub to have something to fly while I build. This is not a final decision just some thoughts.

Just some thoughts I wanted to share to maybe help others thinking of building.

Bill

Bill you mentioned my kit and time. I've got 684 hours into mine so far. I keep track of evey hour and what I did that day in an Excel file.

I sprayed my last trim coat this morning. I don't have a lot left: window installation, interior panels, attach tail feathers and wings. Also a little wiring in the left wing root, but not much. I'm anticipating about 750 hours in my CC kit. In comparison I rebuilt a PA-18 a few years ago and had 1000+ into it.

I started this kit on September First of 2010 and have averaged just over 16 hours on the project per week. I have missed very few days woking on it and have done everything myself - no commercial assistance as it is called. As you know it takes dedication. They say the CC kit has half the parts count of a PA-18 so it follows that it should go together quicker.

I also own a Cessna so had another plane to fly but I have flown it very little since starting the kit so if it we me I wouldn't place a priority on having another plane to fly while you build.

Bill Rusk
06-24-2011, 03:31 PM
Dan

Thanks for the correction and the info. Good stuff for anyone reading this thread. I plan to go to CC Monday to look.

Bill

Bugs66
06-24-2011, 03:40 PM
I bet Dan will have one of the nicest CC's out there! When can I fly over and check it out? ;)

spinner2
06-24-2011, 03:44 PM
I bet Dan will have one of the nicest CC's out there! When can I fly over and check it out? ;)

Hi Bugs, We've got a breakfast fly-in tomorrow (Saturday the 25th) morning at S34. Come on over.

I've got my wings in the hangar and most of the other parts in my home shop. The fuselage is covered with masking yet as I finished my trim painting this morning and haven't stripped anything off so far. So not much to see there until it is peeled off.

Josh
06-24-2011, 07:09 PM
$60 grand wore out 150hp Supercub to rebuild later to fly for fun... OR $45 grand pristine 65hp J-3 Cub fly now no worries fly for fun but wishing for a Supercub?

mikeo
06-25-2011, 08:09 PM
Bill It took me from July 2006 to February 2007 to build Cuzoom 1rst build made lots of changes an mods . Come over an see my new project Started with wings an fuse Mikeo

D.A.
06-26-2011, 10:38 PM
I would Not, have the leftside door on the next one!!

Interesting, why is that?

Iflylower
06-26-2011, 10:51 PM
Bill, I'm curious, would you do the elec. trim again, or go with the endless cable? I know you've flown both, just wondering what you prefer on this end.

mikeo
06-26-2011, 11:21 PM
Don't want to but in here but I put electric trim on my cub have about 900hrs on it. I haven't had one issue , a $55 motor, $12switch two inline $6 circuit breakers $2 wire I'm putting the same set-up in new project Mikeo

CubChaser
06-27-2011, 05:23 AM
Bill,
Your in a very good position, you're and experienced Cub builder. Now you're trying to decide who's kit to build by weighing strengths and weakness. Why not build Bills kit. Decide what you want for your fuselage, wide body, narrow, two doors, one, approximate finished weight, AOI, draw up a specification for your perfect Cub and find someone to build it, or that already builds it as close to your specifications as possible. Tail feathers, buy them done, a kit, square, or extra large. Break the project down to small components and decide what your kit will have, or who makes it the way you want. We will be there for opinions, advice, and help. You could even get DW to come over and drill holes all over your new airplane. You could name it CubCraftersSU2NorthstarDakotaSomeGuyInAKwithAmachi neShop#1, or just The Rusk Cub.

Glenn

Bill Rusk
06-27-2011, 07:18 AM
Glenn Cal mikeo
On my cell so can't type much but I would definitely do the elect trim again. Mikeo if I can figure out how to work it out I would love to come visit. You are an awesome builder and I know I could learn a lot. Going to Cub Crafters to look over their kits and look at a Cub there as well.

Bill

Bill

aktango58
06-27-2011, 09:20 AM
Build it all from different parts, call it the "RUSKIT"

Or, to make it more simple, another name, so when asked for payment say: "BILLIT" if you wanted to ruskit....

To me, a certified guy, your task of just choosing would over come me. Right now I am stalled just on floorboards. At some point, you do have to pull the trigger, so set a date to quit investigating, otherwise this will be the longest thread in history!

dalec
06-27-2011, 06:29 PM
Bill

Reading this is killing me, I am right on the edge of doing one from scratch myself. If I take the plunge it won't be from a kit either. The more I fly mine and the more I have done to it in the name of "legal" improvements, the more apparent it becomes that getting it just the way you want it is far easier and cheaper as an experimental. I just hope that building an experimental doesn't leave me a mental case. :o

Marty57
06-27-2011, 07:32 PM
The more I fly mine and the more I have done to it in the name of "legal" improvements, the more apparent it becomes that getting it just the way you want it is far easier and cheaper as an experimental. I just hope that building an experimental doesn't leave me a mental case. :o Trust me ....... it will ...... but that's half the fun!
Marty57

D.A.
06-27-2011, 09:49 PM
...I am right on the edge of doing one from scratch myself. If I take the plunge it won't be from a kit either...
Enough plywood for a jig table and tubing to tack together a fuselage doesn't cost that much and if you later decide to pass on the project you could easily get rid of the frame, especially on this forum.

I started my "Plunge" a few months ago and I'm just starting the steel work. Too bad all of us "Scratch Hopefuls" don't live on the same block.......

Bill Rusk
07-01-2011, 02:56 PM
Folks

I went up to Brainerd MN yesterday to visit Javron. Here is my report.

I drove to Anoka airport just on the North side of the Minneapolis metroplex. There I borrowed Dr Randy's Cub, and flew up to Brainerd. Jay DeRosier picked me up at the airport and took me to his shop. We met up with Brad (Cubus Maximus, great guy and VERY knowledgeable) and got the tour. A little background.
Jay owns a machine shop. That is really his primary business but he is an airplane nut (like so many of us on this site) and several years ago he was at Oshkosh thinking it might be fun to pick up a little extra work. Well, he met Nick Smith, they hit it off, and a few weeks later Jay was welding up PA-12 kits for Nick Smith. When Turbine Cubs (now Backcountry Cubs) bought out Nick they contracted for Jay to continue welding up fuselages including the PA-18 model. Jay welded about 60 kits together and the feedback in this period was exceptionally positive. Backcountry decided to pull everything into one location and so they no longer needed Jays services. There may have been a little turbulence in the transition, as is often the case when significant physical moves are undertaken in a manufacturing concern. I think that is about the time Paul Fisher got his kit. Here is an older thread with a few pro's and cons. http://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?32921-TCOW-PA-12-Kit/page2&highlight=tcow+welded
At any rate I believe that all issues have been resolved and that both Javron and Backcountry Cubs are producing quality products at this time. After Backcountry discontinued subcontracting to Javron, Jay thought it would be fun to get back in the business so he built all new jigs (as opposed to using Nick Smiths) as close to the original Piper drawings as possible. Jay is a machinest by trade so he works in thousandths of an inch. His jigs are all super-accurate and to Piper specs. So any part you buy from Atlee, Stoddards, Univair etc. will fit with Javron stuff. Jay is trying really hard to get back as close as possible to the Piper specs. Nick beafed up a lot of stuff. Jay is going back to the original as much as possible.
So...... you can purchase a kit from Javron which is comparable in parts count to Backcountry but it will be closer to a Stock Supercub than say Backcountry. The Backcountry Cub and SQ2 kits are pretty highly modified Cubs with a specific mission goal. Javron will have some mods but it will be closer to stock.
Javron will also sell parts, partial kits, and pretty much anything you want. So if you want a tacked fuselage (Ala Spraker) he will sell it that way. You build what you want but if you decide you don't feel like welding the seat, for example, you can just buy one from Javron. Mix and match all you want and it should fit as long as you are building from the plans/Northland CD.
Jay is still getting up to speed on all this and his product is not as refined or mature as Backcountry at this time. He has no builders manual yet and may not have the depth of knowledge currently at Backcountry. Wayne Mackey is there pretty much full time and that is a HUGE asset to Backcountry.
Jay is VERY flexible and will build whatever you want. I have also heard NOTHING but positive feedback on his customer service. I hope he can maintain that after he gets overwhelmed with orders. Jay is very weight conscious and that is a trait I admire as you may remember from my thread on building a Smith Kit
http://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?22553-Building-a-Smith-Cub
In a nutshell I was VERY impressed with Jay and Javron and I am excited to see another kit company out there. I think once he gets fully up to speed it will be an awesome addition to the marketplace. The more options the better. Here are a few pictures.

http://www.supercub.org/photopost/data/500/medium/IMG_00541.jpg
Jay machines all his parts in house. This is a photo of one of many shelves, this one with pulleys on it.

http://www.supercub.org/photopost/data/500/medium/IMG_0056.jpg
This is Jay with the old pulley in his left hand and his new pulley in his right hand. Did I mention he is VERY weight conscious?

http://www.supercub.org/photopost/data/500/medium/IMG_00602.jpg
Jay redesigned the overhead trim crank to a double ball bearing unit that is light, strong and REALLY smooth. Very nice.

http://www.supercub.org/photopost/data/500/medium/IMG_00571.jpg
A little blurry (I have not replaced my camera yet (it went down the river) so this is from my Iphone) but this is Jays CAD cutter table.

http://www.supercub.org/photopost/data/500/medium/IMG_0055.jpg
Fuselage jig. Jay can do J-3's, PA-11's, and PA-18's both narrow and wide body.

http://www.supercub.org/photopost/data/500/medium/IMG_00581.jpg
Another jig shot.

http://www.supercub.org/photopost/data/500/medium/IMG_00592.jpg
A fuselage in progress.

Hope this helps (and folks please remember this is just one opinion, not gospel)

Bill
(A huge thanks to Windonhisnose for letting me borrow his horse, and bum a couch for a night.)

Bill Rusk
07-01-2011, 04:03 PM
I also went to Cub Crafters last week.

Report

I was looking at the Carbon Cub EX model specifically. Cub Crafters is clearly the leader in having a highly refined cub kit. I doubt anyone else has anywhere near the engineering, testing, test flying, and data that CC does, including Piper. It is a top notch operation in every respect. The only limitation with a CC kit might be the lack of flexibility. I doubt you could get them to make a bunch of changes to the way they weld things up, for example, it comes with toe brakes, I don't think heel brakes are an option unless you want to get crazy and start cutting and welding on their frame. Even then, they have done such a fantastic job of integrating things that you would very quickly hit a wall. You can not hang their wings on a stock fuselage. The flaps hinge into the fuselage, the flap handle and mechanism is different, the fuselage attach points are different. The interior floor is now structural so you can't just take it out and do your own. In a nutshell you pretty much have to build it as is. Changes would be a real mess.
The good news is is an exceptionally complete kit. It costs more but you get more.

I went to CC with three concerns and they answered all three.

1 I wanted more fuel. They now have extended range tanks as an option that takes the wings up to 43 gals useable.
2 I wanted more baggage area. They have an expanded baggage mod now. Its huge.
3 I wanted more gross weight. You can set it where ever you want as an experimental. There are a couple of things you could do to the wings that I think would make me comfortable setting a GW at 2100 or higher. CC will not support that obviously, but at any rate, I feel I could address this to my own personal comfort level. Might not work for someone else. It is an experiment after all.

It is my opinion that this kit would fit my requirements; however it has a few things that I don't care for. Just me and my opinion, some folks like blue some like green...... so take this for what is, one persons opinion....

I do not like sharp stuff in the cockpit near my head. I feel flap handles, overhead trim handles, headset hooks, etc. are all just things that could split your skull wide open in a mishap. So for me the only thing I want up there are the tubes. You could do the CC airbags to help alleviate this concern or wear a helmet but it is just a personal thing for me. I do not like sharp objects, sharp angles, and things like that in the cockpit. My panel was very flat with no protrusions for that reason as well. Personal problem.

I prefer heel brakes in cubs.

I really like the lack of holes in the floor for things to fall into but I don't care for the plastic look.

So....thinking....it has tons of good points and only a few drawbacks, the question becomes, are those downsides so pervasive to me personally that I can not overlook them.

Great kit and a great company

Bill

spinner2
07-01-2011, 04:28 PM
Bill, I don't think you'll find a Cub with a larger baggage area than the EX kit. Here's an image of mine without the rear seat in place. And behind that I put in my own extended baggage similar to their sub-kit but made from Kydex and with a large outside door. And remember that the CC floor is the same level all of the way back, it doesn't rise up to clear elevator cables like a PA-18 does.

2830

The clamshell door is 50% longer too so you have easy access behind the seat.


2831

More of the Kydex extended baggage area and it includes a 36" long, 6" diameter fishing rod tube.

I prefer heel brakes too but I'll see if I can't get by with toe brakes. :smile:

You're really doing your homework on this. I'm sure you'll make the right decision for what's right for you.

kevin
07-01-2011, 04:50 PM
Hi Bill. These are good reports. Thanks for sharing with us. I too don't like toe brakes in a Cub type of plane.

centmont
07-02-2011, 03:10 PM
The EX kit is a great way to go... keep it as light as possible if you can. Once you get accustomed to the flap handle where it is, you will never want to go back to reaching the floor in the pattern, or not having left full aileron. I can't wait to see Dan's. Tom Konitz, worked full-time (ca. 40h/wk) assembling his EX and had it completed (beautiful job !!) in less than 4 months. R

Gordon Misch
07-03-2011, 09:22 PM
Bill, thank you very much for your reports. Did you fly the Carbon Cub? That thing really performs with its low weight and strong horsepower. I was VERY impressed with it, though I haven't seen more than the finished version.

ronmac
07-04-2011, 02:52 AM
Guys I think a lot of you are paranoid about aircraft weight.When it comes to the severe turbulence we experience in the strong equinoxial winds in New Zealand and the associated rotors,what the hell is 20 pounds extra weight when it comes to aircraft integrity.I will take the heavier aircraft.For some of those who disagree I suggest you will live longer by watching your food intake,the other bonus is the aircraft performs better.

mike mcs repair
07-04-2011, 03:31 AM
Guys I think a lot of you are paranoid about aircraft weight.When it comes to the......I suggest you will live longer by watching your food intake,the other bonus is the aircraft performs better.


score +2!.......

tempdoug
07-04-2011, 09:13 AM
I like EQUAL strength but lighter anyday. Especially when its 100 degrees out. Or trees ahead. Or a passenger.

MainlandCub
07-04-2011, 01:28 PM
I also went to Cub Crafters last week.

Report

I was looking at the Carbon Cub EX model specifically. Cub Crafters is clearly the leader in having a highly refined cub kit. I doubt anyone else has anywhere near the engineering, testing, test flying, and data that CC does, including Piper. It is a top notch operation in every respect. The only limitation with a CC kit might be the lack of flexibility. I doubt you could get them to make a bunch of changes to the way they weld things up, for example, it comes with toe brakes, I don't think heel brakes are an option unless you want to get crazy and start cutting and welding on their frame. Even then, they have done such a fantastic job of integrating things that you would very quickly hit a wall. You can not hang their wings on a stock fuselage. The flaps hinge into the fuselage, the flap handle and mechanism is different, the fuselage attach points are different. The interior floor is now structural so you can't just take it out and do your own. In a nutshell you pretty much have to build it as is. Changes would be a real mess.
The good news is is an exceptionally complete kit. It costs more but you get more.

I went to CC with three concerns and they answered all three.

1 I wanted more fuel. They now have extended range tanks as an option that takes the wings up to 43 gals useable.
2 I wanted more baggage area. They have an expanded baggage mod now. Its huge.
3 I wanted more gross weight. You can set it where ever you want as an experimental. There are a couple of things you could do to the wings that I think would make me comfortable setting a GW at 2100 or higher. CC will not support that obviously, but at any rate, I feel I could address this to my own personal comfort level. Might not work for someone else. It is an experiment after all.

It is my opinion that this kit would fit my requirements; however it has a few things that I don't care for. Just me and my opinion, some folks like blue some like green...... so take this for what is, one persons opinion....

I do not like sharp stuff in the cockpit near my head. I feel flap handles, overhead trim handles, headset hooks, etc. are all just things that could split your skull wide open in a mishap. So for me the only thing I want up there are the tubes. You could do the CC airbags to help alleviate this concern or wear a helmet but it is just a personal thing for me. I do not like sharp objects, sharp angles, and things like that in the cockpit. My panel was very flat with no protrusions for that reason as well. Personal problem.

I prefer heel brakes in cubs.

I really like the lack of holes in the floor for things to fall into but I don't care for the plastic look.

So....thinking....it has tons of good points and only a few drawbacks, the question becomes, are those downsides so pervasive to me personally that I can not overlook them.

Great kit and a great company

Bill

Thanks for all the reports Bill!

Earlier you expressed a dislike of the Widebody Cub. How did the extra width of the Cub Crafters Carbon Cub strike you?

Cheers,
Andrew.

Bill Rusk
07-09-2011, 06:54 AM
Northstar

I somewhat overlooked the Northstar option in the original post. They have been doing this kit for over ten years now and seem to have a pretty good following and reputation.

Here is a link to their website http://www.customflightltd.com/

Advantages include a number of refinements to the basic Cub concept. Good builders manual/instructions and good parts list and hardware details. I have been fortunate to fly Lytles Northstar and it flies quite well indeed. The airplane is pretty beefy but a 0-360 helps mitigate that. Lots of cargo room, a little wider cockpit, much more adjustable seat and lots of removable panels to assist with maintenance. Downside.....heavy. Upside....if you want a plane that you can thrash around in the bush, work hard and put up wet, and generally use it like an old pick up truck, this may be just the ticket for you. As you know Jay Pratt has one and flies it often and recommends it. Jay has a LOT of experience building airplanes and his words carry great credibility.
Another option.

http://www.supercub.org/photopost/data/500/IMG_0803_small.jpg
Lytle (currently in Alaska flying Beavers) with his Northstar in my backyard

http://www.supercub.org/photopost/data/512/IMG_0914small.jpg
Painted with Stewarts System

http://www.supercub.org/photopost/data/500/IMG_0786_small.jpg
Panel

Bill Rusk
07-09-2011, 07:29 AM
Dakota Cub

As you may know Amy and the folks at Dakota Cub are working on updating their website. But to help them out I will post some of the stuff that they sent me. They have (basically) three kits. A small engine kit that you should be able to get into the light sport class, the traditional 160hp Supercub kit and the Super 180hp kit. All are basically the same airframe with different engines. The big advantage that Dakota cub has is the fact that they are built to PMA FAA standards. You are for all practical purposes building a "factory" supercub. They also say if you did not finish your project you could sell the parts off to certified folks and perhaps not loose as much of your invested capitol. But the biggest advantage to Dakota Cub kits remains the certified status. The kit looks to be very complete and there is no doubt as to what you are getting or how well it will perform. It falls under the guise of experimental but the reality is there is not much experimental about it. You know exactly what you are getting and how it will fly.
Downside... Cost and flexibility. You will not be able to get them to start making lots of changes to the kit to accommodate your unusual request for a oversize this, undersize that, new one of these here and get rid of that there. If you like the Supercub pretty much the way it is and want all the assurance of time tested strength and utility, this may be perfect for you.

I tried to post the info Amy sent me to this thread but I could not get it to format properly so it came out in a mess. It is a very complete kit and the listed price was about 64K but I understand that that may be an old price and that it may be higher now. This would make it the most expensive kit option but also in many respects the least "experimental". Sometimes you get what you pay for.

Hope this helps

Bill

Bill Rusk
07-09-2011, 08:44 AM
Folks

Now for the controversial part. Cost.

This is the hard part. It is not easy to compare apples to apples and to get a really firm idea of the cost of all this. I can tell you that building will cost more than you think and take longer. That is just the way it works. Get that idea firmly in your head.

As already discussed the lowest cost is to scratch build. This also has the advantage of the lowest entry or start up cost and the advantage of a "pay as you go" type build. The kits will significantly speed up your build time but they will also require a significant down payment. I know several folks including Christian that have a very nice flying custom Supercub for 50K. It can be done but it will take a LOT of time and determination. Completion rate will be very low. Most folks think they are tough enough to make it to the finish but the reality is fewer than about 1 in 5 will make it to the end. Time will be a minimum of about 3 years and usually closer to 8 or 10 years when all is said and done. Remember..... "it will take longer and cost more than you think"
The kit building completion rate is much higher. Perhaps because there is so much money invested you just can't quit as the resale value of a partially completed project is usually quite low. This would be less true of CC, Dakota kits, Backcountry, and the more established and complete kits. (that list is probably in order). Also once you start customizing your kit you reduce the market. Someone else may not want your goofy mods.

