• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Javron, Dakota, Carbon Cub: The build experience?

S

StuBob

MEMBER
Indianapolis
Cub building seems to be different from the rest of the homebuilt arena. No one is building an experimental 172 using original Cessna drawings.

Comparing kits, its hard to figure out which ones are difficult and time consuming and which are truly complete kits. The whole world seems to agree that Cubcrafters has the most complete kits, best builder support, etc. But I have one or two qualms about the airplane, including the price.

But what about the others? It's been a long time since there was a Which Kit to Build thread on here. My questions are about the building, not the flying. Looking at, say, Javron, Dakota, and Backcountry Rev2, what has been the experience of actual builders? What are the frustrations or surprises? What did you have to buy that you didn't expect to buy? Would you build the same one again? I don't want to buy a kit only to find a manual that says, "Here are the parts. Make them look like the plans. If you have questions, ask strangers on the Internet."

Thanks.
 
I've rebuilt many normal super cubs (certified) since late 80's... I'll use that as a baseline...

only "kit" I have had a hand in helping on is the Backcountry Rev2... and it's enough different that you end up designing & making MANY, many, many parts... can't just copy a cub part or go buy one....

not that that's a bad thing, I enjoy making parts... but you better too....

this was first one of this style for me so there was a learning curve too...

but It's almost done now, then I'll be ready for whatever the next build is....

price wise, that cub crafters kit is not to much... thats just what ALL NEW parts plane ends up at....
 
When I built my -12 using a Dakota Airframes fuselage I was introduced to builder frustration as nothing was where it was supposed to be and nothing fit. My Rev 2 makes the -12 look easy. I never received a build manual so I had a big pile of parts, many different than typical Cub, and I (we) had to figure out how to put it together, often needing to add to the airframe or make parts from scratch. After I built my -12 I told my friends that I enjoyed building it as much as flying it. I suspect I'll say the same when my new Cub rolls out. It's been an adventure.
 
Last edited:
Another thought. For sake of this comment I'll limit the kits to the Carbon Cub, Javron Cub, and the Rev 2. All the Carbon Cubs are pretty much carbon copies. Javron allows more builder expression. The Rev 2 requires builder expression far beyond the others. I like that, that my airplane is unique even compared to the other completed Revs. The point is that the more you deviate from the standard pattern the more complicated and difficult the project becomes. The re-sale market will work inversely, so Carbon Cubs will have a bigger market and an easier time getting re-sold. I hope that makes sense. It makes perfect sense from my position.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the comments so far.

I meant to add the Bearhawk to the list, so please chime in with experience!
 
stewartb said:
Another thought. For sake of this comment I'll limit the kits to the Carbon Cub, Javron Cub, and the Rev 2. All the Carbon Cubs are pretty much carbon copies. Javron allows more builder expression. The Rev 2 requires builder expression far beyond the others. I like that, that my airplane is unique even compared to the other completed Revs. The point is that the more you deviate from the standard pattern the more complicated and difficult the project becomes. The re-sale market will work inversely, so Carbon Cubs will have a bigger market and an easier time getting re-sold. I hope that makes sense. It makes perfect sense from my position.
Click to expand...
That totally makes sense, and fits with my observations of the used market. A used Javron, for instance, will be lumped in with the Pipers and likely priced well below what it cost to build, but a used Carbon Cub is lumped in with the factory Carbon Cubs, and looks like a bargain even when priced at or above the price of building. Or so it seems.
 
I'd talk to Bill Rusk. He's just starting his third Super Cub build. He's on his second Javron build and favors them because of options, support, completeness of the kit and parts quality. Like Stewartb says, there are a lot of variables and a lot of options.

I am sure Bill will respond to your thread and add much more than I can...I'm just a Cessna guy.
 
If are you considering Legend

I am building a Legend HP.
Long time builder of RVs, A&P, IA.
Parts that do not fit.
Incorrect parts delivered vs parts call outs.
Parts missing at delivery.
Fuselage not media blasted and not painted with a primer sealer.
Incredibly bad fitting welded parts.
I will see it to completion.
Looks like the folks that build from scratch or restore are on the right track.
 
After seeing and flying Bill Rusk's cub, I don't see how you could consider it's value less than the cost of parts.

Holy cow, it is nice!
 
Darrell said:
I am building a Legend HP.
Long time builder of RVs, A&P, IA.
Parts that do not fit.
Incorrect parts delivered vs parts call outs.
Parts missing at delivery.
Fuselage not media blasted and not painted with a primer sealer.
Incredibly bad fitting welded parts.
I will see it to completion.
Looks like the folks that build from scratch or restore are on the right track.
Click to expand...
I'll be senile before I could build one from scratch, but a restoration is appealing. Just have to find a friendly IA.
 
I merged this thread with one Bill Rusk started on the same subject with lots of great information. I have been putting a list together in my head of what I want to include in an experimental Super Cub. Pretty close to what Piper did with some modern weight saving parts.
 
Steve Pierce said:
I merged this thread with one Bill Rusk started on the same subject with lots of great information. I have been putting a list together in my head of what I want to include in an experimental Super Cub. Pretty close to what Piper did with some modern weight saving parts.
Click to expand...

ya... but... the rev 2 is not much like a cub.... was kinda better/accurate as a separate thread...
 
Steve Pierce said:
I merged this thread with one Bill Rusk started on the same subject with lots of great information. I have been putting a list together in my head of what I want to include in an experimental Super Cub. Pretty close to what Piper did with some modern weight saving parts.
Click to expand...

the dakota and the Jarvron are trying to be cub copies... the cub crafters and and the backcountry rev 2 are different critters... best to return it to a separate thread...
 
Cub replicas vs Cub derivatives. Very different from the builder standpoint. Also different from the owner standpoint. I never wanted a Supercub. I came very close to buying a Carbon Cub before choosing the Rev 2.
 
Steve Pierce said:
I merged this thread with one Bill Rusk started on the same subject with lots of great information. I have been putting a list together in my head of what I want to include in an experimental Super Cub. Pretty close to what Piper did with some modern weight saving parts.
Click to expand...

the cub crafters is what 1000 or 1100lbs? and and the backcountry rev 2 is 1400lbs?? they are different critters... other than the makers chose to include the name CUB..... it's like saying a cessna 180 and a supercub are the same planes....
 
StuBob said:
Cub building seems to be different from the rest of the homebuilt arena. No one is building an experimental 172 using original Cessna drawings.

Comparing kits, its hard to figure out which ones are difficult and time consuming and which are truly complete kits. The whole world seems to agree that Cubcrafters has the most complete kits, best builder support, etc. But I have one or two qualms about the airplane, including the price.

But what about the others? It's been a long time since there was a Which Kit to Build thread on here. My questions are about the building, not the flying. Looking at, say, Javron, Dakota, and Backcountry Rev2, what has been the experience of actual builders? What are the frustrations or surprises? What did you have to buy that you didn't expect to buy? Would you build the same one again? I don't want to buy a kit only to find a manual that says, "Here are the parts. Make them look like the plans. If you have questions, ask strangers on the Internet."

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Looked like the same subject to me Mike. Here you go. Back to your regularly scheduled program.
 
mike mcs repair said:
the cub crafters is what 1000 or 1100lbs? and and the backcountry rev 2 is 1400lbs?? they are different critters... other than the makers chose to include the name CUB..... it's like saying a cessna 180 and a supercub are the same planes....
Click to expand...

The guy that started the thread included both the Back Country and the Cub Crafters as did Bill Rusk in his thread. I agree, neither one are a Super Cub.
 
And now the title is changed :-(. I really wanted to start a conversation comparing the building experience of various types. I deliberately named them in the Subject to facilitate searching in the future.
 
ShortWingPipers.org saves the original topic title over each post within the merged topic. I did not realize until after I separated them back out that SuperCub.org is not the same.
 
Here's what I've learned talking on the phone so far: CubCrafters pride themselves on being a "complete" kit. It's an "assembly" more than a "construction." They make it sound like the builder never has to get anything from Spruce. Shake the box and an airplane falls out. Hard to believe.

Bearhawk doesn't have a manual for the Patrol, but it's similar enough to the 4-place that they use that. The QB kit includes "everything that's unique" to the Patrol. They have a hardware list and builders get a discount from one of the suppliers. You get the stuff and the drawings. It's up to you to make the stuff and the drawings look the same.

Both approaches have their advantages. One of the biggest frustrations I have with Van's is the occasional separation between the manual and reality. I have this idea that, if I drill a hole where they tell me to, everything should be fine. But sometimes I'll drill the hole in the right place and wind up with a bad edge distance, destroying a part. Perhaps the perfection I'm asking for is impossible, and I'd wind up mad at CubCrafters when slavishly following instructions caused trouble. In that case, I might be better off with the approach of "Here's the stuff. Here's the plans. Good luck!" I get the impression that the Rev2 is more like the Bearhawk. Not sure where the Javron and Dakota fall.
 
StuBob,

I bought a Turbine Cubs of Wyoming (now Backcountry) -18 kit as a retirement project. I attempted to follow their instruction manual but since I have nearly 60 years of A&P experience I drifted away from the manual and just put the parts together as I saw fit. As you have discovered the variety of available and quality of homebuilt Cubs and look alikes is variable. Each individual must take into consideration his or her own background when choosing a project of this nature.
 
Having both rebuilt an -18 and built the Carbon Cub EX kit, I can say that all new parts makes the build many times easier. The EX does go together quickly. I had about 800 hours. I also made quite a few modifications to mine including the extended baggage and a tail clean out and changed the panel completely fabbing my own and bought the instruments from other sources.

You can can follow the EX kit to the letter, it is all there with excellent instructions and phone help. Or make changes as you like.
 
Give Dan Dufault a call and ask him about building a carbon cub versus a Javron. He'll tell you straight up that they're both great airframes but the cub crafters kit is truly complete. Sounds like as close as one can be to an assembly project.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org
 
I am just a dumb pilot. I was an ejection seat tech for three years before navigator school and later went to pilot school. The only skills I had was safety wire and torque wrenching. That’s why I chose Cubcrafters. My CCEX was 95% assembly.

I did my own panel and avionics, the rest came from Cubcrafters. If a part was ever missing, a quick call to Mitch got it shipped over nite. (Same if you destroy a part)

Phone support was second to none. (Call anytime during operating hours) Manuals were being constantly updated and improved.

I had no building skills and got a great airplane. 950# with most options on 8.5s. This forum and EAA hombuilders videos were/are very helpful. I took a covering class and avionics/wiring class thru the EAA.

The parts fit was fantastic and if I ever got confused or didn’t understand the manual (happened many times) a quick call got it sorted out. I also spent a few days at the factory watching the production folks build and picked up some valuable tips.

Cubcrafters EX built in 3.5 years start to finish taking two winters off. The next one would take less than a year now that I have a heated hangar. Build hangar was 200miles away and unheated. If I can do it, anyone can.

Jay at Javron has a builders assist program that can significantly speed up your build. All major parts are stock so if 15 years down the road you need new gear or tail feathers, airframes or atlee can help you out.


Sent from my iPad using SuperCub.Org
 
Last edited:
Darrell said:
I am building a Legend HP.
Long time builder of RVs, A&P, IA.
Parts that do not fit.
Incorrect parts delivered vs parts call outs.
Parts missing at delivery.
Fuselage not media blasted and not painted with a primer sealer.
Incredibly bad fitting welded parts.
I will see it to completion.
Looks like the folks that build from scratch or restore are on the right track.
Click to expand...
Wow! Not my knowledge of Legend Cub at all! My brother bought a 2015 Legend HP kit, brought it up here from the factory to NB Canada and put it all together. The kit was as it should be, (nothing like what you discribe whatsoever), very well built with excellant factory support. The plane looks and flys beautifully! The next kit from Legend will be here by the second week of this January.
Are you sure you’ve got a Legend kit or something else. Please explain.
Thanks
Roddy
 
I bought a Javron the delivery was supposed to be 6-8 weeks after deposit was received i got 80%of it about 30 weeks got my last part about 8 weeks shy of two years packaging was not sufficient all my arches were bent and I had powder coat rubbed off in two spots from parts rubbing seat base is way out of square hardware kit left a lot to be desired there was something wrong in just about every pack fuel tanks leak , brackets were put on in the wrong place and a couple the cable guides were wrong one horizontal was bent trim cable was too long because bracket was put in the wrong spot, my biggest complaint is delivery time and I am his quality control he has eventually gotten me parts that I can work with just very frustrating when you buy new and waste a lot of time making things work that should have been right before it was shipped
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

bamendala
Building a javron with no plans
Replies
22
Views
2K
Scott A
Scott A
Bill Rusk
Javron Supercub Kits in Alaska
Replies
4
Views
4K
DENNY
D
tackdog
New Javron Build
Replies
11
Views
926
fishhook
F
W
New Project Javron Super Cub
Replies
5
Views
4K
empire375
empire375
D
Who's got experience with a Dakota 18 kit and/or the North Star also)
Replies
8
Views
4K
JeffP
J
Back
Top