• 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!

Have been eyeballing Maules for float work.

Alex Clark

Registered User
Life Long Alaskan
I sold the PA-11 Cub a while back and sold the 172n on floats in October. I have been shopping around for my next plane or planes for my float business. Back when I was not really looking there were affordable Maules here and there. Now they are all in hidding . M7-235s are kinda scarce right now and not all M6s had the float mod frames. Not so sure how am MX7-235 would be on floats. Probably a lot like an M5-235.
 
I did my seaplane rating with Rich Hensch of Florida Seaplanes years ago in a MX7-235. I think he is ready to retire, but his son David is taking over operations. They would both be a wealth of knowledge on the MX7. Check them out here http://www.flyfloatplanes.com/
 
There used to be an operator out of Kotz my friends flew with. Was great for all they did.

I do know where an M-5-201 on floats is for sale.

Everyone that has flown them say great things about them.
 
It has been for sale for awhile. Most of my experience with Maules has been M7s and M6s on floats. a little (maybe 40 hours) with M5s on wheels .
Not interested in a 4, The prices on long wing 7s has gone up enough that I might as well just buy a nice 180s or older 185.

Just ruled out one M5 I liked due to some concerns I have, hope to hear from another owner tomorrow. Thought I had a line on a MX7-235 in Georgia but the guy never got back to me when I stated asking questions.

So far it seems to me there are two types of Maule Owners.
1. Those who know everything about Maules and how to flying them.
2. Those who do not know much about their own plane and were talked into buying a Maule by somebody in group 1.
 
Last edited:
I owned an M-5-235 40 yrs ago but never on floats. And yes I'd want a longer wing than an M-4 or 5. They were popular once on Fiberfloats but that soon soured when the floats' rigging started to unravel. Aqua 2400's seem popular. EDO 2440's are around too. I see you posted on the Maule Forum so maybe the experienced will offer advice and a source.

I flew the C-180 some but mostly the C-185 for three engines. If I had to choose I'd not screw around and just get a 185 some older pilot hates to sell but has to and pay and play it out. You know these matters so that's nothing new.

Gary
 
The M-7s do cost a bit, that is for sure, but find a 185 in the same condition and then measure prices, condition makes a big difference.

My mechanic told me the average owner flies a maule between 50-150 hours total, or over 1,000. Group one scares themselves and will never get in it again, (mine came from such an owner), the other learns to fly it and finds they can do most everything they desire while carrying the kitchen sink.

One advantage of them is price of parts. Just your average Cessna part starts at $1,000, my tail steering fork was less than $200.

The short wings do reduce lift, so we compensate with lots of power. Admittedly I am not any great with the plane yet, but it is coming. They do not fly like the Cessna, or cub. Until it becomes natural to fly them like a Maule they will not seem to perform.

The M-5 210 I was instructing a guy in we had two BIG guys in front, and one average in back and lots of fuel. Impressive out of the water on a calm day. Again, you need to fly it different than the Cessna.

There seem to be people that hate the aircraft without much knowledge- usually parrot from others; there are also those that got bit by one in the past that dislike them due to their past experience- they do not suffer fools lightly, nor do pacers.

I don't know what your goal is, but the M-5 is not super expensive, and will do well for performance.

Are you looking to continue instructing? Or have another gig up your sleeve?
 
I hadn't considered parts support as haven't owned Maule for a long time or Cessna ever. Same for maintenance expenses. A&P's that maintain them would know the expected issues. Hope it works ok eventually.

Gary
 
I have a friend who has a Maule on straight Baumanna. It just sits in his hangar all pickled and sitting for three years. It is in upstate New Your. Maybe he will want to sell it?

Jim
 
Oh Hubba Hubba...a pickeled 7..

I looked at a 5 the other day which I really liked, until I saw the engine log books, compressions and how it had sat for a few years outside. The price was ok and I have cash in my account. But,, little warning klaxons were going off in my head.

I may hear from another 5 owner today. Hopefully. He is pretty busy.

There is a wonderful 6 down in Texas, but the seller does not think it has the float reenforced framework. ( the triangular piece under where the passenger door and cargo door meet. )

The lower horsepower MX7s have the 32.11 universal wing, but for some reason or another the older MX7-235s had the shorter (30.10) square tip wings. But at least they have the 4 notch torque tube flap system and not the 2 notch M5 cable system for the flaps.
 
Just curious what the 172 wasn’t doing for ya? Seems like it would be fine for sea level float ratings. Obviously the airplanes your looking at are a huge step above the 172 in some ways.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
AlaskaRallyer: The 172 was great for float ratings and was the best step-turn plane on floats I have flown.
But,,, I also used it for family flying and fishing trips. The legal load was too limited and some of the smaller lakes needed more climb angle. It would get out of the water pretty fast with two people and half fuel, but the angle of climb at up lake distance pretty fast.
 
Last edited:
Hi Alex, this fall I flew a M-7-260 on 3000 wip amph's. Very nice airplane with maybe 300 tt. Flew it several times in 30kts of wind and it seemed to do better than the 230 hp M-7 I was flying. I can't say anything bad about it but wasn't hauling anything or working hard. With two in it it got off the water very well and climbed good.
 
I have some time in an M7-260 on straight floats. It was a real zippy bird.
Sometimes fuel injection while on floats can be something to think about.
 
FWIW... Brown's Seaplane Base in Winterhaven, FL now has a M-7-235 they are using for training. They might have some leads or info.
 
Funny, I’ve never owned or flown a Maule, however, watching a couple of them at Greenville was impressive.
Long time steady company making planes through thick and thin. Not even the best known light aircraft of all time, the Super Cub, has that kind of “same company” track record. Bankrupt, bought, sold, modified, modified some more, renamed, etc. It’s all good though. Mostly. Can you even buy a certified Super Cub now? Oh, a Top Cub. Is that a Super Cub? Yes no maybe kinda. Point being, I’d like to know whats wrong with a Maule...
Roddy
 
I'm in the same camp as Mit. For starters, count the rivets in the top of the Maule wing and compare that to, oh, a Cessna wing. Or the number of stitches in a Cub wing.

RK
 
What might be considered is longevity and retained value. Put $$$$$$ into an airplane and where will your investment plus accrued maintenance be down the flight line? Airplanes aren't investments....they're tools, or for some toys, that wear out or loose value. Some unfortunately more than others.

We all know some that have gone west in a plane that apparently failed them. Something to think about when buying.

Gary
 
Havent worked on one for years. Not all fond memories, but it was nitpicky design things I didnt like

FWIW, mechanics opinions are opinions.

Hopefully we all deal with mechanics who can separate their opinions from facts and data. Hopefully I can do that!
 
I’m with Bowie,
ive owned 2 M7s with about 750 hrs combined.
They’re a bit of a black sheep in the GA world but an honest plane that does exactly what it was designed to do.
Mentioned earlier; 2 camps - pilots that are scared of them, and pilots that love em.
if you haven’t scared the crap out of yourself in the first 10 hrs, and stick with it, you’ll start to appreciate how capable they are. 100 hrs seems to be the magic number before you’re “wearing” the plane.
Yes, mechanics bitch about them a lot, but once you’ve learned the idiosyncrasies of how they come apart and go back together for annual, no big deal. Parts? Theyre still in business, without the Univair sticker shock.
Bang for your buck? Twice the plane as a cub for the same$
 
Back
Top