Jerry Gaston said:...
And no dope does not weigh more... :roll:
Jerry Gaston wrote:
...
And no dope does not weigh more...
supercubber said:Who the heck owns the two cubs coming in at 1300+ lbs?
Noel Nunley said:My Exp. SC weighs 1074. It has O-290, Clevelands, 26" Goodyears, battery under pilots seat, light weight oil cooler and basic AK mods. As I recall, my PA-11-90 with two 18 gal tanks and big baggage weighed about 785. It was amazing what that cub would do.
supercubber said:In Louisiana I don't think it matters much, heard cubs turn into rust buckets in short order down there. 8)
T Willson said:...am leaning toward more power, but lower fuel consumption would be great... Tim
T Willson said:Noel, aside from the exp. vs certified situation, which of these cubs would you prefer to fly on an average day? Does the extra power make up for the weight gain? I am starting an exp. cub and even after reading nearly every post on this forum for a couple of years I am still struggling with the engine choice question. I am at 4500 feet with mountains up over 10000 ft. so am leaning toward more power, but lower fuel consumption would be great. It sounds like people with little cubs tend to love them but the high alt. worries me.
I would appreciate input from anyone.
Oh, the primary use would be pleasure, but short field performance is definitely a plus . Thanks, Tim
Steve Pierce said:945 pounds. L18C with C-90-12, B&C starter, heavy generator, safety cables, Micro VGs, Cleveland wheels and brakes, 8.50 tires, Microair radio, Hawker battery under front seat, rear under seat storage, OP/OT, AS, Alt, Tach, Elect T&B, map pocket, small fire extinguisher, headerless fuel system and Scott 3200 tailwheel. Stock wings and fuselage covered in Stits. Left and right wing tanks. Seems heavy to me for a 90hp. Am building one to be super light.