Cub Crafters sells their kits in several pieces that may help a little. Roughly 22K for wing, 22K for fuselage and 22k for finishing. You really can't buy just the wing kit and not the others. You can't bolt their wings on ANY other fuselage. They won't fit. Same for the fuselage. It is all different and integrated. Thus, you are probably going to buy their engine and firewall forward package too and maybe their instrument panel. That is all good as they are very complete and they all fit together into a wonderful package but they don't allow for much customization either.
So the total build cost for a Cub Crafters Kit is probably going to be in the 120 to 130k price range.

Next most expensive will probably be the Dakota Cub. Like the CC kit it is pretty fixed, not a lot of room for customization, but you also have a very known product. Say 70K for the kit and another 40K to 50K to finish is about 110 to 120K total.

Next seems to be the Backcountry kits. I have not spoken much about these. This is what I did last time. It is a known company with a good reputation and they have done a lot of innovative things, ie the SQ2. Wayne and Sharon Axelson were building wings for Nick Smith and they produced beautiful and well made wings. Cover them and bolt them on. They were straight and true. Wayne has gone from building wings to managing the entire kit, and he now has the help of Wayne and Sharon Mackey. If you guys don't know Wayne Mackey, you should. He is one of the Gurus of the Supercub world. Their standard kit comes with all sorts of mods, square wings, dual door, extended glass etc. You can get it back closer to stock but it will cost extra. Their cub is pretty highly modified. They have an excellent build manual and website to help you through the build. If there is any downside to this kit at all it would be that the cost and weight have crept up, at least with the Supercub kit. I am not that familiar with the SQ2. I know Wayne Mackey is very weight conscious and that he has been getting the weight down on their kits.
The basic cost of their kit is about 49K. To build what I want, ie customize the kit to my specs, would push it to close to 55K, if I understand their website and order form correctly. So 55K plus 40 to 50K to finish and you are right around 100K

Javron is currently listing his kit at 41K, plus what ever mods you want. add 40 to 50 K to finish and you are in the 80 to 90K range.

I do not have all the cost data for some of the other options and I am running out of steam posting all this stuff.

The Legend Kits are very nice but they are more light sport ie not 2300 pound GW Cubs so that does not fit my needs. It may be perfect for you however.

More later

Hope this helps and remember...... a LOT of this stuff is just my opinion and may not be perfectly accurate.


Bill

tempdoug
07-09-2011, 05:20 PM
Bill, to me a very big item to building is Phone, Freight, Gas, UPS, parcel post, etc, etc. I dont want to know but i think im in the 5-9 grand area by the time it was all said and done. So the more of all the little things you can get the more 12 1/2 dollar bills you will save getting that one piece you forgot. doug

Marty57
07-09-2011, 06:28 PM
Bill,
I think you are right on target on the different issues regarding building a Cub. There is one other thing to consider regarding scratch building a Super Cub that you haven't touched on yet. You are right about the completion rate for scratch built being low overall but I think that might be different for Cubs. My reasoning is Supercub.org. My project did not come with a builders manual and that has been a very big stumbling block many times. However, this site has become my "builders manual". The talent and generosity offered here is likely very unique and has sustained my efforts during times when it would have been easy to pack it up. Christian's site inspired me to put my build on line, D.A. is doing the same. You are offering the initial inquire in to the entire process; a great resource. Any questions a builder has can usually be answered with a search; if not than a post gets answers for sure. There sure are a lot more exp. Cubs being finished now than when I first started 5 years ago and I suspect that will continue because of these resources. The beauty of the Cub as an option for the experimental builder seems to to be you can simply pick the price you want to spend and realistically come pretty close to that mark. The range is build it all your self (my project) or assemble and fabricate as little as you like. Range is from around $30K to over $100K; 5+ years or one year to build. I don't think there are many other "kits" or plans out there that allow that kind of versility. Most of the planes out there today do not offer plans as an option; fewer yet allow you to build a part or buy that part un-certified or buy it for a certified aircraft and use it. I think the value of the Cub to any prospective builders are these options. I think it's great that you are taking the time to outline all these options; it is a lot of work on your part but exactly the example of what this site can mean to a builder. I bet there are going to be a lot more Exp. Cubs flying in the next few years. Great job putting together your perspective on all this!
Marty57

Bill Rusk
07-09-2011, 07:37 PM
I need to catch up a little on my responses.

D.A. asked about the left door. Here is just one thought on that......

That left door might be nice when it is on floats (probably 30% of the time for me) and when I really need to dock on that side,(10% of 30%), so not very often, but the throttle will be in a uncomfortable position ALL of the time with dual doors. So it is not worth it to me to have poor ergonomics for the throttle for that one time a year event. One of the things I love about cubs is the way the controls just seem to fit and be in just the right place. It is a wonderfully comfortable plane to fly.
The door/throttle is just one example of many, and others may have other opinions but I do think whatever your opinion....build for what you will be doing MOST of the time.

Dalec - As Marty 57 says, one of the great things about cubs is the possibility to mix and match. Start building a set of wings. Not too difficult, not too expensive. Then if you want (and can afford it) you could just buy ailerons and flaps from one of several sources, Univair, Dakota, Backcountry, Javron, Wag Aero etc.
Plus you do have this great website and tons of support.

ronmac - welcome to SC.org. Great to have input from places other than middle USA. The trick is to cut the weight where you can. In a perfect world the entire airplane would fail at say 7G's. It does no good to have a spar attach fitting that will fail at 30G's if the bolt holding it on fails at 7G's. Cut that fitting down to where it weighs less and fails at 7G's. That is the whole issue with the weight on some of the cubs. We are beefing up areas that are already over built. If I can save 3 pounds from a part by getting it closer to the ultimate load criteria then that is good. If you know the bolt will fail at 7G's would you be comfortable with a attach fitting that fails at 10G's. Sure you would. Well I just saved a pound. Lets multiply that many times and you get a light airplane that flys better, hauls more and is just as strong as the original. Win Win situation. There are places where history has proven it is good to reinforce,..... tails, birdcages, gear, seatbelt attach, firewalls, etc. I am all for that, and my cub will have all those mods.

But a question for the masses.....How many pure structural failures have we seen from Supercubs? IE wings folded, tail fell off, firewall separated from fuselage? I don't know of many.

Andrew - I don't dislike the widebody but I am not so sure that I personally need it. It is nice in a lot of respects. I am actually still considering it. I think the perfect cub might be a 2" wider fuselage. Unfortunately no one makes one and it would add to the complexity. IE it would require a special cabane vee for the gear, custom windshield, custom panel, etc. Not all that bad if you are going to scratch build but if you are looking for a kit to speed up the building process it does make things a bit more difficult. The Northstar and the CC (as you mentioned) are wider but it is difficult to compare because the layout of the cockpit can have a big affect on the feel of the cockpit.

Marty57 - Excellent post. I agree this site and the folks here are a BIG asset. Furthermore, there is a lot more building going on now that a few years ago. In fact I would speculate that other than the RV guys the Supercub may be the second largest group of homebuilders. There is a lot of activity in this group.

Bill

skywagon8a
07-10-2011, 05:40 AM
Widebody fuselage
I chose the wide body because of the increased space in the cockpit. It will fit me better. My question is: Does the widebody do anything else? Has anyone noticed any different flight characteristics that could be attributed to the extra width? I used to think that the reason that an Aeronca 7AC was faster than a J-3 was the width of the fuselage having a little less drag. Also that a PA-12 was faster than a PA-18 for the same reason. After all a blimp is supposed to have the most efficient shape. Wider in the middle. The 7AC has a different airfoil and the PA-12 has the wing mounted at a different angle. Perhaps those are the reasons? Is a PA-18, with the only change being a wide fuselage, any faster than a stock PA-18? Is there anything else that is effected?

Builders manual
I think that any kit should have a good printed manual. My Backcountry/TCOW kit only had a very poor manual which I had to download over the internet. To me it was almost useless. I do not like to have a computer running in my shop for two reasons. It goes to sleep while I am performing a task and it will get very dirty or broken. Just look at how dirty ones hands get while performing in the shop.
In my case it was not too important to have the manual as I have been working on these planes for over fifty years. For someone else, who does not have this advantage, a good printed manual would be a must.

mike mcs repair
07-10-2011, 11:06 AM
edit: moved to own thread
http://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?38506-Left-Door-Throttles



..... but the throttle will be in a uncomfortable position ALL of the time with dual doors. So it is not worth it to me to have poor ergonomics for the throttle for that one time a year event. One of the things I love about cubs is the way the controls just seem to fit and be in just the right place. It is a wonderfully comfortable plane to fly......
Bill

I still need to mock up the left door throttle idea that keeps it all in same basic location and movement...

mentioned in another thread, you would also need one more in front of door for that one time when door is open.

and you could do normal style handles.. I just thought the rod between knobs was simpler

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-zGNI9I7svbw/ThnMA3HVXcI/AAAAAAAAjdM/3Uq6GcjOLAg/s800/door%252520throttle%25252001.jpg


discussed down in these threads
http://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?37340-Our-Cub-Project&highlight=left+door+throttle

http://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?38506-Left-Door-Throttles&highlight=left+door+throttle

qsmx440
07-10-2011, 12:12 PM
Mike why not a good quality cable for experimental? It's good enough for the engine compartment, why not all the way? To much bending?

qsmx440
07-10-2011, 12:23 PM
Rethinking that, A small back up handle on the floor between the seats for door open and emergency if cable breaks in the door. Allows both doors to be open and still function and backup. Still lighter than a lot of hard linkage? I'm thinking the door part closes over the handle. Door part breaks, open the door to disconnect.

Greg Campbell
07-10-2011, 12:25 PM
Bill, I agree with StewartB. Flying that Bill Bilt Supercub from the front seat will always be a life memory for me. I would put it right back the way it was. It was perfect. I know you might get bored with the same new same new. Bill, Tornado got the J3. Be ready to give me my check out when our Supercub Upgrade Arrives. Greg

mike mcs repair
07-10-2011, 01:17 PM
edit: moved to own thread
http://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?38506-Left-Door-Throttles


Mike why not a good quality cable for experimental? It's good enough for the engine compartment, why not all the way? To much bending?

that was one thought I mocked up on -12 before i settled on this style... was a long cable going along hinge line(almost ordered the cable to do that!)...

but I like this better.... good old 1920's tech.... when levers were high tech!!

Marty57
07-10-2011, 04:33 PM
The issue of a builders manual is an interesting point to look at. If a manufacturer is selling something that they call a "kit" than it should come with a very detailed builders manual. if the aircraft is advertised as "plans built" than it is just that; a series of drawings providing all the necessary information to fabricate the aircraft but little or no step-by-step info. If I were in the market for a "kit" aircraft and found out the manufacturer did not have a builders manual I would think long and hard about committing to that project. Where do you start? What is the sequence necessary to complete a given task? My 2+2 is a "plans built" aircraft and there is no builders manual and requires a lot of head scratching. Unless you are comfortable forging ahead without the directions in a manual you should stay away from "kits" that don't have a detailed manual. Just my experience and opinion.
Marty57

Bob Breeden
07-11-2011, 02:12 AM
Bill,

Just got home and it was good to get back on SuperCub.org and find this thread. Looks like I found it at an opportune time...... Thanks for this thread!

Bob Breeden

cgoldy
07-11-2011, 03:48 AM
Builders manual
I think that any kit should have a good printed manual. My Backcountry/TCOW kit only had a very poor manual which I had to download over the internet. To me it was almost useless. I do not like to have a computer running in my shop for two reasons. It goes to sleep while I am performing a task and it will get very dirty or broken. Just look at how dirty ones hands get while performing in the shop.
In my case it was not too important to have the manual as I have been working on these planes for over fifty years. For someone else, who does not have this advantage, a good printed manual would be a must.[/QUOTE]



I built my BC Cub from a lap top in the shed and was so frustrated. I was too tight (stingy) to print out the entire manual. With hindsight, I should have bitten the bullet and printed it out. Couple this with the very long and over done Stewart's System DVD I reckon I wasted weeks in front of a screen. Not to say that the Stewart's DVD wasn't complete but a bit long winded for some one on a mission.

But I now have a great Cub and all is almost forgotten!!!

ronmac
07-11-2011, 03:55 AM
Bill, If it helps at all, Wayne Mackey put my wings on a diet 2 years ago. We shaved out almost 10 lbs from each wing. It's still heavier than a stock Piper wing, but it will handle 2,400 lbs.
Thanks Wayne,what did he do to lighten them?Regards,Ron.

cgoldy
07-11-2011, 04:06 AM
For some reason, Skywagons's quote above looks like my comments. See [/QUOTE] One day I will work out this posting thing!

mike mcs repair
07-11-2011, 04:14 AM
For some reason, Skywagons's quote above looks like my comments. See One day I will work out this posting thing![/QUOTE]

you deleted the first [QUOTE= whoever ]

Bob Breeden
07-11-2011, 11:11 PM
A lot of this thread is about different build options - to git 'er done...

Another entirely different aspect of this is: What can be done with design adjustments on an Experimental that cannot be done on a Certified Airplane?

mike mcs repair
07-11-2011, 11:32 PM
...What can be done with design adjustments on an Experimental that cannot be done on a Certified Airplane?

one thing I have wondered about is in the cabin area, getting rid of all the cross and diagonal tubes, and making some sort of light (carbon?) panels that serve as the bracing & interior & exterior all in one...

never played with the stuff.. so....

skywagon8a
07-12-2011, 05:32 AM
A lot of this thread is about different build options - to git 'er done...

Another entirely different aspect of this is: What can be done with design adjustments on an Experimental that cannot be done on a Certified Airplane?

The difference is that on an experimental amateur built you just do it. On a certified airplane it is the paper work that needs to be done to satisfy the FAA to be able to keep it certified.

Bob Breeden
07-12-2011, 06:52 AM
skywagon8a,

My point exactly....

We incorporated a lot of them on our 4th place Valdez Experimental plane.....

What would those Cub Pilots comtemplating a new plane desire to incorporate?

How could this be best done with the various options that Bill has laid out?

Bob

Amy
07-12-2011, 02:19 PM
Dakota Cub

As you may know Amy and the folks at Dakota Cub are working on updating their website. But to help them out I will post some of the stuff that they sent me. They have (basically) three kits. A small engine kit that you should be able to get into the light sport class, the traditional 160hp Supercub kit and the Super 180hp kit. All are basically the same airframe with different engines. The big advantage that Dakota cub has is the fact that they are built to PMA FAA standards. You are for all practical purposes building a "factory" supercub. They also say if you did not finish your project you could sell the parts off to certified folks and perhaps not loose as much of your invested capitol. But the biggest advantage to Dakota Cub kits remains the certified status. The kit looks to be very complete and there is no doubt as to what you are getting or how well it will perform. It falls under the guise of experimental but the reality is there is not much experimental about it. You know exactly what you are getting and how it will fly.
Downside... Cost and flexibility. You will not be able to get them to start making lots of changes to the kit to accommodate your unusual request for a oversize this, undersize that, new one of these here and get rid of that there. If you like the Supercub pretty much the way it is and want all the assurance of time tested strength and utility, this may be perfect for you.

I tried to post the info Amy sent me to this thread but I could not get it to format properly so it came out in a mess. It is a very complete kit and the listed price was about 64K but I understand that that may be an old price and that it may be higher now. This would make it the most expensive kit option but also in many respects the least "experimental". Sometimes you get what you pay for.

Hope this helps

Bill

As we work towards redoing the website, making information easier to find and share is a top concern. Additionally, we will be setting the website up so that we can easily update it so that out-of-date materials are no longer an issue. If you are interested in the information about kit contents, feel free to PM me so I can email it to you.

To some extent, there is the ability to "mix and match" fuselages and wings but there are some limitations. For instance, if you want the 2300-lb gross weight model, there is only one fuselage we will sell for that because it has been tested to the number and we know it's good. For the 2,050 lb model, you can choose either widebody or standard because both fuselages are good for that number.

Builders are a creative lot so I have no doubt that there will be some interesting modifications out there. One nice thing is that you can use essentially anything a certified Super Cub can use, so parts are easy to find (then again, if you enjoy building, you may not want to buy parts because you would want to build them!).

We feel the worth of our kit is the extent to which it has been tested and the fact that every part we supply with it has been built to an FAA-approved quality manual (for our PMAs). You know what you're getting so you minimize the amount of time you spend acting as a flight test engineer or test pilot. For some, this may be ideal, but for some, the joy is in the testing and tweaking which you can certainly do on a Super 18 kit as well, but we have tried to make it as complete as possible to make it less intimidating for a first-time builder who has little to no Cub experience to take on.

Just a few thoughts for you all!

I am looking forward to following Bill's next build no matter what he chooses 8)

Bill Rusk
07-12-2011, 07:40 PM
To all the folks that have posted on this thread, Thank you.

Mike - regarding a carbon fiber interior - my understanding is that sometimes when it breaks it does so in shards that could impale the occupants. I would want to research that before I put it all around me. I do think there is application for carbon fiber.

I have opted to go with the Javron kit at this point. It offers me the greatest flexibility to make changes and incorporate some modifications that are important to me. The proximity to my home is also a factor as it gives me an opportunity to actually be present for some of the build up and saves on shipping. Jay DeRosier has been (and is) very receptive to mods and variances to his kit. I will be working closely with him, and also ksecub, to build a lightweight wing capable of safely operating at 2300pds GW. Our goal will be to build a fully capable bush cub with a 2300pd GW with an empty weight of less than 1100 pds. This will not be a contest cub per se but rather something that anyone else could build and fly. Furthermore it will be close enough to the original Piper specifications that parts should be readily interchangeable. There will not be anything particularly unusual about my cub, or the kits that come from Javron, except close attention to weight. We are not trying to duplicate the Carbon Cub (it would be really hard to outdo them) but I will be watching the ounces closely to end up with a light, strong, great flying Cub built the way I want. A lot like the last one. I came in at 1135 +/- on my Smithkit (Backcountry now) and I believe it will be possible to come in under 1100 pounds with 31's, safety cables, float fittings, and all the other mods. It is my belief that this will result in a great flying, useful, go to Alaska (on floats) cub.

Standby for a new thread on "Building a Javron Cub" There I will post all the mods I am doing, why I am doing them, weights, cost, etc.


I agree with Bob Breeden that there are lots of ideas out there and one of the great advantages with experimental Cubs is the ability to do just that. Experiment. I thought Bobs last Cub was very innovative and that he has pushed the envelope further, along with Wayne Mackey, Doug Keller, Dave Caulkins, Jerry Burr, Jim Richmond and a host of others. Thanks to all the guys pushing the boundaries.

My new Cub will not be anything new. Just a good, solid, lightweight Supercub. But once again I'll try to share what I learn along the way.

Hope this helps

Bill

Bugs66
07-12-2011, 07:46 PM
Excellent Bill! Let the build begin! Congrats on your decision!

Iflylower
07-12-2011, 07:52 PM
Great! Get'er done! Looking forward to seeing the progress. Hope it's a fast build where possible.

You gonna stay with a narrow deck 320, or have the 360 guys/planes seduced you?

chilecubdriver
07-12-2011, 08:30 PM
Re: gliders use a carbon/kevlar weave in the fuse interior. Carbon is light, but fragile. Kevlar will hold it together and is not flamable Think light, bulletproof vest!

Marty57
07-12-2011, 08:47 PM
Great to hear you are ready to start. You will likely be flying before I will : )
Marty57

kevin
07-12-2011, 09:21 PM
Sounds good Bill. Looking forward to watching it come together.

Kevin G.

Bob Breeden
07-12-2011, 09:42 PM
Sounds Good, Bill!

mike mcs repair
07-13-2011, 12:15 AM
.....
Mike - regarding a carbon fiber interior - my understanding is that sometimes when it breaks it does so in shards that could impale the occupants. I would want to research that before I put it all around me. I do think there is application for carbon fiber.....
Bill

rule #1 don't crash...

the plexi windows brake sharp too....
the aluminum is sharp when balled up....
the chrommolly is sharp when balled up....

you can always build it out of 1/2" steel plate...... ;-)

compromises....

Crash
07-13-2011, 02:56 AM
No one built them lighter (ribs, tanks, tail feathers etc.) or better then Piper. I'd buy a clean, late model PA-18 and rebuild / recover parts (wings, fuselage, tail feathers) in the off season. Stick with an O-320-160. Keep it light.

Crash

ronmac
07-13-2011, 04:24 AM
good move Bill,I think a well planned selective choice,GOOD LUCK

Jim Miller
07-15-2011, 03:57 PM
Bill
This may have already been suggested but I would build using the best available without being tied to a kit.
I would start with a tack welded fuselage from a PMA scource if possible like univair, alaska airframes etc.
Build wings from any of several suppliers. The other major airframe pieces like tail or landing gear can be purchased in kit form or fully welded depending on how much fab credit you need. You could even use some old piper parts keeping in mind the 51 % rule as they exact a heavy penalty on the build credit calculations.

Jim Miller

Jim Miller
07-15-2011, 04:02 PM
Bill
I made the above post before I discovered your decision to build a kit. I need to check into Javron
myself for possible parts for my project. I had never heard of them before.

Jim

Bill Rusk
07-15-2011, 04:53 PM
Jim
I have been very impressed with Jay at Javron. I believe I will be able to get the "best of the best" (if you will) all from one place, to my specifications. As Crash said it is tough to beat the original Piper Supercub and that is pretty much what Javron is building. So I get to start from the basic Cub and make the changes that I want. I don't have to settle for changes I do not want because they are already incorporated into the kit. Jay is working on putting together a list of mods he will do and also the weights and cost for each. So ultimately you will get to build the cub you want from a menu of available options, with some idea of the penalty you will incur on the weight.
As I mentioned Jay is currently working on building a light wing as well. He told me he took 5 pounds out of the tail feathers by going back to Piper Specs. He understands weight.

Although Jay DeRosier (ie Javron) has been in the background, supplying parts, fuselages and even full kits, he is coming into the limelight in a big way. He has already established an excellent track record of customer service and high quality parts. We will be hearing a lot more from this company in the future.

Crash - I agree, that is what I am doing but I want to stay experimental so I have more options to use the latest and best equipment and parts. LED's, Dynon, Carbon fibers, batteries, alternators etc. I have no heartburn with certified aircraft but in this case I feel I have more options, lower costs and fewer headaches by going experimental. It will not be as quick as a rebuild but I feel it will be worth it. Everything is a trade off.

Bill

mike mcs repair
07-15-2011, 06:29 PM
Jim...He told me he took 5 pounds out of the tail feathers by going back to Piper Specs....
Bill


unfixing the decades of learned fixes is not necessarily a wise thing................................

the inboard ends of stabs should really have the newer style rib or else the new fabric collapses it...

on another thought on them, i bet going to a thinner 4130 for ribs over the mild steel would be a good thing....

Marty57
07-15-2011, 07:54 PM
Bill,
What changes did he do to the tail ? I built mine to the drawings on Christians site, made my own ribs from mild steel by forming over hard wood form, both easy and light. There is a tendency to use 4130 in place place or mild steel"just because" that I have had to fight. I used 4130 to form the end of j3 style aileron hangers for more strength. Worked ok bit the hangers could not be twisted and bent onto alignment as easily due to the more modern 4130. You are right, Piper did adopt right and some improvements aren't necessarily a good idea.
Marty57

mike mcs repair
07-15-2011, 07:59 PM
.. There is a tendency to use 4130 in place place or mild steel"just because" that I have had to fight....
Marty57

the point is when you use stronger material like 4130 to replace a soft steel part, you should be able to go thinner and lighter and still have the same strength.....

D.A.
07-15-2011, 08:13 PM
No one built them lighter or better then Piper...
A real eye opener for me and an illustration of that point is Jason. Ever watch him in a STOL contest? He is usually going up against the gnarliest Cubs in the land and usually beats them or at least he's right in there with them with a stock - - - BONE stock Cub. He's lightened it where he could and has 31" BWs but other than that I think it's completely stock. Oh yeah, did I mention it has an O-290?!?! Now that being said, a lot of the performance advantage of Jason's Cub is the guy sit'n in the front seat but to Crash's point, straight from Piper they're darned impressive!

Marty57
07-15-2011, 09:17 PM
Mike,
That's been one of the biggest things I have been learning. Changing just to change is not good. On the aileron hangers I didn't like how flexible the ends were with mild steel so I went with 4130. It was harder to work but ok with that. It was "ten steps" latter that I discovered my great idea made adjusting the alignment more difficult. It worked out but when I watched the Cub Club j3 wing video (for the 5th or so time) that I figured why they did it that way. D.A. comments about Jason's success with good old Pipers kind of hammers home to me to think twice about a change. I guess my wood wing is a different deal alltogether.
Marty57

Jim Miller
07-16-2011, 08:06 AM
I looked at the Javron site and saw something I need on the first page. They have a great looking trim yoke
and a very good price. I plan to order one next week.

skywagon8a
07-16-2011, 09:00 AM
A large percentage of my Backcountry kit came from Javron. Workmanship and quality is superb. I ordered the extended steps with my kit. When the kit arrived the landing gear had some bushings welded in for bolts to hold the steps on. But, no steps. I figured that I had misunderstood what I was to get and did not ask. Several months later I received a phone call asking if I still wanted my steps? Of course! They arrived in the form of a triangular extrusion with lightening holes cut in. Excellent, I will use them on both my landing gear and floats. I would not hesitate to do business with them in the future.

mikeo
07-16-2011, 09:02 AM
Jim I purchased all the trim parts for my new project from Javeron all were like fine jewelry !!! Vey very impressed Mikeo

aktango58
08-01-2011, 10:44 AM
Bill,

I got to do some real flying this weekend. Needed it with all the storm of stinky I seem to be in.

Anyway, as I was rolling around the ridge line at 4,000 feet on a heather patch that looked appealing to 31" tires, I came to a thought about controls in the cub:

I like having the carb heat where I can advance the throttle and reach a finger forward to push the carb heat in, or even a slight forward reach with your hand. Mine is on the dash.
I did not like the early Husky ones that skinned my big hands when I used it, so it needs to be out a bit where you can get to it quick.

The next morning as I did my preflight, (last landing was over a set of trees to a brake-on touch down to get stopped before the ditch), I was looking over the gear attach fittings for damage. I tend to do this more serious when I am really flying in the tough stuff. As I looked them over I found myself moving the brake lines to see the inner attach points. Why did we do this???? My new frame has the little tabs above the cluster for firewall type fittings for the brake lines to come out, instead of through the fabric below. I very nice modification.

Anyway, some minor items that maybe have been covered, but are things I thought about.

Take care, and glad to have you guys to communicate with.

God bless!

Nocub
08-01-2011, 04:19 PM
Javron is currently listing his kit at 41K, plus what ever mods you want. add 40 to 50 K to finish and you are in the 80 to 90K range.

I do not have all the cost data for some of the other options and I am running out of steam posting all this stuff.
Bill
When comparing the Javron kit to CC, Backcountry, etc. how does their kit compare with regards to including the smaller items which all add up in price. i.e. windshield, cowling,trim strips, seats, etc.

Bill Rusk
08-01-2011, 06:50 PM
Nocub

As best I can tell, all of the kits are pretty similar in contents with the exception of CC and Legend. Theirs are very complete and well done.

George

Thanks, good thoughts.

Bill

aktango58
08-01-2011, 07:43 PM
Bill,

Update on my carbon fiber testing:

Broke a bunch of it, drove holes in it, and am soaking some in a very corrosive solution with bolt through it. I have to say that the stuff from Randy at 6E concepts has me changing my mind and thinking my floor boards will be CF.

The edge of his floor boards do break a bit sharp, but no more than aluminum. Edges are not jagged, and no long splinters like I get from my CF arrows. I am leaning to CF for my plane where I can use it, but probably not the sides, as they will be light, consumable and I expect to beat the husky out of them.

George

ps I have a new spot for you to try fishing next year

dlwoolsey
10-02-2011, 03:30 PM
bill if i remember right you designed an electric trim system for your airplane, how did it work out? Also it is good to hear that you are getting things rolling again. I am just getting started rebuilding my 2+2 that I bent this spring so I am right there with you. Good luck, Duane Woolsey

Bill Rusk
10-02-2011, 08:22 PM
Duane

Sorry to hear you are rebuilding :smile: but glad to share any info I can. The electric trim worked great and I am doing it again. I will have some photos and info in the next couple of weeks. You can visit my thread on "Building a Smith Cub" to get the first version of electric trim. It worked great but I am trying a different motor this time. The last one worked just fine but, like everyone, I am always searching for better, faster, lighter etc.

If I get out to SLC it would be fun to hook up and see your project.

Bill

flylowslow
02-02-2018, 05:04 PM
I'm on the" Johnny Cash build a Cadillac program" but it has been fun actually. Went the Javron route and only wish could build it at home. Jay uses sound, up to date cnc and his new builders center is incredible for cub builders. here is my firewall and boot cowl jig-up.35006

Bill Rusk
02-03-2018, 07:50 AM
Folks

Pretty interesting to go back and read this thread. Lots of good inputs. Thank you all.

I tried a different trim motor and it did not work out. It interfered with the elevator cables. So I went back to the McMaster -Carr unit. It has worked great. No problems at all. You can find more info in the "Building a Javron Cub" thread.

To those who might stumble on this thread....an update. I finished the Javron Cub and have been flying the stuffing out of it. I have about 535 hours on it after 2.5 years. It has been EVERYTHING I hoped and more. I have used, and needed, every bit of the 2300GW. I met my goals stated in the first part of the thread. Under 1100 pounds (1052), for a full up, all Alaska mods, 0-360 powered Super Cub. I have spent two summers in Alaska on floats. More to come.

Some updates on "Build a Cub" options

Cub Crafters has come up with some great improvements, and their newer kits are better suited for longer, bigger, heavier trips. They have increased the baggage capacity, fuel load, (i.e. range), durability and GW. They remain....an outstanding kit, and company. The downsides also remain. Not much ability to customize the airframe, and cost. The are excellent but somewhat expensive. You do get a lot for your dollar but you have to come up with a pretty significant amount of money pretty quick. They do allow you to order the kit in subsets, thats good, but they go together quick so you need the next subset ASAP and that means money. Kits are in the 140K and up range. Excellent company....excellent product. Highly recommended.

Javron continues to improve and grow. My understanding is he has about a 3 month lead time for a kit. Advantages are cost, flexibility and quality. He will sell parts and that allows for the ability to scratch build with Javron help. His kits run about 44K depending on the options you select. Still no builders manual, though I will be working on that this year (a little). But hopefully there is some info in my thread "Building a Javron Cub" that might help. The only real downside to Javron is he does not always hit his promised delivery times. If you expect this then it lowers the frustration from his being late. Quality is excellent as is cost. I am biased. I built a Javron kit and I'm super pleased with it. I know of lots of happy Javron customers, several are building a second one, including me, (and one who was not so happy, but I believe Javron made it as right as possible). Jay is doing "builder Assists" as well.
http://www.supercub.org/photopost/data/500/medium/2921-MMS-1517535452058-attachment1-IMG_20180201_131416501.jpg
He is finishing up a third expansion of his shop, and that should help with organization, and also delivery times.
Javron remains my highest recommendation when considering cost, flexibility (to customize your kit), and quality.

Backcountry produces the SC revision 2 and Boss. Both of these are highly modified. Really not even a Cub anymore. They are heavy duty, high GW, workhorses. Kits start at 66 and 72K. I understand there may have been some delivery and quality issues in the past. Quite possibly the most difficult kit to build. Depending on your mission....this may be the ticket. It is a mixed bag. I've seen some awesome performance, and other folks sell their airplane because they hated it. I would recommend flying one before you invest in the kit. It seems folks either love it or hate it.

Legend Cub has upped the engine size and also the GW as well. In the past it was more of a light sport Cub but now it is approaching more of a standard Supercub configuration. Excellent kit, good company, and certainly worth a look depending on your mission.

Dakota Cub remains an excellent choice, depending on your wants and needs.

The Northstar Cub is still an option.

Wag Aero is still an option, but again it is more of a J-3 with an 0-320 than a full up SC. You could make modifications as desired, but you are getting closer to scratch building here. Quality has been a problem in the past, not sure where this is now.

Folks, the above is just my "OPINION" and I may very well be out to lunch. Do your homework, talk to builders from each group, fly an example if you can, visit the company. What works for you will be a little different from the next guy. We all have different needs, expectations, budgets, etc.

DEFINE YOUR MISSION, then build for that. Build for what you will be doing 90% of the time. Don't build for the 10% dream that you "might" do someday.
Best of luck

Hope this helps

Bill

stewartb
02-03-2018, 08:27 AM
Backcountry Supercub Rev 2. The evolution of the very popular and well liked SQ-2. Iím a happy customer. And given the pireps from a couple of flying Rev 2s that arenít familiar to most here? Iím more excited than ever. I know of three Rev 3s being built now.



https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180203/9102ae1ea501819ac92465bab773df88.jpg


Sent from my iPad using SuperCub.Org mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=93960)

Bill Rusk
02-03-2018, 08:48 AM
Stewart

I've been closely following your build. VERY IMPRESSIVE!!! You guys make quite a team and Skup is truly a craftsman. I am really interested, and I hope you might consider giving me a ride sometime. I am really looking forward to your reports. Very well done sir, and thank you for posting.

Bill

stewartb
02-03-2018, 08:59 AM
You'll get the invite.

There are lots and lots of great options in the Cub builder world. The biggest first step? Go experimental. From there you can build anything from a replica of a Piper to a replica of what modified Pipers became in the certificated category, or take it outside the box. There are soooo many fun choices in engines, props, avionics, high lift wings, landing gear, suspensions.... it's like being a kid in a candy shop. Target what you want and go for it. And be prepared that the products you invested in may not be the coolest by the time you get the plane finished. And that's a good thing. With any luck the evolution of experimental Cubs will continue for a long time.