Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 42

Thread: Another which kit?

  1. #1

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Wichita, Kansas
    Posts
    8
    Post Thanks / Like

    Another which kit?

    I have been reading through the forums, literature and only have become more aware of what I do not know.

    Oh, hello, all, new here but not new to the homebuilt world. I have built a Kitfox IV and flew the heck out of it (and sold it and it is still going) and built a RV4 sans engine and sold the airframe and unfortunately acquired a RV7A kit and at the moment have no interest in it. What I have fallen in love with, slowly, over time, is low and slow, grass strip, I will get there when I get there type flying and aircraft.

    I also have an O-360, brand new (currently fuel injected but it has sump induction so I can return it to a carb).

    I work for an aircraft manufacturer and hold an A&P and yes, worked on aircraft as a professional mechanic and other things.

    I want a classic Super Cub, bow tip wing, plenty of fuel, standard 8 inch wheels. I kinda sorta have the money (more or less).

    I want a kit that is close to classic, can carry an O-360, and I want it fully welded, wings complete, I just do the assembly, rigging, covering and finish.

    I like the Dakota Cub, why should I get something different? Please no bashing of the kit compnaies, but Cub Crafters is not classic enough for me and seems to have an odd cowling and be heading toward new-er power plants which may be lighter. And, it might be out of my price range.

    Is the Dakota wing completed, is the fuselage welded? All of the web sites for these companies leave me more confused than satisfied?

    Any guidance is appreciated, links to threads etc.

    Thanks.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    SE Montana
    Posts
    109
    Post Thanks / Like
    It sounds like you need check out the Javron kit. Jay is very flexible with his kits, regarding level of completion. He also builds from the original Piper specs, so his planes are as close to a factory Super Cub as you'll likely find. It would be worth your time to give him a call.
    Last edited by 1934A; 05-10-2017 at 10:59 PM.
    Thanks FdxLou thanked for this post
    Likes C-FIJK, Cubus Maximus liked this post

  3. #3

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Wichita, Kansas
    Posts
    8
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thank you, is there a resource that I can compare these, Javron and Dakota? I have come pretty much to the conclusion these two are very similar and in my price range.

    I could, I suppose buy a nice older, certificated SC but then there is rust, busted parts, questionable rebuilds, spotty history, farm technology and that leaves me with an expensive Cub yellow O-360 laying on my shop floor.

    I want to build in a year to two. I covered and painted my Kitfox, helped rebuild a J3, fabric does not scare me. What I am running sort on is time.

    Do not turn a hobby into a career, I work on aviation stuff all day and the last thing I want to do in my free time is work on airplanes. But I still have the discipline, I can do another, but it needs to be highly prefabricated.I do not want to jig wings, weld tubes, modify stuff etc.

  4. #4
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    15,883
    Post Thanks / Like
    Dakota Cub certified the Super 18. Their kit is a compilation of those parts. Their wings are complete as is their fuselage.

    Sent from my SM-N900V using SuperCub.Org mobile app
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  5. #5
    Bill Rusk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Spokane Felts Field, WA/Poplar Grove, (Chicago) IL
    Posts
    4,473
    Post Thanks / Like
    You might find some info here.


    http://www.supercub.org/forum/showth...ill+javron+kit


    Hope it helps

    Bill
    Very Blessed.

  6. #6
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    6,724
    Post Thanks / Like
    I started out like you with an IO-360 in a box looking for a home. My kit was a Back country before they started the current version. Javron was building their fuselage components at the time with the wings coming from another source. All parts were top quality with the entire project being just a big assembly. I spent 1300 hours on it. 2-300 of it was doing things which I could have purchased but wanted to do myself.

    Keep the fuel injection and change the mags to Pmags for the electronic ignition. The combination is a smooth starting and stopper, and is economical on the fuel burn. You will be happy with the results.
    N1PA
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  7. #7
    Dave Calkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    5,039
    Post Thanks / Like
    Whatever you go with. If you want low and slow Cub performance, do not get caught up with buying, and installing, (and haling around) every option available.

    The things you leave off a round tip Cub are what make it good for low and slow.

    And the things you leave off make it more affordable and also quicker to assemble.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    413
    Post Thanks / Like
    You may also give American Legend Aircraft a call in Sulphur Springs, Texas. I was just at their factory and they are building some neat cubs. You can go light sport-ex, or regular experimental. Just one more option to consider. I think they are building 180 hp (O-340) cubs in the 900-950 lb empty weight range. They sell kits.

    I have no idea how their pricing compares to the others. I am not allowed to touch tools, so experimental is not an option for me.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Wichita, Kansas
    Posts
    8
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Calkins View Post
    Whatever you go with. If you want low and slow Cub performance, do not get caught up with buying, and installing, (and haling around) every option available.

