• 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!

Best Performing Floats

ths

Registered User
Alaska
What have Y'all found to be the best performing float for a 160 cub? Seems Edo 2000 are the gold standard, but wondering about other choices including Aerocets. I know plastic floats work wonders on a 206 and they sure are nice from a maintenance standpoint in salt.
 
I have never used them but, I would certainly look at the Aerocets. Look at the shape of those bottoms. They appear to be a copy of EDO's formula which gives excellent overall performance. The EDO 2000s are flat skinned bottoms with hydro boosters to give them some shape. They are not optimal but do a good job with less construction cost. The installed weight of the Aerocets and EDO 2000s are basically the same. 265 pounds vs 266 pounds and the Aerocets have 200 more pounds of floatation. The extra floatation alone should give shorter take off times. Besides the Aerocets have a wide flat deck which makes life a bit easier.
rcub.jpg


Just an opinion since I have not had an opportunity to try them. If I were in the market to buy a new set for my Cub, it would be an Aerocet.
 
There's a reason all floats are compared to EDO's. Kinda the same as bush planes being compared to SCubs. Surface tension is the enemy of acceleration on water. EDO's rivets help break that tension. Smooth plastic does not. IMHO: For big hatch doors & wide walks, go Aerocet, for TO performance, go EDO.
 
That is an interesting observation Nimpo. I had a Lake LA-4 which had flush rivets on the bottom ahead of the step. It was very slippery in the water. Water handling was definitely better than the other Lake airplanes which have protruding head rivets. It was possible to hear the water spray on the protruding head rivet airplanes, while the flush rivet airplane it was possible to make a glassy water landing and not be able to hear the spray at touch down. The only indication of landing being that of seeing the spray out of the corner of your eye.
 
Performance?

Take off

repair

Maintaining them


what weight do you want performance?

My old 180 hp cub on 2000s light used the same water as the 150 cub on aquas needed light. I could not believe it, but I tested it many times.

Now with a load it was totally different.

today, what I know about floats and keeping them airborne, I would be going aerocetts. I do not think that you will notice enough of a difference between them and Edo's to warrant the added hassle of round top aluminum.

My cub with a 150 hp and edos, me at 230 and half tanks used 600' to lift off. I think even with plastic floats you would be airborne in 650... and with a load the bigger size will help keep it short. Full it took lots of time to get up and off.

Now we talk cash outlay....
 
Thanks for the replies. The cub will be at gross plenty, 2000lbs. Performance light won't make a lot of difference to me. It's nice to rip off light, but any where I'll need to go I'll need to go heavy at some point. And yes, performance as in TO. I have run metal and are Aerocets on larger planes and there is no comparison for maintenance and repair. At least in salt water. I imagine a 180hp cub on Aerocets would be the ticket, but that's almost twice the price of a decent 160 and metal floats. Hard to justify at if you can approach the same performance....
 
i take it, it's a certified cub? i know some guys really like the cap 2000's but haven't tried them myself. as for glass floats i have a pair of tf 2300's and on my new cub a pair of 2300 bilmar now claymar 2300's and they are definitely more slippery on the water then a riveted float.
 
Unfortunately it is a certified cub. Really limits a lot of options, but the way it has to be....

i too have found fiberglass floats much slipperier. Takes a little getting used to at first because they don't come off step and slow down as quick.
 
Is Aerocet still in the business of selling floats?

I have been trying to buy a set for my PA-12 (with PA-18 landing gear attachment points) for about 8 years.

It's always the same answer: they are not STC certified for a PA-12, they won't help me get any kind of paperwork through the FAA, and that I shouldn't hold my breath for an STC because they aren't even trying and probably won't ever (at least in my lifetime).

I told them that I personally know at least four PA-12 owners who would buy a set today if they were STC certified.

I would bet real money that they could sell hundreds to PA-12 owners, like right now.

They didn't seem to care.
 
I have flown most of them. The aerocet floats are big and have big compartments, but I think the attachment points are farther forward causing the tip of the floats to go under water in waves. By far my favorite was the wip 2100s on a cub.

Mike
 
since we are on the float topic again, the 2300 floats i have on my 0360 pa-12 float nice, but after about 300 feet of taxi the nose drops and even in calm water it splashes over the top of the bumpers (they are amphibs) this is the first set of amphibs i have flown and i assume this is because of the weight of the wheel gear in the front and the water filling up the nose compartments, the water drains out as soon as i hit the throttle and the floats are on step so i have no C of G issue in flight, but is this normal for amphibs?
 
Love my edo 2000 with speed fairing and booster,compartement,before overhauling them 2 years ago i went and asken the aerocet dealer for a quote and kick me to overhaul my edo at $ 28000.00 for a set its a lot of gas money for a extra 5 mph and flat top
 
cub12.. you say your have BILMAR's.. and then CLAMAR's... do not confuse the two as the same. Not sure why your forward compartment would be filling up with water... they don't on Clamars.
 
Mr.Irishfield, bilmar is the early clamar, same float design different wheel gear mine are hydraulic and the front wheel set up is more like what i have seen on an edo 3500
 
Hate to split straws.. but Bilmar is not the early Clamar.. you can buy Bill's moulds they're still out there somewhere. Last year they were on Barnstormers for sale. Clamar may have used a set of Bilmars as a starting point to make refined moulds and final floats but they are not the same float nor company. I'm quite aware of the situation as I considered partnering with Clair when he started Clamar and supplied him with spreader bar and flying wires for many years. The Clamar 3500 mould was pulled from my Edo 3500 amphibs, so they have that same sculpted bottom but in glass. Back to your water issue... where is the water getting into the forward compartment? This could only happen on a Clamar if the seal between the float bottom and the metal nose wheel support track separated.
 
it get's in were the wheels swing out, i will try to seal it better. i was just wondering if it was common for most amphibs to ride nose low?
 
Picture of where I mean that should be sealed if the Bilmars are done the same way. Saw some very early Clamars that separated here and needed some more Sikaflex sealer, or water can get up inside.
 

Attachments

  • nosetrackseal.jpg
    nosetrackseal.jpg
    177.3 KB · Views: 295
I liked the Wips because they were big and have good sized hatches , have flat tops, and the tip of the floats never were under water. Performance wise, they did just fine.

Huskys on Baumans also tend to be nose heavy and the tips are under water a lot.

Mike
 
I never had the bows under water with EDO 2000s but the tails would go under while slow taxiing even with moderate loads. I wanted Wips or Baumanns but they weren't available on the used market at the time. EDOs were. And EDOs were relatively inexpensive. That makes up for some performance compromises.
 
I have little time on EDO's but one of my concerns is that we have increased the gross weight so much from the early Supercubs, that the EDO's may be a little underfloated.
In the old days wasn't the GW something like 1750?
Now we are using a GW of 2000 and the experimental guys are setting values like 2300, and...... it is easy to load a cub to 2300 on floats. Thus we go from a float that was awesome at 1750 to asking that same float to perform at 2000 and up to 2300. That seems to me like we are asking a lot.
Thus it seems like the Aerocett, Baumann and Wips might have a little more floatation. I know when I walked to the back of the Baumann's on my last cub that I did not get my feet wet.
Also it seems to me if the front is going under it would be a factor of rigging and/or CG. Perhaps the floats need to be rigged a few inches further aft. I know there is generally a sweet spot for the step to be relative to the wing (center of lift, or CG, or 30%of cord, or something like that), but I do not know what or where that is. No doubt JJ Frey could tell you.

Just some of my random thoughts.

Bill
 
Also it seems to me if the front is going under it would be a factor of rigging and/or CG. Perhaps the floats need to be rigged a few inches further aft. I know there is generally a sweet spot for the step to be relative to the wing (center of lift, or CG, or 30%of cord, or something like that), but I do not know what or where that is. No doubt JJ Frey could tell you.
Bill

Bill, You mean to rig the floats further forward. Rigging them further aft would place the CG (of the airplane) too far forward of the center of floatation. You want the center of floatation to be further forward to lessen the water coming over the bows. This is a problem with amphibs because of the weight of the nose gear being in the bow.

The book "Design for Flying" by Dave Thurston has a chapter about seaplane design. Step placement etc.
 
it probably is a little under floated with the amphibs.The tf2300 straight floats were a great working float they are a composite copy of baumanns, not quiet as slippery as the bilmars but nice flat tops huge hatches and always felt safe at 2300lb gw on a windy day.
 

Attachments

  • MHF in water-LR.jpg
    MHF in water-LR.jpg
    117.2 KB · Views: 261
Wow! I finally figured out how to post a pic!!
 

Attachments

  • on floats-beach.jpg
    on floats-beach.jpg
    43.9 KB · Views: 270
Also it seems to me if the front is going under it would be a factor of rigging and/or CG. Perhaps the floats need to be rigged a few inches further aft. I know there is generally a sweet spot for the step to be relative to the wing (center of lift, or CG, or 30%of cord, or something like that), but I do not know what or where that is. No doubt JJ Frey could tell you.

Just some of my random thoughts.

Bill


Seems you Baumans had this nose under water habit:wink:8)


We love you Bill!
 
Back
Top