• 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!

35s

I am bias so be forewarned. Go look at the 5 or 6 cubs setting at Ultima Thule Lodge at an given time. They are all on 35's, they all regularly haul 2 passengers and gear.
They have 160hp cubs and 180hp cubs but they don't use 31" tires for a reason. It use to be a 31 weighed 30-31 pounds and a 35 weighed 39-40 pounds. I think they have gotten heavier (both) so it is probably still similar difference in weight between them. Weight is everything but getting in and out without breaking your airplane is higher on my list. You will never catch me on a 31, in fact I have a brand new set of the 31" radials from when they weighed 31 pounds if anyone is interested.

But they are doing it every day. Not a few times a year like the rest of us

Glenn
 
Glen has hit it squarely on the head. The fact of the matter is 99% of the guys that are wanting to pretend they are a " bush pilot" and using Paul Clause as a reference, to what size" they need "for tires is absurd. Reading tundra, glacier conditions, and river bars with soccer ball sized rocks, is never going to something you can learn on here.............. 99% of the movies on youtube of guys landing on river bars in the lower 48 I watch show a few guys landing 1/4 million dollar CC's on 35" tires where, a" good stick "could probably land a C-150; or if not, certainly a Tcraft on 8:50s...... Is pretty pointless.
As soon as the 42" Bushwheel is available that will be "the tire" and the 35" will come off in a heart beat......... This tire thing is getting ridiculous
on here. We flew Airstreaks since the 70's when 99% of lower 48 pilots had never even "seen a pair" of big tires! Even then, Every Dr/Dentist/ Attorney in Anchorage, that had a Cub,(to play guide) got a set of big tires to pretend they were a "bush pilot"; however the only place that they really dared to land, was when they could find tire tracks, were a real pilot had landed. They would spend hours circling ridges and then leave, not sure if you could or not........ The had the tires and belt buckle, ONLY.
So here is the bottom line: If your finding 35" tires soooooo much better than 31" tires, fine and dandy. POST some pics of your plane, in basketball sized rocks were you cant already go on 31" tires ; and then prove it!!###! I am going to take a guess that we wont get this site; bogged down with pics.
As Glen has implyed. Dreaming and doing is two different things......... Big tires are 98% image thing, how many really can utilize them is the 2%
. There are a few guys that need 35" like Paul, that will benifit from 35" tires, but the sad fact is he can also probably land a Cub on an old set of 25x11x4" were most wont land on 35" . Buying a $1000 golf club wont make you Tiger Woods, but it will look good back at the clubhouse!
 
Hey Turbo Beaver come play for a day with me and your cub on 31" tires and will see if you change your mind. Even better yet bring the Cessna 150 that will even be more fun to watch from the air! I live in the lowly lower 48 so you should not have a problem with your 31" tires and all your years of experience. wink, wink, smile, smile!
 
I think they used to say the same thing about wrinklewall slicks a few years back. My 31s work just fine at 2psi, no disk on my brakes. Buy what makes you happy.

Glenn
 
d8098da9fb6f442b4fa293598f59942c.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I went to edit my post and lost it somehow and don't feel like writing the whole thing again. I used Paul as a reference but I would guess even Paul would say he could do almost everything thing they do day to day with a 31" tire. The fact is a 35" tire is safer, easier on an airplane gear attach points, hardware, shocks etc.

Most will never need a 35" but if just one time from lack of experience you do you will be glad you had them.

The tire will outlast a 31 by I bet twice the amount of take off and landings because of rolling diameter.

I just retired the first set of 35" tires ever built with probably 20K plus landings, they were not worn out in fact they probably had almost as much tread as they came with 15 years ago. They were checked so bad that the Stan's tire sealant was coming out many places so I decided it was time.

I always thought Alaskan Bushwheels was making a mistake selling the 35" tire because they were going to sell a lot less tires...

Buy whatever floats your boat, both good tires but you cannot really compare the two if you are going to really work a cub.
 
I think they used to say the same thing about wrinklewall slicks a few years back. My 31s work just fine at 2psi, no disk on my brakes. Buy what makes you happy.

Glenn

You can't run that low of pressure and land anything off camber without getting into the tire with the caliper. About 4 to 5 psi is as low and still land a steep off camber spot.
Post a picture of 2 psi on off camber please!
 
I live in fear they will come out with Airstreaks in a size larger then the 29's, as I will be first in line for a pair! When I went from 26 to 29" Streaks, I was impressed with their greater capability and cush, I'd imagine the same holds true for the 31 v 35 thing. Whether a individual pilot NEEDS that extra margin is a whole nother matter, but it's there. Flying into Afton and Alpine WY. a lot like I do, you'd think 31's are needed for a multi thousand foot long paved strip, as all the Huskys I see there have them! Though no 35's that I've noticed. But I don't see those same dogs on the multiple nearby off airport sites ever. If I had a quarter mil in my plane I wouldn't go to them either I guess.
 
When you start talking about how big and bad rough and tumble all the strips you go into are tires become only a smaller part of the picture, important, but only a small part. Take fabric/paint and general aircraft condition, Are you going to drag a new 30,000 recover job into a strip with knee to waist high brush? How many alders are you going to drag that new leading edge through? Oh ya lets trim some brush/shrubs with that Cato prop. 35,s can handle it but will the rest of the plane? How much mud/rock do you really want to throw into the prop? If you even think twice about not getting them due to money, don't because unless you only land in wide open spaces the rest of the carnage to the plane is going to cost quite a bit every year. Mission, mission, mission.
DENNY
 
When you start talking about how big and bad rough and tumble all the strips you go into are tires become only a smaller part of the picture, important, but only a small part. Take fabric/paint and general aircraft condition, Are you going to drag a new 30,000 recover job into a strip with knee to waist high brush? How many alders are you going to drag that new leading edge through? Oh ya lets trim some brush/shrubs with that Cato prop. 35,s can handle it but will the rest of the plane? How much mud/rock do you really want to throw into the prop? If you even think twice about not getting them due to money, don't because unless you only land in wide open spaces the rest of the carnage to the plane is going to cost quite a bit every year. Mission, mission, mission.
DENNY


Wheel land or 3 Point:roll:, that is a whole big thread drift! Never ran a Cato and probably never will for the reasons stated above and more. If you are going to land off airport and land in rough stuff (which I do with any airplane I own) you are going to pick stuff up and sometimes it does come off the tires or cut some brush with the propeller, never a problem for me with a metal propeller. Keep the tail high coming into big rocks and it is never a problem landing very rough places with big rocks. People use techniques for the very reasons you stated, tires just another tool, keeping it light another advantage whether on 35" or 31". Bottom line for me is the 35" tire was the best tire made to this point for my mission, not every mission but enough so I am not going to switch tires back and forth.
 
Wheel land or 3 Point:roll:, that is a whole big thread drift! Never ran a Cato and probably never will for the reasons stated above and more. If you are going to land off airport and land in rough stuff (which I do with any airplane I own) you are going to pick stuff up and sometimes it does come off the tires or cut some brush with the propeller, never a problem for me with a metal propeller. Keep the tail high coming into big rocks and it is never a problem landing very rough places with big rocks. People use techniques for the very reasons you stated, tires just another tool, keeping it light another advantage whether on 35" or 31". Bottom line for me is the 35" tire was the best tire made to this point for my mission, not every mission but enough so I am not going to switch tires back and forth.
Post us some pictures of all this super nasty stuff you use your 35" tires for? Love to view them! Looking forward to seeing what you got.[emoji6]

Sent from my LM-X210 using SuperCub.Org mobile app
 
Don't need to post pictures to prove anything. There are some pretty big rocks in Vol. 1 Big Rocks and Long Props DVD flying my Experimental Maule a.k.a. Bushwacker. Pictures really don't prove much as anyone can land and taxi into a totally crap place.

I find most people that post on here lack any real credibility but I will fly with anyone that wants to show up with there cub and prove my point!

Cubdriver2 totally proves my point with his set up.
 
Finally, pulled out the Smoking gun!
[emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787]
 
18856AC9-6F9C-402D-9641-5D3B75140E19.jpg
Roughest flowers I ever landed on. Almost didn’t get back out as the blue bonnets damn near chewed my catto in two. Thank god for 35s. They are insurance for bad judgement;-)
 

Attachments

  • 18856AC9-6F9C-402D-9641-5D3B75140E19.jpg
    18856AC9-6F9C-402D-9641-5D3B75140E19.jpg
    130.6 KB · Views: 347
When you start talking about how big and bad rough and tumble all the strips you go into are tires become only a smaller part of the picture, important, but only a small part. Take fabric/paint and general aircraft condition, Are you going to drag a new 30,000 recover job into a strip with knee to waist high brush? How many alders are you going to drag that new leading edge through? Oh ya lets trim some brush/shrubs with that Cato prop. 35,s can handle it but will the rest of the plane? How much mud/rock do you really want to throw into the prop? If you even think twice about not getting them due to money, don't because unless you only land in wide open spaces the rest of the carnage to the plane is going to cost quite a bit every year. Mission, mission, mission.
DENNY

1fb0cad4e16551081975cb9fc8d47257.jpg

Third landing after the rebuild. Guess there’s something wrong with me. Now it’s just an old supercub again.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Let there be no doubt. Greg sets the standard. He is the stud the rest of wish we were. He USES his 35’s. The rest of just brag about them.

Bill
 
Well nice picture but that does not really show what a 35 is capable of rolling over.

Surely it’s just an illusion created by the 35’s. The rocks in the photo may be larger than they appear.

Maybe the tires should come with a disclaimer “the objects you may now safely roll over are larger than they appear”[emoji1787][emoji1787] “they may also inflate some egos, and have been known to cause jealousy” [emoji1787][emoji1787]
 
It is true, Loni worked the 31" tires to the max. He is a truly gifted cub pilot. I bet Loni would hate to be back on 31" tires.
 
Surely it’s just an illusion created by the 35’s. The rocks in the photo may be larger than they appear.

Maybe the tires should come with a disclaimer “the objects you may now safely roll over are larger than they appear”[emoji1787][emoji1787] “they may also inflate some egos, and have been known to cause jealousy” [emoji1787][emoji1787]

It is true 35 do make bigger rocks look small.
In Big Rocks Vol. 1 I placed a basket ball in one of the gravel bar's I landed to show size of rocks. When I was turning around I blew the ball into the river. You can hardly see it happen so I don't think I ever mentioned it. That basket ball looked like a softball and sometimes like a base ball compared to the size of the rocks.
 
Last edited:
I was out at Ultima Thule Lodge several years ago for the Geo Cache and saw the places Paul, Loni and Hank landed on 35s. :drool: No way we was going in there with 90 hp and 31s. It was interesting when we got back from the Geo Cache and getting ready to go to Valdez for the STOL Contest. All the 35s and Baby Bushwheels came off and 31s and Scott 3200s went on. Different mission different equipment.
101_9258.jpg

101_9260.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 101_9258.jpg
    101_9258.jpg
    69 KB · Views: 3,228
  • 101_9260.jpg
    101_9260.jpg
    124.8 KB · Views: 2,299
It is true 35 do make bigger rocks look small.
In Big Rocks Vol. 1 I placed a basket ball in one of the gravel bar's I landed to show size of rocks. When I was turning around I blew the ball into the river. You can hardly see it happen so I don't think I ever mentioned it.

I remember that. Did put the size of the rocks in perspective.
 
It is true 35 do make bigger rocks look small.
In Big Rocks Vol. 1 I placed a basket ball in one of the gravel bar's I landed to show size of rocks. When I was turning around I blew the ball into the river. You can hardly see it happen so I don't think I ever mentioned it.

I have all of your videos and refer to them often. I was amazed at what the first set of 35’s EVER would absorb in regards to size of rocks (boulders) that they could roll over with ease. The reduced shock to the airframe alone is probably worth the price (although I do wish that the were less expensive), plus as was mentioned above, they wear at least 2:1 over 31’s, and possibly 3:1.
 
This was the post I put out this morning and lost. A good moderator found it for me!

If you have not used a 35" tire you can not imagine the difference between it and a 31". AOSS is not that great compared to what is out there now and really never worked that great. LOOK and see how much your AOSS moves when you rock the airplane and you can see it is not sucking up anything. You can run a 35" tire at 2 psi try that with a 31" tire and it is flat and will cut into the brake disc.


The 35" tire will outlast the 31" tire by I bet twice the amount of pavement landings because of rolling diameter (replacement of tires goes down). I always thought that Alaskan Bushwheel hurt there business buy making the tire because once you bought a set they last forever vs a 31" and they are not that much more per tire. The tires also span a lot bigger hole, easier on gear attach points and hardware.

I just replaced my 35" tires with just guessing 20K landings or more. They are not worn out, no cords are showing, in fact I bet they have at least half the tread they came with. They were just checked so bad and in places the Stan's tire sealant was coming out so I decided it was time (15 years on them). First 35" tires ever built!

Yes most people will do fine with a 31", but those same guys will benefit from the 35" if they misread a spot from lack of experience. I know for a fact and saw the tundra still attached to the cabane vee that one guy got away with landing a spot he would not have on 31" tires. He could barely get the airplane rolling again it was so rough, almost needed a helicopter to retrieve that airplane. He was a high time float plane pilot and a good stick with really almost zero off airport tire experience. Saved his airplane for sure that is a fact! I watched Loni land places that a 35" would have worked much better. I also watched Loni replace gear bushings, gear bolts. I was also landing some places he would not. As soon as the 35" was legal he had 35" tires on his cub.

For those on the fence about the extra cost I say it is worth it. If you are anal about the weight and don't need them buy a 31" tire it is a great tire.
As for a 42" tire, I have not heard of that being in the works, maybe that is just a joke. Would I run out and buy a 42" tire, probably not.

By the way I measured my old 35" tire standing without weight on them when I pulled them off my cub and they measure almost 39" tall with probably around 3 psi.

This is my last one on the 35 tires I think I have made my bias pretty well known
:lol:
 
Not 2 psi, not on an off camber spot and not the typical set up you see with a 31" bushwheel. Also your brakes probably suck!

My brakes will stay locked till 2300 rpm or skid first. Some of us don't run out and buy the lasted and greatest when we can't figure out how to get things to work.

Glenn
 
Back
Top