    The things you leave off a round tip Cub are what make it good for low and slow.

    And the things you leave off make it more affordable and also quicker to assemble.
    My Kitfox was very light, I will not have an issue there. It was sometimes accused of being filled with Helium. Aside from the Dakota (and Javron) being supposedly on the heavy side (if I go that way), I will not fill it with electronic doodads. My wife and I are little people, I think our combined weight is less than 280 pounds. That should help.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lasater View Post
    You may also give American Legend Aircraft a call in Sulphur Springs, Texas. I was just at their factory and they are building some neat cubs. You can go light sport-ex, or regular experimental. Just one more option to consider. I think they are building 180 hp (O-340) cubs in the 900-950 lb empty weight range. They sell kits.
    My engine is an O-360 and as it sits is probably closer to 200 than 180 horsepower. It is not one of those bitsy little ol' O-340 jobs. There is no substitute for displacement. Seriously, maybe I would consider such an engine today, but I am going to have to make do with what I got I think and that is a full size engine for a full size SC.



    Thanks for the suggestions. Are the Javron and Dakota parts PMA and interchangeable with a TC PA-18? I am still trying to compare these two and understand what the differences are.
    Last edited by 3X4X4; 05-11-2017 at 09:09 PM.

  10. #10
    Bill Rusk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Spokane Felts Field, WA/Poplar Grove, (Chicago) IL
    Posts
    4,473
    Post Thanks / Like
    Well, there is a LOT of info in this thread.........if you can wade through it all............

    http://www.supercub.org/forum/showth...g-a-Javron-Cub


    Hope this helps

    Bill
    Very Blessed.

  11. #11
    Mauleguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    510
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 3X4X4 View Post
    My Kitfox was very light, I will not have an issue there. It was sometimes accused of being filled with Helium. Aside from the Dakota (and Javron) being supposedly on the heavy side (if I go that way), I will not fill it with electronic doodads. My wife and I are little people, I think our combined weight is less than 280 pounds. That should help.

    Javron can be built as light as any 180 hp Super Cub. It is how you put it together that is going to determine the actual weight when complete as you probably know. They have (Javron) a very nice wing kit that is probably the lightest one out there and if you build it in the stock round tip style there is no reason you could not come in under 1100 pounds on 31" ABW. If you are a super freak about weight you will do much better then that. I don't think most people are going to be able to tell a 1000 pound cub from an 1100 pound cub because they can't fly a cub like it is capable of being flown. Then there is the scale thing that is always in question with what someone says there airplane weighs.

    My Javron wide body with big long wing, spar spliced and extened (these are not Javron wings, mine are Univair with 110" double slotted metal flaps and custom 90" metal ailerons squared off) stock fuel tanks, Lycoming O-360, 84" metal prop, full metal interior, full electrical, 35" ABW, weighs 1194 pounds. It gets off in 100 ft with me and full fuel. Javron wings were not available when I built my cub otherwise I would have used them. My wings complete easily add 100 lbs. would be my guess.

    I would buy another Javron kit without even thinking about it. The fuselage is correct, everything goes together as it should. The wings are a work of art!

    Greg
    Likes 1934A, Larry G liked this post

  12. #12

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    SE Montana
    Posts
    109
    Post Thanks / Like
    I'm not sure where you heard that the Javron kit was on the heavy side, but from my experience and observations, that's not true at all. Like Greg said, there's absolutely no reason you couldn't build one that comes in under 1100 lbs. Depending on how weight conscious you are, and how thick your wallet is, you could get darn close to 1000 lbs if you wanted to.

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    413
    Post Thanks / Like
    My point was that somehow Legend figured out how to build a O-340 powered airplane that is fundamentally a PA-18 in every respect that weighs 900 lbs. Slightly wider cabin (3-4 inches), double doors, beefed up flaps, etc. I don't know how they do it, but they do. The airframe is hell for stout. I don't see why you could put a an O-360 on it and still stay below 950 or so.

  14. #14

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    SE Montana
    Posts
    109
    Post Thanks / Like
    I've heard only good things about the Legend, it'd be interesting to k ow where their weight savings comes from. Is their fuselage basically a PA-18 clone? Or is it their own design?

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    413
    Post Thanks / Like
    I think the Legend fuselage is a slightly modified PA-18 fuse welded in their shop.
    Likes Little_Cub liked this post

  16. #16
    Bill Rusk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Spokane Felts Field, WA/Poplar Grove, (Chicago) IL
    Posts
    4,473
    Post Thanks / Like
    Make sure you check the GW and cargo capacity. It's great if it is 900 pounds empty but if it was only built to handle 1800 pounds that could be a problem

    i don't know what the numbers are..... I'm just saying be sure to check.

