Top cub v. Husky

I know this topic has been beaten to death. I am making a decision in the near future between and Cubcrafters Top Cub and a new 180 hp Husky. My flying will be mostly in the brush coutry of South Texas with the occassional dirt road or pasture landing and in the mountains of Colorado (thousand foot strip at 8,000 foot altitude).

At least a three or four times a year I will be doing relatively long (400-700 mile) single day cross countries.

Most of the flying will be low and slow looking at game.

We owned a 180 hp supercub that was otherwise stock until about 8 years ago. Obviously I still miss it. Never should have sold it.

There is a lot of Husky bashing here, but what is the real drawback other than the lack of a jackscrew trim?

Well here we go again.

Top Cub or Husky

G-2 is that you?

How about a widebody cub check your pm or www.warrenaircraft.com

Scot

The Top Cub has a larger GW/useful load.

The two airplanes are pretty different. Quality and workmanship is pretty similar.

The Husky has a definite speed advantage, 20 mph greater to be specific, while burning about 1.5 or 2 gallons per hour less fuel than a 180 Cub. On those long trips, that is a huge difference.

At high density altitudes, as you describe, there is no comparison: The Husky is a far better performer at very high DA.

The Husky is a little harder to stuff into tight places, but you didn't say you were planning on spending a lot of time landing in marginal strips.

As to low level observation, they both work fine. The new Husky wing really improves its handling in this mode.

With the parameters you noted, I'd choose the Husky. Actually, I did, and never looked back.

But, again, it really depends what you want the airplane to do.

MTV

When I changed from a SuperCub to a Husky in 1998, the decision was easy. I was getting a newly certified airframe, with 180 HP CSP that would travel 20-30 MPH faster.

Today, the decision would be more difficult. The workmanship on both is good. Performance is similiar in most areas. The Husky will still travel faster and perform most short/slow tasks as well. There is a Husky that just came out of the factory and after receiving some surgery, will weigh in around 1,250 with AK Bushwheels, so you can get them fairly light.

I like the feel of flying the Husky (personal preference). It seems to me I fit it better and I feel more a part of the machine....if that makes sense. Once you get used to the trim system in the Husky, you won't miss the jackscrew. I actually like it.

All in all, it really comes down to personal preference. You can only hope that you always have as good of choices to make in your purchase decisions.

Good luck in whatever you choose.

From my experience you can get more stuff in an extended baggage SC than a Husky.

So is it six and one half dozen or the other?

Some other realistic advantages of the cub. After market products are available. Gear change overs are cheaper. It is easier for a recreational pilot like me (125 hours per year) to land a cub and has a shorter learning curve. There are more options available to customize a cub to your liking. Stu at Aviat!!
Can you name even one Husky pilot that you would consider to be cool?
But, if those flight characteristics are still more important to you go and buy the darn Husky.

I had the chance to fly both last summer on several days on floats and on wheels. It was weird how it worked out, but it did.

As much as I hate to say it,,,

The Husky is a better float plane. Faster in cruise, better take-off for some reason and you can make up for their crappy flaps by slipping.

For a long distance cruising plane: the Husky is better since it is faster and burns less fuel due to the constant speed prop.

Comfort wise: I liked the Cub better. The Huskys that I have flown had fixed location seats. In the wrong spot for me... Although they were those great Oregon Aero seats.
Plus I did not like to high panels in the Husky. But that may be aircraft specific.

For really getting into a very short field on Wheels: The Cub smoked the Husky like a cheap cigar. It was most noticable when having to descend over an obstacle to make the end of the gravel bar, clearing or strip.

MCA: Same thing, the Cub can change the entire AOA due to the jackscrew trim moving the horizontal stabilizer.

The Husky trim system stinks like Brown Bear poop.

But that is flying in my area, with the type of flying I do...

If you are trolling over farm fields and dry lake beds, there is probably not much chance that you may need to slip down the face of a Glacier.

How do the comparative prices stack up??

Christina Young said:

So is it six and one half dozen or the other?

Click to expand...

Blasphemer! Infidel! How dare you utter such things on a SUPER CUB forum?

OK, I'm kidding. I have neither, so why don't I shut up?

Personally, I'd buy neither. If I wanted a Cub - and I *do* - I'd buy a genuine Piper PA-18, not a CC version. In fact, I'd find a wide-body to fit *my* wide body into. I'd probably stick with a 150 or 160 hp model, so as to get away from the extra weight of the vibration dampener on the 360 engine. (Yes, I know all about the MT propeller, thank you).

When I move away from a lowly Champ, I'll probably buy either a Scout or an old C-180, depending upon how badly I want to be in debt. A CC Cub is beyond my reach. Even older A-1 Huskies are a bit rich; not enough Bang for the buck, I think.

Jon B.

Alex,
Jump on one of those Oregon Aero seats in February and tell me what you think about them.

Good grief JB...ask brother Dan about the Scout...you know there was a reason he traded for the Husky. Are you a glutton for punishment?

Brad

ground loop said:

...
Can you name even one Husky pilot that you would consider to be cool?
...

Click to expand...

Mike Vivion, AKA MTV, seems pretty darn cool...

But yes, I get the point. Super Cubs, and Super Cub pilots, ARE the coolest!

Ground Loop.

I used to be married to a gal from Fort Yukon. I know about cold...

Alex







xx

Wow we have become a kinder and gentler community.It seems of late that we are talking huskys with civility.Seems like they are even convincing the cub crowd that the husky outperforms the cub.Lots of the cub people have been stating that the husky outperforms the cub on floats.I need to see this, i have yet to see a husky on floats beat a 180 cub off with the big prop.Could be,just never seen it.I hope to at greenville.If the cubs blow doors again at greenville i will know.Aviat should be sending their factory demo pilot there to prove it,or even the local dealer.The previous years they didnt even whip the pa 12's.

Alex,

Oh, yeah, you know cold :lol: !! That's a tough place, and I go there a fair bit.

Oregon Aero seats warm up pretty well in cold, even better when you put heat pads in them 8) .

Note that the man's question was a CC airplane vs Husky, not a Super Cub. Therefore, after market stuff doesn't apply, cause none of the Cub stuff is approved on the CC airplanes.

Alex, there are a couple of panel configurations available on the Husky, I agree with you, though that the "square" panel sucks. That's what I'm facing at present.

The trick to getting a Husky down is pull it back to about 55 to 57 mph indicated, and watch it come down. Fully controllable, and if you use the trim, all you have to do to float is push forward a hair on the stick. If you try approaches at 60, though, it'll float forever, at least on wheels.

The biggest difficulty in off airport stuff with the Husky on wheels is that to really get it slowed down, you have to get the nose up on short short final, and its hard to see over the nose. I use a slight forward slip, and fly a bit of a curve to landing (sorta like instructing from the back seat in a Cub) to keep the spot in sight till just prior to touch. Otherwise, its just a matter of learning to work the airplane. Big tires helps, but its still a little more challenge to get in a tight spot.

The CC airplanes have really good useful load, though, so if that's your game.....

I agree that its tough to get LONG stuff in a Husky baggage. That said, I can fold the rear seat down, and the whole rear seat and baggage compt are open and one compartment without the pesky Cub rear seat brace. Try getting three 15 gallon poly drums in a Cub sometime. If you have LONG stuff, though, its hard to fit in the Husky. That's why we do external loads :lol: .

Pricewise, they're pretty close.

Cool?? Hardly. Old, maybe.... ......

MTV

I think this really is relative to the discussion: How much is "cool" worth? I mean, don't you think its worth about $50K or so in a general aviation plane?

Last year, I was cruising around in my little Cessna 140. I was going almost everywhere a Super Cub would go. And it only cost me 5 gallons an hour and a sticker price of $20K. It even had more room than a Super Cub (I still haven't figured out how to get access to behind my Super Cub instruments - in the C-140 I would just lay on my back in the cockpit). But guess what? It wasn't "cool" enough. So, now I'm doing almost exactly the same thing, only I have 5 times as much invested.

Is cool a big deal. Yeah, it is. Because if it wasn't, I think we'd all be flying champs and Citabrias and C-140's and Stinsons and Scouts and C-170's, etc....

Super Cubs only do specific things exceptionally well, and most of us just don't use them to their ability. We use them to be cool in doing something that is already cool (flying!)

Anyway, figure that into the Husky vs Top Cub equation. A Top Cub is inherently cooler than a Husky.

I would rather have a ratty looking $55,000 PA-18-150 sitting on a short gravel bar in the middle of nowhere, than a $155,000 Husky or CC Cub sitting in a hanger because I was afraid to get it banged up.

For as much money as some people pour into high-end Cubs and Neo-Cubs, they could buy a really nice C-185 on floats.

The best gravel bar landing I have EVER seen was made by a guy in a 90-horse Champ that cost him $16,000.


It reminds me of the time I went to Long Island New York to visit my son at the Merchant Marine Academy.

I saw several gals driving huge 4x4 SUVs to the store. They were all wearing hiking boots and ranger shorts. Since they were not in down-town Manhattan they thought of themselves as being in the country and this was apparently the trendy thing to drive and wear. The fact that it was the middle of summer and there was nothing but paved streets for a few hundred miles never entered their minds.

They were paying big bucks to appear cool.


Go buy a beater cub for low and slow cattle herding or critter watching. With the money you save , you can go out and get a nice 170 or 172 for the long cross country trips and someone may actually be comfortable enough to want to go along with you.

Then you will be a two plane pilot,,,,,now how cool is that???

I only wish I could fly a Husky once a week or so - with that said, I have the best of both worlds: a Cub and a Super Decathlon. The Deck is fun to fly - far more so than a Champ or Citabria - but in the pattern, I'll take the Cub for harmony of controls and just plain enjoyment. The Husky, when flown on approach at 55, is great fun. The Champion series is far less expensive, and faster for equivalent horsepower, and more comfortable, and flies upside down (some of them), but they are not Cubs or Huskies.

Alex, you and I are on the same page, totally agree with everything you said! Substance over image....... substance can be a status symbol too! There are no pilots I admire more than those real guide / bush guys like the Ellis', McMahon, etc, that can take those old beat up "has-been" 150HP cubs to the gnarliest, most amazing places and make them sing! The planes themselves reek of "been there, done that"!

I agree, get a "been there, done that" cub that you aren't afraid to bruise a little and spend the extra money to "cruise" to places in style - in a Stinson! :lol:

Christina Young said:

...There are no pilots I admire more than those real guide / bush guys like the Ellis'...

Click to expand...

Gee - that wouldn't be Kirk's new widebody body with a 180hp (or is it 150hp??) that you were referring to as a "old beat up "has-been" 150HP cubs" would it??

Heee heee hee...... maybe they're getting more image-conscious?

Cubus Maximus said:

Good grief JB...ask brother Dan about the Scout...you know there was a reason he traded for the Husky. Are you a glutton for punishment?

Brad

Click to expand...

Glutton for punishment? Me? Hell yes. Bring it on; I can take it!

At the risk of reinforcing the dreaded "Thread Creep"...

I can think of only a couple reasons for Dan buying the Husky rather than keeping the scout:

1.) Useful load was higher *when on amphibs*. A little higher on wheels but not a huge difference.

2.) He didn't like the Scout when dirtied up and slow on approach. He said it felt as though the elevator was 'underpowered'. Maybe he didn't use enough engine power to keep the tail energized; I can't say. I can say that he's not (to my knowledge) big on dragging it in, slowly, under power. He's got more time now in the Husky, so maybe he's become more aggressive. If he'd have bought a Cub, he'd have felt comfy low & slow, eh?

And besides, it was there at Wip-Aire, all set up and ready to float & fly.

A couple things that would make me think about trading:

1.) More gas in standard 'tankage' configuration - 50 vs. 35 gallons. The Scout can go to 70-72 gallons, though. That's a heap of gas! Eat yer heart out tptailwheel.(Tom has only 61 gallons in the -12) Of course, with 72 gallons of gas, you can't carry yourself; you have to fly by remote control...

2.) Better landing gear - triangular tube structure vs. spring gear. I think it'd be easy to wipe out the Scout gear with a side-load; like the Cessnas.

I know that for quite a while, he kicked himself for trading. He may be over that these days.

In my case, it ain't my airplane that limits where I can and can't fly into and out of. That loose nut at the top of the stick needs to be tightened.

Jon B.

Christina Young said:

Heee heee hee...... maybe they're getting more image-conscious?

Click to expand...

Image conscious shimimage conscious.......why is it so difficult for folks to understand that the difference between a $50K cub and a $150K cub is $100K of accumulated depreciation.

Equipment that gets used regularly is going to have to be replaced eventually. I gotta believe that someone as sharp as Kirk is going to replace his equipment with new and improved gear that will get the job done better. But who knows, maybe I'm just having another logic attack....

"Can you name even one Husky pilot that you would consider to be cool?"

Harrison Ford
Alan Jackson

Gunny said:

Image conscious shimimage conscious.......why is it so difficult for folks to understand that the difference between a $50K cub and a $150K cub is $100K of accumulated depreciation.

Click to expand...

And into your financial analysis you can also figure insurance, higher cost of repairs for this kind of flying, etc......

Is it really three times as good at getting the job done as the old cub? How much additional value do his customers get for their money for the flying part of their hunting trip?

Top Cub v. Husky

When I started this thread, I didn't expect such an euthusiastic response. I don't disagree with the statement that a beater cub offers just as much utility and enjoyment as the high dollar options. I am trading an airplane that puts me closer to the Husky and the Top Cub than a beater. I already have another airplane for traveling long distances, so trading for a beater and another airplane like a Cessna 180 doesn't make since. My thought is that a Husky, Top Cub or even a primo rebuilt SuperCub is much cheaper to maintain and own than the T210 I am getting rid of.

Basically, I really miss stick and rudder flying. I had more fun screwing off in our old 180 hp cub than in any other airplane.

A few of you may remember how hard I was trying to find a Super Cub for puchase on this site this past winter. I set specific requirements (in terms of condition, time on airframe and engine, and features). I also set a price range of $50 to $70K. And I hit Barnstormers, the local papers, and Trade-A-Plane hard (three to five times a day). You know what I found? A lot junk. You guys can talk-up the old beaters as being diamonds if you want. But I just was not willing to buy into someone else's junk.

I ended up jumping on a barely used (and therefore not used up) 1981 Super Cub with a new Cub Crafters O-360 for $95K and I've since put $7K into bush mods for it. Did I overspend? I don't think so. I think I got a plane that will not give me any problems for years to come.

By the way, I don't agree that flying in the bush means beating up your plane. But the risks are higher for an accident, I will agree with that.

Kirk Ellis Super Cub: