SC vs. 7GCBC ?

The one I owned years ago was with field approval; trying to do it since was told engineering would have to be done? As to my comment on structural, I wasn't referring to that in ref to either door; just have seen several broken and would be a simple fix to improve it. I have repaired a couple that gave out at the bottom front of the door, and seemed like such a large door opening could use some improvement.

I looked this SA3-322 up. There is no reference as to whether it is multiple use or one only. For someone who is interested it would be worthwhile to either find Mr Kunde or to contact the Chicago ACO.

Incidentally I used to work for an engineer who worked for Aeronca when the Sedan was designed. He told me that he was instructed to design the Sedan around the use of the Champ door. It seems that Aeronca had a large supply of doors in inventory to use up.

Works great! Can fly with it open and everything.

Pete, I saw on another site where Mr Kunde has past away .





Here is another one quite nicely done.................. Great pictures Tom thanks for posting. Is that your machine?

Tom,
How does the paperwork address your door? FA on a 337, STC, minor alteration in the log book?

skywagon8a said:

Tom,
How does the paperwork address your door? FA on a 337, STC, minor alteration in the log book?

Click to expand...

Field approved in the mid 90's if I remember correctly. They also put a left side citabria window and citabria heater too.

TurboBeaver said:

...Pete, I saw on another site where Mr Kunde has past away .

Click to expand...

In that case one needs to look up an heir and/or go to the ACO.

I agree with the apples and oranges thoughts.
I fly a 7GCB with Scout gear on it and an 82/41 Borer prop. I will be the first to admit it's not a SC. However I have about 50k less invested in my Champ! It still does a great job on wheel, skis or on Edo 2000s and I have been able to haul the same loads, or darn close to, the Guys with the SUper Cub,

So if we're comparing a $100,000.00 Sc to a $40,000.00 Citabria or Challenger like I fly you're not being fair to yourself.
Now, if I had 100k to invest in an airplane, I'd own a Cessna 180, and that will definitely haul more than a SC.

But, you're still comparing apples and oranges!!!!

So I guess it comes down to whether you like apples.................. Or oranges! Lol

Dody,
That sounds like a very nice outfit, you got a nice light airplane , you got the flaps, the good gear and the right prop. What you cant do , that can be done in a SC is really getting into splitting frogs hairs.............. like someone said earlier in the thread , a champ rib is not a cub rib and it does NOT develop as much lift at low speeds , however it is pretty easy to get totally carried away with that line of thinking; As really the sorta person that needs that type of utility; and the ultimate STOL performance, is certainly not the avg owner, When I see guys landing on dead flat 800ft sandbars, on 35" tires that you could easily land twice with that GCB on 8:50s, it does crack me up.
Ditto on landing in 3-4" of snow and calling it a foot, again with $4000 tires and a $200.000 Super Cub; and I am thinking gosh a guy could do that in a $12,ooo Tcraft on 6:00 x6 tires , it gets a little silly . When I was guiding I HAD to have a Super Cub, because we were always pushing, what even the cub was capable of doing , However if your not doing that , the fact of the matter is, you certainly don't need a quarter of a million dollar Cub to land on a sandbar with $4000 tires on it. Granted it is one hell of a cool looking outfit, and if you can afford one , I am "all for it", Hey just the pride of ownership; would be great.. But it sure as heck doesn't mean that is the only aircraft that is capable of landing there ....................... Champs have always been a really good compromise airplane and have some great attibutes. I think they are fantastic bang for the buck and offer a lot of performance for the money, pretty much unbeatable for the dollar spent. If your a dyed in the wool Cub guy that's great too, weather you need one or can really fly it, isn't evidently that important at all , its an image thing and I understand that completely,My only gribe is these lounge pilots hanging around the airports , comparing airplanes that they know very little about either one ??............... unfortunately they are entitled to their own opinion......................

TB,
Youre right on the money with your opinion.
Its like two guys going to the Fleet Farm store. One says I only buy slip on boots. The other guy says I only wear lace up boots! Or I only like this shot gun or that rifle!

Well, they made plenty of Super Cubs, and they made plenty of Champs!
Theyre not all still sitting at the factory so someone must have liked them! Lol

I put almost 300 or more hours on my 7ec 90hp champ. I could go most places my cub buddies could go. Getting out was the hard part. Oh and you wanted to carry something besides myself. Haha that's funny. I learned a lot about flying. I have a 160 hp Supercub now. I can go everywhere I could in my champ, but with all my camping gear and someone else. It's gets really fun when I have nothing in the cub. Two totally different airplanes. I had a lot of fun in the old champ. Doesn't like two people and full fuel in the summer. Climbs better with the doors and windows closed on that day.

It was amusing landing on sandbars and hills on 800x6's where the super Cubs on bushwheels landed.

In my eyes the big thing is practicing in the airplane you're flying. I could take the champ in the places some people couldn't get there Supercubs into but I was flying a lot, slow flight and spot landings weekly.



I couldn't take the champ where I take the cub now, and I love my super cub. Champ is still fun to fly. You get used to power and performance of the cub.

Tom,
Just for interests sake, how do you think your old 7EC
Would perform if you took your 160hp engine and Borer
Prop and bolted them onto the face of it?? Now add a set
Of 30" tires , do you think you would struggle to get out
Then, or have trouble hauling a passenger and camping
Gear? I had one rigged up that way in Alaska and it got
Off light in 150' and would hold the vsi right at 1500fpm
Until the cly head temps , said knock it off! If you back up
To apples to apples and flew yours against a Pa 18/95 with
Regular prop, elec system so you both weighed the same ,your
Going to find a lot of similar limitations...........

I have a little time in a pa-18-105 same empty weight as my champ and same tires too. The 105 flew like my 160, just didn't get off as good or climb as good. Defiantly did better than the champ. I only have a few landings in the 105 but from those, it did better than the champ. For the most part people are not using sc's for getting in and out of tiny places, and a gcbc would do fine. I have a bunch of time towing banners in a 7gcbc with a fixed pitch 180hp. Got off pretty short and cruised at 130-140 depending on how much power you wanted to push in. And it would get in and out pretty good. Not as good as the cub but close. Was nice to be able to cruise down fast, set up the banner pull it slow and haul ass back home. Only had 36 gal tanks which was good for 3 hrs and you better be on the ground. That's if you leaned it.

One other thing to consider is legal mods to a certified airplane. Want to put an extended baggage in a -18? No problem, multiple options. Citabria? Good luck. Extended gear? Who do you feel like buying them from, cub crafters, atlee airframes, citabria? Want to put a cargo pod on? What do you want, firman, airglass fuel/ cargo, or straight fuel. Citabria, again out of luck. It all boils down to what do you want to do with the plane.

Good post Tom , there are very few airplanes that offer the latitude as a Super Cub when it comes to mods, from that respect it would be impossble to beat a cub. I think the extended gear is still a go because American Champion offers it as a kit to upgrade to Scout gear legs. But for mods the PA18 has more than any plane I can think of . Good point. Funny even with all the mods available so many guys that own cubs are moving over into
the experimental ones to get away from the legality of flying a certified airplane. Too bad it has come to that . Over regulating general aviation is what pretty much killed it in Canada and looks like we are well on our way here as well. I my lifetime I have seen the time when 500 signatures would get a lot of attention, I think that the AOPA and EAA have around 27,000 signatures now on their latest endeavor and looks like in todays climate in Washington that doesn't mean squat................... had a fella tell me yesterday, if that number was 270,000, they would react exactly the same as they have. I guess its come to the point they don't have to answer to anyone, seams like Senators and Congessmen cant seam to even control them at this point.................... looks like they run this government depts. the same as Hoover ran the FBI for years. [However he wanted to] Doggone shame it has to be this way.

Now a days, experimental is the way to go in my opinion, seems like the faa and local FSDO don't want to help with anything, if I had no intentions of flying for "hire" I would have experimental. Wouldn't be bad if they were willing to help with field approvals. Thread drift over..

THREAD POLICE
After todays anouncement on the new bill II, maybe 27,000 signitures do count. How about that part were they got 180 days and if they dont Like it , it becomes law anyway!!! Getter done!

RaisedByWolves said:

Now a days, experimental is the way to go in my opinion, seems like the faa and local FSDO don't want to help with anything, if I had no intentions of flying for "hire" I would have experimental. Wouldn't be bad if they were willing to help with field approvals. Thread drift over..

Click to expand...

Do you mean to tell me that Pierce doesn't have the local FSDO wrapped around his little finger yet?

I have gotten one field approval, which is one more than I have ever got before

"In my eyes the big thing is practicing in the airplane you're flying."

^^^^^ tru ' dat

RaisedByWolves said:

...Want to put an extended baggage in a -18? No problem, multiple options. Citabria? Good luck. ...

Click to expand...

just make it a clamp in mod.... minor.. did it with my PMI's direction even moved battery to firewall (Scout, later factory model moved batter, referenced their blueprint).. only field approval he had to do was for the battery itself SBJ16 or whatever...

Hello everyone,

First time posting and just signed up to learn to fly. Turning 50 and lessons were my birthday present to myself. I live in Alaska and literally see SC and 7gcbc's etc taking off from my office window all day long. There goes one now!

Anyway, like most new flyers Im full of questions and little if any answers. I want to be able to access the vast areas of this state with a "bush plane". The SC's are all starting at $70k and up and out of my price range. I found this which is in my budget;

1969 Citabria 7GCBC w1398 ttaf and 759 smoh. 0-320-A2B,Fresh top end with annual done 10-28-14. 31 inch Bush wheels and Scott 3200 tail wheel. Nice Panel with King KY-125 Nav Com. Ebc -102 elt. New Odysee Battery. vor-tex generators, Anti Collision Whelen Strobe. Pilot harness, Skis and fittings, Wood spar, Flown so hours will change. $36,500

But based on all the comments, it seems that this plane may have a limited stol capabilities. Is there someone here that could definitively say, the $70k SC will land(assume some apples to apples criteria) in x feet and take off in x feet, while the plane listed above would do x and x(in ballpark terms)? and also how much weight can they carry? I stopped and looked at the plane listed above and Im 6ft 225 and it seemed a dwarf and a box of Kleenex would fill up the rest of the plane. So how will it pull home a moose? plus camp gear, raft antlers, cape etc.

Please don't trounce the new guy!

picture of plane listed above

Hi! I totally understand your interest and inthusiasm! However, try hard to focus on learning to fly and getting your licence first. Then get good tailwheel/bush plane instruction from a top knotch outfit on their plane. Keep your eyes and ears tuned. To do the above will require considerable effort and attention. After this, you'll be in a much better position to search for a plane to buy in comparison to now. If you do the above, it could save you considerable dollars and grief. Get good training with an instructor that's inthusiastic and enjoys teaching. Make it a fun process. Nothing like flying! Enjoy!

Welcome Hughiam.
Go for it. You are a big fellow, you will find that you will be more comfortable learning in the 7GCBC, which is more roomy getting in and out of, and while in flight. It is a good airplane which, all things being equal, will not get in and out as well as a Cub. However for the time being while you are learning to fly, spend the extra money on gasoline. You can trade for a Cub later down the road once you actually do start to go into the tiny patches if you wish. There are ways to get more out of the 7GCBC which will make it almost Cub like. You can address that later.

Good luck Fly safe!

skywagon8a said:

Welcome Hughiam.
Go for it. You are a big fellow, you will find that you will be more comfortable learning in the 7GCBC, which is more roomy getting in and out of, and while in flight. It is a good airplane which, all things being equal, will not get in and out as well as a Cub. However for the time being while you are learning to fly, spend the extra money on gasoline. You can trade for a Cub later down the road once you actually do start to go into the tiny patches if you wish. There are ways to get more out of the 7GCBC which will make it almost Cub like. You can address that later.

Good luck Fly safe!

Click to expand...

I'd second that approach with one caveat: Make sure that the plane has enough useful load to accommodate you, an instructor, fuel, and survival gear before purchasing it. If that condition is met, get it and learn in it. When one has enough time and experience that the 7GCBC is truly the limiting factor on where you can go, then look at an SC.

I suspect most of the members on this forum are at least if not more competent as their A/C, but to me the key element of successful flying has always been for the pilot's skills to meet or exceed the aircraft limitations. Many times the aircraft is more capable than the pilot can truly utilize.

Hughiam

Hey man, welcome aboard. Lots of great folks on this site. Best of luck with your flight training. It will open a whole new world.

Bill

Hughium,
Just for fun here is a good way to give you some prospective on this, it is common for folks to compare these, two airplanes and they are
Constantly comparing Cubs with extended gear legs, and extended baggages, with Borer props , big tires, to a factory Citabria with a landing gear height (way too short) when on tires that drastically limits the planes ability to perform to its true potential, So that allows the Cub a HUGE, advantage to begin with, because the champ wing just does NOT produce as much lift as a CUB wing at low airspeeds.
So now lets flip this all around and make another sort of a different kind of comparison, Lets now take a standard unmodified PA18, standard gear, regular 74/56 propeller ,standard 150hp engine, stock exhust, and 6:00 x 6 tires; flat out vanilla cub, (very similar set up to how they are always comparing the Citabria)and put a private pilot with 300 hrs total time(thats right where they all think they are Chuck Yeager) that weights 225 same as you do , then you take that GCBC your looking at in Palmer with those big 30" tires and borer type of prop, and fly over to a sand bar and have a few TO s and I think you will be pleasently surprised what you find out................:lol:. now of course this isnt fair either, however, my point is, if you give the champ wing more AOA than the cub and take away his borer prop, he could then find himself missing two extreamely important elements, for his planes great performance.:-(
The actual "difference" in how short the two planes could be landed , is a number like 50/100 ft, those are numbers you would have no bussiness considering for many years, so that is actually a moot point anyway.....If you cant afford a $70k cub, and lots of folks cant. The old GCBC, will get you down the road fine forr years to come, However when you put it on Skis unless you install (Scout) longer gear legs, is going to be toooo flat , and be way short on AoA, so bear that in mind. On those 30" tires it is sitting "just right", and will do a great job on them.
With all this said, if I need to fly off the side of a mountain and we only have 150' I am getting in the cub, but is that a practical situation you should consirn your self with? I sorta doubt it.............
Could you load up in Anchorage and fly a GCBC down to Lake Illiamna and land it on the beach at upper Telarik Ck and catch some Rainbows,Just the same as guys do in a $100k cub? You sure can! Ditto on landing it on a ridge top in the tundra and shooting a Caribou, and still have $50k in the bank! So dont get too into all these storys about what a pig a Citabria is and how vastly superior a Cub is, as this is almost always coming out of someone, that actually knows very little ,about a Citabria with a 80" prop and 30" tires. If you NEED a Super Cub, for a specific sorta of mission, and can fly it to its full potential,then your going to need to buy one. However if your not in that situation; then the airplane you are looking into will give you lots of years fun flying! Good luck on your purchase if you
Buy it, and fly safe
E

Thanks all for the useful and common sense answers. While I have dreams after watching the videos on Youtube of landing in 25' shooting the new world record 45" dall sheep and diving headlong off a cliff, I think Im more likely to do as was mentioned above, fly to a lake, land on a beach. Land on the tundra and hunt boo and moose. I want something big enough for me and my daughter(wife not keen on flying in "those little things") to get out in the wild areas.

The flight school mentioned that I could learn on their plane and then get a tail wheel class or simply fly in my own plane(assuming its a tail wheel). Any thoughts on one over the other? It seems to me, learn in what you will use is smarter than a rented rig, but again, im like a puppy in a field of fire hydrants and don't know where to go first.

You would be paying off your plane instead of his while your learning to fly.

Glenn