    Bill
    Very Blessed.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    2,016
    Post Thanks / Like
    The point of ex Cubs is you can make it whatever you want it to be. Tons of choices to achieve what you want. The "kit" is just the foundation. Backcountry's relocation of the upper longeron to the top is a game changer for me.

    Choices, choices. Enjoy the process!
    Last edited by stewartb; 05-12-2017 at 08:59 PM.
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  18. #18

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Wichita, Kansas
    Posts
    8
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by stewartb View Post
    The point of ex Cubs is you can make it whatever you want it to be. Tons of choices to achieve what you want. The "kit" is just the foundation. Backcountry's relocation of the upper longeron to the top is a game changer for me.

    Choices, choices. Enjoy the process!

    Tell me more about this, I am not sure I understand.

    As to Javron being heavy, I did not hear it was heavy, I was just reading that Kitplanes article and looking at the weights.

    For somebody with an O-360, what is the preferred prop? The "Borer" is not vibe approved on the O-360 so I suppose a Cato or similar is the work around?

  19. #19
    Mauleguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    510
    Post Thanks / Like
    Propeller for experimental: I run the McCauley 1P235 84" pitched at 44, it gives me 105 mph at 2500rpm. I have also ran the 90" with no problems, close to 2000 hours.
    Most people now days use the Cato because of the weight savings. I like the fact that a metal propeller you can possibly fix it in the field if need be and chop something down without causing splinters (old school thinking).

    I have also witnessed an accident that I believe he lost all thrust and crashed after running his Cato propeller through the top of a tree making it ineffective for forward thrust but that is just a hunch.

  20. #20

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Wichita, Kansas
    Posts
    8
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mauleguy, where do you get the compatibility? I am not arguing, just asking what approves the 84 inch 1P235 on the Lycoming O-360? Just looked at TCDS P12EA and I do not see vibe approval under Note 9 beyond 78 inches.

    Okay, on the Javron, none of these website really show photos or descriptions, including Javron, are the wings fully assembled like Dakota? I want a highly prefab kit. I build airplanes for a living, I no longer find it fun. I am disciplined though and can suffer the pain but the less of it the better.
    Last edited by 3X4X4; 05-13-2017 at 11:19 AM.

  21. #21
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    6,724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 3X4X4 View Post
    For somebody with an O-360, what is the preferred prop? The "Borer" is not vibe approved on the O-360 so I suppose a Cato or similar is the work around?
    This is the prop that I have on my IO-360 (180 hp). It will get out and climb like gang busters with normal cruise of 108 mph using 21.5" mp @2400 rpm, 8.2 gph. If I push it up it will easily do 120 mph on floats. I like the ground adjustable feature because I can easily fine tune the pitch for what ever I want at the time.
    http://www.whirlwindaviation.com/props/STOLGseries.asp

    If you are so inclined and want a constant speed for a little better performance at both TO, climb and cruise this is the same basic prop.
    http://www.whirlwindaviation.com/pro...LGCSseries.asp
    Last edited by skywagon8a; 05-13-2017 at 02:24 PM.
    N1PA
    Thanks bowenjo thanked for this post

  22. #22
    www.SkupTech.com mike mcs repair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    chugiak AK
    Posts
    8,066
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 3X4X4 View Post
    Tell me more about this, I am not sure I understand.
    .
    This is his build site for his http://wildcatcub.com

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    2,016
    Post Thanks / Like
    I uploaded 150+ new pictures into my web file before leaving for my latest business trip. When I get some time I'll add several new pages to my site. I've neglected it lately. My life is busy!

    Re: props. If I used a <200hp 0-360 I'd have a Catto but at 220hp+ a fixed pitch doesn't make sense. My WW 200A and governor is about 30# heavier than a Catto. My motor is heavier than a 360, too. The BCSC Rev 2 is extended 2' to balance the weight on the nose. Balance is more important to me that weight as long as the weight is associated with an advantage. Like I said, choices.
    Last edited by stewartb; 05-13-2017 at 06:20 PM.

  24. #24
    Mauleguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    510
    Post Thanks / Like
    This is not an approved propeller but if you are experimental you can choose whatever propeller you want. This prop has lots of hours by lots of people.

  25. #25

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Wichita, Kansas
    Posts
    8
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Mauleguy View Post
    This is not an approved propeller but if you are experimental you can choose whatever propeller you want. This prop has lots of hours by lots of people.

    Unfortunately for me, I have certain expertise in the subject, lol, which scares the Hades out of me in this particular case. Experimental, true, you can use what you like but it does not change the physics and mechanics.

    The engine I have was configured for an RV (which I am still hammering away on). But, that is another story. I want to use it on a SC. So, I will need to reconsider propeller options. Stuff for another thread really.

    Thanks, seriously, everyone for discussing these things with me. You are not wasting your time. I will either buy a good, certified CUB or build one. I am leaning more to the Javron. I have the money. I am not blowing smoke. But, this is my last pile of airplane money and I need to make it count. I am moving toward retirement, ughhh, and, well, this is it, once I am retired I will not be able to grab big chunks of cash and make it up by working. This is it! My RV project will continue, after retirement, I want to get this kit relatively soon and hammer out a flying airplane fast. Thus the need for a highly prefab kit.

  26. #26
    Dave Calkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    5,039
    Post Thanks / Like
    Slow yerself down and make some good choices first!

    And do not fear the big McCauley fixed pitch on the 0-360! Like Mauleguy said, it can eat some wood and not come apart, vibe-survey be damned!

  27. #27
    Bill Rusk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Spokane Felts Field, WA/Poplar Grove, (Chicago) IL
    Posts
    4,473
    Post Thanks / Like
    It sounds like you do have some experience in the building world, and I'm sure you know this, but as much for you as for others who may be reading this thread, I think it is extremely important to very carefully define your mission. Is this a fly around on a beautiful summer evening for a half hour and put it in the hanger airplane or is it a take an occasional local camping trip airplane, or is it a go to Alaska, load it up with a quartered out moose, fly home airplane? And of course it's extremely important to figure out what you're going to do with this airplane 90% of the time and then build for that 90%. If you're only going to take it to Alaska once, that represents 10%. It will be great 10% of the time and it will suck 90% of the time. It is not uncommon for all of us to dream of what we want to do, but that is not always reality. People build extreme cross country, heavy duty airplanes, and then never take them to Alaska. So defining your mission, and building the airplane for 90% of its flying will make for an airplane that you like 90% of the time.
    In the Valdez thread you can see two people who built for their mission, and came up with airplanes that are totally different but perfect for each of them. And just because your mission is not the same as someone else's mission does not make you wrong or your airplane bad. It's your perfect airplane.
    Cub crafters puts out a fantastic kit but there is limited flexibility there. Javron gives you great flexibility, but his kit does not come with the builders manual, although it is very complete. The legend cub has a very complete, excellent kit, but that mission may not fit your mission. Dakota kits come with all certified parts and that's their big selling point. And then of course, there's always the option of picking and choosing from various manufacturers and creating your own kit. Hope this helps


    Bill
    ( i'm sure you know most of this, but again it was also written for other people who may read this thread)
    Very Blessed.
    Thanks Oz. thanked for this post
    Likes Dave Calkins liked this post

  28. #28

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Wichita, Kansas
    Posts
    8
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Rusk View Post
    It sounds like you do have some experience in the building world, and I'm sure you know this, but as much for you as for others who may be reading this thread, I think it is extremely important to very carefully define your mission. Is this a fly around on a beautiful summer evening for a half hour and put it in the hanger airplane or is it a take an occasional local camping trip airplane, or is it a go to Alaska, load it up with a quartered out moose, fly home airplane? And of course it's extremely important to figure out what you're going to do with this airplane 90% of the time and then build for that 90%. If you're only going to take it to Alaska once, that represents 10%. It will be great 10% of the time and it will suck 90% of the time. It is not uncommon for all of us to dream of what we want to do, but that is not always reality. People build extreme cross country, heavy duty airplanes, and then never take them to Alaska. So defining your mission, and building the airplane for 90% of its flying will make for an airplane that you like 90% of the time.
    In the Valdez thread you can see two people who built for their mission, and came up with airplanes that are totally different but perfect for each of them. And just because your mission is not the same as someone else's mission does not make you wrong or your airplane bad. It's your perfect airplane.
    Cub crafters puts out a fantastic kit but there is limited flexibility there. Javron gives you great flexibility, but his kit does not come with the builders manual, although it is very complete. The legend cub has a very complete, excellent kit, but that mission may not fit your mission. Dakota kits come with all certified parts and that's their big selling point. And then of course, there's always the option of picking and choosing from various manufacturers and creating your own kit. Hope this helps


    Bill
    ( i'm sure you know most of this, but again it was also written for other people who may read this thread)
    That is good advice and no, I do not know all this already. My mission is a general purpose machine. Sure, I may fly to Idaho, or back to Arizona where I used to live but can you imagine that I did all that including crossing the Rockies four times and flying coast to coast and north to south in a Kitfox! I cannot see that there is anything specific about a fairly standard PA-18 with 180 horses up front that would prevent it from being a general purpose machine, Sunday flying or short cross country hop or that once in a life time (well now several times) coast to coast hop. Every long trip is just a series of short trips consecutively .

    The big hurdle right now is coming to grips with the mental issue of admitting I would rather have a Super Cub than an RV. Yes, I own a full RV7A kit with some work progressed on it. I just do not feel motivated by it because (because as I explained earlier, I hate aluminum now) I think I realize, the Kitfox taught me some lessons, that I already knew, 100 MPH down low where I can see the leaves on the trees and landing at out of the way places and in general just being in the air with the windows (and doors) open is really more my interest.
    Likes skywagon8a, Larry G, cubdriver2, StuBob liked this post

  29. #29

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    413
    Post Thanks / Like
    When I was 18 years old and a brand new pilot, my father bought a stock 1979 PA-18 that was modified with a 0-360. This was 1988, so no bushwheels, no SuperCub.org, no access to Alaska airplane porn. The airplane sat on stock 8.0 tires. I landed it everywhere and flew it from my home in Fort Worth, up to Aspen, Colorado, to Moab, down to Alabama and back. That Cub spent a lot of time doing low and slow at our ranch in South Texas. Reading your post above reminded me that the stock Supercub is a fantastic compromise to do everything from long low altitude cross countries to Sunday afternoon screwing off. It flew great.

    I love my Super Legend, but the original Supercub was pretty damn good from the factory. I am not so sure that all of popular mods improve the airplane that much if you live in the lower 48.

    I think you are on the right track.
    Likes Dave Calkins, super stol liked this post

  30. #30
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    6,724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Besides the 180 hp engine, the second most important improvement in my mind to a PA-18 is the wide body fuselage. I'm skinny but I do like elbow room.
    N1PA

  31. #31
    Dave Calkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    5,039
    Post Thanks / Like
    A good frame with proper wing incidence trumps all.

  32. #32
    cubdriver2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    upstate NY
    Posts
    7,524
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Calkins View Post
    A good frame with proper wing incidence trumps all.
    Anybody try this from Javron? 1/4 rise of front spar



    Glenn
    "Optimism is going after Moby Dick in a rowboat and taking the tartar sauce with you!"

  33. #33
    Dave Calkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    5,039
    Post Thanks / Like
    1/4" Schmorter inch!!!!

    i fart in the general direction of a 1/4" rise
    Likes Bill Rusk, Little_Cub liked this post

  34. #34
    cubdriver2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    upstate NY
    Posts
    7,524
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Calkins View Post
    1/4" Schmorter inch!!!!

    i fart in the general direction of a 1/4" rise
    Please speak English, your as confusing as those Maine guys

    Glenn
    "Optimism is going after Moby Dick in a rowboat and taking the tartar sauce with you!"

  35. #35
    Dave Calkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    5,039
    Post Thanks / Like
    Am a long ways from Maine, Glenn.

    ....and wouldnt bother building a Cub frame that didnt have at least the greatest Piper spec'd incidence. Preferably much more.
    Likes RaisedByWolves liked this post

  36. #36
    Dave Calkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    5,039
    Post Thanks / Like
    Some guys dont like the rise bracket Glen. They say it changes the sight picture!

    sheesh!! Man up!!
    Thanks cubdriver2 thanked for this post
    Likes Little_Cub liked this post

  37. #37

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Wichita, Kansas
    Posts
    8
    Post Thanks / Like
    What are the advantages of increasing the wing incidence? What other modifications does this beget, stab incidence?

    J

  38. #38
    cubdriver2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    upstate NY
    Posts
    7,524
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Calkins View Post
    Some guys dont like the rise bracket Glen. They say it changes the sight picture!

    sheesh!! Man up!!
    You want the largest AOI but not with this?

    Glenn
    "Optimism is going after Moby Dick in a rowboat and taking the tartar sauce with you!"

  39. #39
    Mauleguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    510
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by cubdriver2 View Post
    Anybody try this from Javron? 1/4 rise of front spar



    Glenn
    I have machined quit a few sets for myself and others over the years, I do the front 1/4" up and rear 1/4" down. My cub has them, I am not sure if it makes much that much difference. I have never flown one back to back, before install and after install but I figure every little bit helps. Doug Keller has gone so far as cutting a perfectly good fuselage to raise the front by 3/4 of an inch.

  40. #40

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    269
    Post Thanks / Like
    What happened to Chris Hatin and Bushwacker tubing kits?

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •