Viking Engine

Just joined the group and homing in on acquiring a L18C PA-18.....no engine so have options
Does anyone have comments / info on the Viking engine compatibility with a SuperCub? I've heard it can be done but maybe some folk out there know far more. They have a 150hp and then a 195hp option.
Also considering installing toe brakes - any pointers for an STC and kit for this?
Many thanks

Are you certified or experimental?

The general consensus with Cub guys is to stay with heel brakes. But it's still your choice as you'll be the one flying it.

Web

I have never heard of a viking engine on a cub. I am sure it can be done on an experimental if you don't mind proof of concept guy. Toe brake STC https://www.hoaircraft.com/stc-mod-king-cub-copy-copy-1 call and make sure that cub is covered. What part of the country and what type of flying are you going to be doing?? Footgear does matter with brake selection.
DENNY

I would keep the heel brakes. You'll learn to love them.

As for the engine, I think you'll find that you will spend all of your time trying to make it work rather than just finding a good engine and installing as Piper intended.

Thanks all for the comments & link - currently certified but considering to move to experimental.
Will view aircraft end of this week and take a call from there

I love my toe brakes but there’s more to it than a simple bolt-on afternoon. For the engine? The prop moves the airplane. Figure out what prop you want then narrow down the engines that drive that prop. You have access to lots of advice here but your intended use needs to be defined in order to get good advice.

Intended uses is really to get from A to B and very occasionally be able to go into places off the beaten track
Mostly flying alone but 2 up + luggage occasionally. So an all rounder.

Buy a 172. The best all-rounder ever made.

Droo said:

Thanks all for the comments & link - currently certified but considering to move to experimental.
Will view aircraft end of this week and take a call from there

Click to expand...

You can move a type certified airplane to experimental but you would be very limited on what you could do with it. It won’t be experimental/amateur built. Do a little research on the regs.

Opinion only....being a warbird and history buff, rebuild it to close to original. It's end value will be considerably higher. I've been trying to find exactly what you are looking at. If you pass on it, please let me know via PM.

The two replies before me are excellent advice! I had a 172 and quasi bush types for the last 30+ years. The 172 was the most flown of all of them. They're so many of them because they do 90% of what most people truly end up doing with a plane. The ' bush plane' segment of aviation is very small compared to the airplanes that are actually flying everyday, unless you live in the interior of Alaska or Canada.

The issues involved with converting a certified are normally put in the experimental/exhibition category and this has it's own set of guidelines. Little more restricted than amature built. Definitely need to do more research before purchasing.

Most people that have gone down the path of using non-aircraft type engines will tell you, you won't save much money and the build time is multiplied. Most are also constantly tinkering to get things running right. The best option that I have seen lately is the Yamaha. Friend has one in a Kitfox. Smooth running but boy is it a screamer!

If you're wanting to go experimental, contact me, I might have something of interest.

Was at a STOL contest with a guy who had had several Viking engine failures on his Zenith even though the Viking folks installed the engine. Lots of finger pointing but at the end of the day he is out the same amount of money as if he had bought a tried and true Lycoming.

As far as a Viking engine on an L18C, why f up one of the best airplanes out there. To save money? Curious as to the weight of the Viking engine vs a C90-8 or -12. I good light 90 hp PA18 is a sweet airplane. I suspect that Honda/Viking engine with radiator etc weighs more than even an O-200.

Only way to go experimental legally would be to go Experimental Exhibition.

An addendum on Experimental/Exhibition category: A number of light aircraft owners have recently “discovered the EX/Exhibition category, and taken their certified aircraft into that category.

The legal requirements for that category are actually fairly confining, but the FAA has never strictly enforced them. In past, the vast majority of aircraft operating in this category have been true, full time air show aircraft. That has made compliance and enforcement really easy for the FAA. Not too many folks taking hard core aerobatic competition type planes out into the back country, or….?

But, with lots of newbies taking Cessnas and Cub type planes into that category, mostly for “personal use”, as opposed to the actual intent of the reg: “Exhibition Use”, I’d be concerned that category could be one ugly accident away from some really serious scrutiny by regulators. If that were to happen, strict enforcement of existing rules could make ownership in this category less than attractive.

MTV

Instead of the Cessna 172 I would buy a Piper Cherokee 235 for serious usability - it’s what I did and I love it - and have a cheaper long wing Cub for fun flying. I have a J-3 and a J-5, both experimental on the rules where I live. The best of both worlds and all for the price of one tricked out PA-18.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org

Little off topic but I still remember seeing a modified Cessna 170 that in the exhibition/R&D (whatever) category that was listed for sale for several years. Nearly impossible to sell as it's use was limited. Also remember the guy saying he would never go down that path again. Granted, this was a few years ago and maybe things have changed.

On the other side of the coin you have "The Beast" built by Kyle Bushman, which is another heavily modified Cessna 175. It seemed to be in all the aviation news articles a couple of years ago. The owner is a cool guy to talk to. Maybe hit him up with some questions.

Brandsman said:

I would buy a Piper Cherokee 235 for serious usability - it’s what I did and I love it -

Click to expand...

Great airplane, I picked up a new one at the factory for my employer in 1964. Loved that airplane. It is basically a low wing Cessna 182 for a performance comparison.