Results 1 to 29 of 29

Thread: Difference between PA-18 and PA-12

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Wappingers Falls
    Posts
    33
    Post Thanks / Like

    Difference between PA-18 and PA-12

    A few newbie questions for you guys if I may ask them...

    I was wondering how different the PA-12 Super Cruiser is from the PA-18 Super Cub in regards to how it flies and handles.

    The Super Cruisers appear to cost less money than the Super Cubs? Why might that be?

    Thanks. Just trying to learn some more as I dream about buying one or the other.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    520
    Post Thanks / Like
    It costs less cause its a fat cub....lol I think by the time you add mods to the PA-12 to have just like what a Stock Supercub already comes with; I.E. Flaps, external bungee landing gear, 150 HP, door thats split. You would have spent the same amount of money total, And even then the Super Cub will land and take off better. But thats comparing a PA-12 to a later version of the PA-18. You can do a Search and find all sorts of great info to answer you questions.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Largo,Fl
    Posts
    74
    Post Thanks / Like
    JC It's all about mission. The -18 will do some things better than the -12. But you gotta ask yourself if you need that shorter landing or shorter takeoff? Go ahead and check SC.org out; there a lots of posts about both the -12 and the -18. My PA-12 is a really fun , forgiving airplane that will relieve a stress headache in about 5 minutes. (experience speaking) Forty six twelve took me up in his about 5 years ago and I found one to buy in about 3 months. Been real happy with it and wouldn't trade it or sell it. Good luck. Dave

  4. #4
    StewartB
    Guest

    Re: Difference between PA-18 and PA-12

    deleted

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Wappingers Falls
    Posts
    33
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thanks for the info everyone.

    I am in the process of getting my PPL and when it is time to buy my first plane I think I would like it to be a Super Cub (or some variation).

    You guys are living the dream.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    518
    Post Thanks / Like
    John,

    I wasn't living the dream until I bought my stock 12 just over a year ago. Even so, I didn't like it much when I first got it, but after 100+ hours and 250 landings I love the thing and wouldn't trade it for anything within reason. My airplane will fly for six hours with full tanks @ 6 gallons an hour, is simple and easy to own and operate, and encourages elbow-out-the-window aviating. The engine/airframe/prop combo is as smooth as a sewing machine and the old gal can do more than a waltz if you want her to. On the down side, it's pretty slow (but who cares?), is not really a three-place airplane unless you are hauling small kids or the Olsen twins, and it doesn't have the mystique of a Super Cub. In my humble opinion, heavily modified 12s aren't 12s at all, but SC wannabees that don't necessarily exhibit the best characteristics of either breed. If you need the better all around performance you get from a nice SC, don't go shopping for a 12. If most of your flying is for sh$%s and giggles, you could do a lot worse than the cheaper, simpler, roomier Super Cruiser.
    Likes Pete Schoeninger liked this post

  7. #7
    StewartB
    Guest
    deleted
    Likes Mander liked this post

  8. #8
    aktango58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    18AA
    Posts
    9,046
    Post Thanks / Like
    Oldbaldguy,


    so how was it with the olsen twins?


    The 12's fusalage creates lift, the 18 does not nearly as much.

    the 12 flies very fast for the power/load, unless you start modifying the landing gear; the 18 is slow.

    the 12 can carry two in the rear seat, cramped for adults.

    The 18 has better vis. out each side.

    everyone else covers some of the other info; but don't sell the champ family short either. I know this is the cub site, but dollar for dollar yo will find the Aeronca's tend to be a great flier, and if flying by yourself, or on strips 1,000+ feet long, they are great!
    I don't know where you've been me lad, but I see you won first Prize!

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    518
    Post Thanks / Like
    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! They were strangely dressed, more than a little scary and had no impact on the CG at all!

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    6,661
    Post Thanks / Like
    I was just about to disagree with 'tango above, being an owner of both a Cub and a Champ. But he does have a point.

    You can get a mid-time 7KCAB or 7GCBC for $30-$35 K. I believe that these are the most underpriced aircraft on the market for what they are. The Cub will teach you more, and has a much tighter feel on the runway in a big crosswind, but the Champ goes a lot faster (120 mph is not an unreasonable expectation) and is a lot roomier.

    If I could have only one, it would be a Cub, but they will pry the Super D from my cold dead hands. And it only cost $42K not so long ago . . . they tell me the J3 is worth more, although I only paid 1300 for it.

    If you maintain it, whatever it is, you will probably sell for more than you pay. I think I would skip the -12 and the 172, for now.
    Thanks JDWilliams thanked for this post

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Wappingers Falls
    Posts
    33
    Post Thanks / Like

    Luscombe vs Cubs and Champs

    As I look into this more I find myself more and more confused when trying to compare many of the stick driven taildraggers.

    I notice that the Luscombe 8 varies at a much lower price than the Cubs and Champs.

    For instance a Luscombe 8A is often seen in the $16,000 to $25,000 price range.

    Typically it has a small engine.

    The main difference is that you sit side by side with two sticks.

    It doesn't have the "coolness factor" of sitting in an open windowed Cub.

    Aside from that do the planes fly much differently?

    Perhaps this is something I won't fully understand until I actually fly a Cub.

  12. #12
    behindpropellers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    6,681
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Luscombe vs Cubs and Champs

    Quote Originally Posted by JC
    As I look into this more I find myself more and more confused when trying to compare many of the stick driven taildraggers.

    I notice that the Luscombe 8 varies at a much lower price than the Cubs and Champs.

    For instance a Luscombe 8A is often seen in the $16,000 to $25,000 price range.

    Typically it has a small engine.

    The main difference is that you sit side by side with two sticks.

    It doesn't have the "coolness factor" of sitting in an open windowed Cub.

    Aside from that do the planes fly much differently?

    Perhaps this is something I won't fully understand until I actually fly a Cub.
    Your kinda trying to compare a yugo to a jeep cherokee.

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    520
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Luscombe vs Cubs and Champs

    Quote Originally Posted by JC
    As I look into this more I find myself more and more confused when trying to compare many of the stick driven taildraggers.

    It doesn't have the "coolness factor" of sitting in an open windowed Cub.

    Perhaps this is something I won't fully understand until I actually fly a Cub.

    You might want to go flying period, a Cessna 152 has it's " Coolness" so don't bash a Luscombe because you have the windows closed. I suggest you go fly anything so you will "fully understand".

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    520
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Luscombe vs Cubs and Champs

    delete

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Wappingers Falls
    Posts
    33
    Post Thanks / Like
    You might want to go flying period, a Cessna 152 has it's " Coolness" so don't bash a Luscombe because you have the windows closed. I suggest you go fly anything so you will "fully understand".
    I definitely wasn't trying to bash the Luscombe. I saw some ads for them and figured I'd try to see what others thought of them. Some are really nice looking. Especially the polished aluminum ones. (Seen a lot of C-140's and 120's like them too.)



    Personally, I prefer the cubs over these. But just want some opinions for the more experienced here.

    Maybe there are some problems with them that I am not aware of.

    Or maybe the Cub is just a far superior ride.

    I definitely plan to bum some rides to experience them myself.
    Until then, I'll have to live with the words I read here.

  16. #16

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,304
    Post Thanks / Like
    OK John, here are a couple thoughts:

    Josh is right: Flying ANYthing is way up the coolness scale.

    Re: Luscombe: I owned one for several years, liked the light controls, liked the relatively inexpensive ownership. Hated the seating, never could do a long XC for that reason. Some have C-150 seats, which are less bad. Most ragwing variants have a ~15gallon fuel tank right behind your head. NOT where I want to be sitting if things go badly. Kinda blind in turns and heavy traffic. Parts a bit scarce and spendy. If you ding one significantly, not economically repairable. (Steve Pierce, jump in, I think you've wrenched on some??). There were a lot of days I chose to sit watching the wind blow, when I'd have very comfortably flown a Supercub, a Champ, or heck, a C-172

    My warped opinion, as much as I love cubs of all sorts, best bang-for-the-buck for someone getting started, a RENTED C-150 (OK, I hear the incoming .....), then an OWNED Champ 7AC or maybe 7CC. Some decent values in Taylorcrafts just now, too. Cheapest net cost you can own these days (insurance being a big factor) is probably a clean, straight early C-172 straight-tail (EEYIKES!!!! more incoming....)

    Also take into careful account the density altitude at which you plan to operate: This wipes out a whole bunch of otherwise interesting aeroplanes for me.

    If you're interested in owning, just make sure to get a thorough pre-buy from a mechanic EXPERIENCED in maintaining the type you're interested in.

    Just be realistic with yourself about what your personal flying goals and missions are, and you should do OK.

    Best luck! cubscout

  17. #17
    behindpropellers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    6,681
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by cubscout
    Cheapest net cost you can own these days (insurance being a big factor) is probably a clean, straight early C-172 straight-tail (EEYIKES!!!! more incoming....)

    Best luck! cubscout
    +1

  18. #18

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    6,661
    Post Thanks / Like
    More fun than a 172 is probably a ticket on Southwest. I hear they are allowing miniskirts again.

    If you want a Cub, by all means get a Cub. Remember, you only get one shot at this . . .

  19. #19
    WWhunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Laporte, Minnesota and the white sandy beaches of NW Florida
    Posts
    1,430
    Post Thanks / Like
    Bob,
    I respectfully disagree with your statement. Flying anything is what you make of it.
    I have a Champ and 172. They serve different purposes and I can have just as much fun in the 172...just depends on the mission. Actually I think it is one of the most versatile airplanes out there for the price factor.

    Keith

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    6,661
    Post Thanks / Like
    Have you ever owned a Cub? In an inexpensive 4-place, I really have to agree with you. On the other hand, if I never fly another 172 or Cherokee, I will have no regrets at all. Take my Cub or Dec away, and I will cry real tears! If I have the choice even in the pattern, a 172 is next to last, right behind the Cherokee. Wanna go places and have fun? Mooney. Opinion.

  21. #21
    Dave Calkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    5,361
    Post Thanks / Like


    I also have a friend who runs skis on his 172. I hunt some beaches and gravel with my Cherokee 140, and I've seen 'em on floats.

    I suppose a guy should figure out what kind of flying makes him happyand if he can afford the cost.

    Some guys are happy flying round and round the pattern and little more. Go figure.

    ...and yes, I own a Cub, or two.

  22. #22
    StewartB
    Guest
    deleted

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    6,661
    Post Thanks / Like
    I agree there. The 180 is one of my personal favorites. I still don't want to fly the 172 any more. Even the ones with decent flaps.

  24. #24
    RedEye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Side Lake , MN
    Posts
    1,571
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by JC
    Thanks for the info everyone.

    I am in the process of getting my PPL and when it is time to buy my first plane I think I would like it to be a Super Cub (or some variation).

    You guys are living the dream.
    John,

    Not sure where Wappingers Falls is, but you are always more than welcome to stop by Side Lake, jump in the front seat of my cub(I'll be in the back of course) and get some seat time. No charge !!

  25. #25
    12Geezer2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Eau Claire, WI
    Posts
    1,065
    Post Thanks / Like
    If you make it to David's; stop by Eau Claire and we can give the old pa12 a try.
    Likes bowenjo liked this post

  26. #26
    12Geezer2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Eau Claire, WI
    Posts
    1,065
    Post Thanks / Like
    David--I looked up Wappingers Falls --only one that came up was New York. On hiway 9 not too far south of a place I,d like to visit sometime--Reinbeck the place where all the WWI airplanes fly.

  27. #27

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Wappingers Falls
    Posts
    33
    Post Thanks / Like
    You Cub pilots are a good breed. Very helpful, down to earth folks.

    As soon as I get my PPL I'm going to take you guys up on your generous offers. That would be incredible.

    I'll buy the burgers.

    Never been to Minnesota.
    I hear there a few lakes there.
    ...and a few fish...


  28. #28

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Wappingers Falls
    Posts
    33
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 12Geezer2
    David--I looked up Wappingers Falls --only one that came up was New York. On hiway 9 not too far south of a place I,d like to visit sometime--Reinbeck the place where all the WWI airplanes fly.
    Old Rhinebeck Aerodrom is great.

    They have all sorts of vintage WWI planes and do a fun air show.
    They even have biplane rides, etc. I take my kids there often.

    http://www.oldrhinebeck.org/

    It is a pilgrimage for many. Open every weekend during the summer.

    I fly out of POU and practice my landings at Kingston (20N) which is rather close by, but see that Sky Park (46N) (haven't been there yet) would be the closest to the Aerodrome.

    Anyhow, if any of you are ever in the area, I would be more than glad to provide ground support to sight see (Aerodrome, FDR's Mansion and Library, and the Vanderbilt Museum/Mansion on the historic Hudson River) or to get a bite to eat.

  29. #29
    Flying_Fin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Medway, Maine
    Posts
    89
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by oldbaldguy View Post
    John,

    I wasn't living the dream until I bought my stock 12 just over a year ago. Even so, I didn't like it much when I first got it, but after 100+ hours and 250 landings I love the thing and wouldn't trade it for anything within reason. My airplane will fly for six hours with full tanks @ 6 gallons an hour, is simple and easy to own and operate, and encourages elbow-out-the-window aviating. The engine/airframe/prop combo is as smooth as a sewing machine and the old gal can do more than a waltz if you want her to. On the down side, it's pretty slow (but who cares?), is not really a three-place airplane unless you are hauling small kids or the Olsen twins, and it doesn't have the mystique of a Super Cub. In my humble opinion, heavily modified 12s aren't 12s at all, but SC wannabees that don't necessarily exhibit the best characteristics of either breed. If you need the better all around performance you get from a nice SC, don't go shopping for a 12. If most of your flying is for sh$%s and giggles, you could do a lot worse than the cheaper, simpler, roomier Super Cruiser.
    Olsen twins...I wish...
    Life is not a dress rehearsal, and is a fatal condition...make it count. It's a good landing if you can still open the doors.

Similar Threads

  1. Difference PA-18-95 and J3C-90
    By 747driver in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-12-2010, 11:15 AM
  2. What's the difference?
    By Bret in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-03-2006, 06:44 AM
  3. What is the difference between.........
    By CptKelly in forum Tips and Tricks
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-26-2004, 11:53 AM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •