Javron Cub vs. Carbon Cub (or original PA-18 deisgn vs CC)

[Cardiff Kook]

Why would one select one over other? Assume they are both already built.

I guess this thread could also be- what are the improvements/differences between the original cub design and a carbon cub? Do they fill the same mission? I am generally talking about once these planes are built and flying- not the build process.

Why would one select one over the other? Is one more robust/easier to maintain than the other. Different flight characteristics? Utility?

I saw other threads on this- but they are focused on the build process- I am talking about the flying part once they are built.

I am asking because after 18 months with my PA-18 I am starting to realize things I want/don't want. My plane is real light- and I want to keep that. Examples of wants are 160hp (from 135), rear baggage door, climb prop, bigger tires. Just daydreaming right now...

[acroeric]

I was in your same position a while go. Have had a Super Cub, had flown lots of Carbon Cubs (in addition I owned a Cub Crafters service center) and had seen the Javron kit. At the end of the day it came down to me wanting something experimental and I chose Javron because I believe it to be built better than the other options.

I am not knocking Cub Crafters at all- they have a great product and are a blast to fly. The airframes are (or were) MIG welded and I just did not see them being "Legacy" airplanes like the stock Pipers are. IMO there is no replacement for a TIG or gas welded airframe. The Javron was the most Piper like construction and at this point I have no regrets. I have a new airplane built like the old ones with all the right mods.

I will say that customer support/ supply chain will be better with Cub Crafters.

[stewartb]

A stock Carbon Cub's takeoff performance exceeds what's achievable in a Javron Cub unless the builder is tweaking the AOI. Landing performance is a little closer. Carbon Cubs aren't known for durability, but saving weight rarely makes an airframe tougher. I considered both and took a different direction for reasons important to me. Figure out what's important to you.

[frequent_flyer]

Why would one select one over other? Assume they are both already built.

"Carbon Cub" covers several quite different aircraft models. Perhaps you need to say which model you are interested in if you want useful feedback. An EX-3 or FX-3 with over 180 hp, constant speed prop, and 2,000 lb gross is quite different from an LSA Carbon Cub SS.

[frequent_flyer]

The airframes are (or were) MIG welded and I just did not see them being "Legacy" airplanes like the stock Pipers are. IMO there is no replacement for a TIG or gas welded airframe.

The only welding I saw while at Yakima was TIG. That was a little over 3 years ago.

[supercub83a]

I was in the same boat a few years ago, chose Javron cub for a few reasons. I have flown a CC and thought it was the best flying cub I’ve ever flown for general handling and great performance but I wanted something capable of some heavy lifting and hard duty and just felt like the CC wasnt really proven in that realm. The availability of spare parts and the many different manufacturers of almost every part of the machine skewed me to a more traditional PA-18. My Javron cub Im certain is capable of lifting more weight out of rougher strips and is the best flying traditional super cub that I’ve ever flown. The wear points and weaknesses of the PA-18 are well known and most mechanics (in AK) are familiar with the design. If my mission were to take joy rides down in America I probably wouldve chosen the CC. The appeal of a build manual and basically a lego airplane kit was very tempting but it just did not suit my mission. I also wanted something with 200+hp and slats but that was also not on offer with the CC.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org

[Cardiff Kook]

"Carbon Cub" covers several quite different aircraft models. Perhaps you need to say which model you are interested in if you want useful feedback. An EX-3 or FX-3 with over 180 hp, constant speed prop, and 2,000 lb gross is quite different from an LSA Carbon Cub SS.

Not the lsa. I probably would not do constant speed…. Cant recall models at the moment

[stewartb]

SS or EX-2. O-340 180 hp with Catto props. I watch 5 of them here in the neighborhood. Impressive performers. All private part-time guys. Other neighbors have Javrons and one has a couple by ACME Cub including the show plane that got wrecked. Those are my fav standard Cubs. Especially the show plane. Beautiful rebuild of a beautiful build! The best performing Javron I’ve seen belongs to the guy building next year’s show plane.

[frequent_flyer]

I probably would not do constant speed….

Why not? You can have great takeoff performance and good (for a Cub) cruise performance. You get either one or the other with fixed pitch or ground adjustable props.

The only downside of a constant speed composite prop is the cost. After nearly 300 hours in my FX-3 I would not consider a Cub type aircraft with a fixed pitch prop.

[stewartb]

Cardiff, for the price of one Carbon Cub you can buy two of the best certificated Cubs you can find. Or two Javrons. Decide if experimental is what you want. If not? Certificated may be the best bang for the buck. A different neighbor bought a very low time 180hp Cub from a former member here. Great airplane, for about 1/3 of a new Carbon Cub FX3.

Imagine saying THAT 10 years ago!

[Cardiff Kook]

Yeah- i know people say dont do it but i kind of just want to upgrade the plane i have. The buying process is a major PITA and i have a solid airframe.

[stewartb]

As your family grows the 185 will be the workhorse. I like a fire-breathing Cub as a stablemate. Go fly a few 180 hp Cubs and I bet you’ll know your answer.

[acroeric]

The only welding I saw while at Yakima was TIG. That was a little over 3 years ago.

They may well TIG everything now. It has been probably 6 years since I had the service center. FWIW, Maule MIG welds too.

[JohnnyR]

Not the lsa. I probably would not do constant speed…. Cant recall models at the moment

Depends on your mission.

I now regret our Sensenich ground adjustable instead of a constant speed MT or similar. We’re often loaded to gross and at the back of the cg envelope (even with a cargo pod). A nose heavy CS prop would make my hauling easier.

Fortunately our engine was built to accommodate a future “upgrade” to CS.

[Formandfunction]

100%correct,the buying process is often insane and more times than not you end up with a plane needing work or changes. Plus it takes years for me to trust a new plane and really get a feel for it.
When it was my turn to purchase a new bird I just upgraded the one I already knew well.