• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

CUBCRAFTERS DEBUTS NEW CC393i POWERPLANT FOR XCUB

sj

Staff member
Northwest Arkansas
CUBCRAFTERS DEBUTS NEW CC393i POWERPLANT FOR XCUB


Collaborative Project with Lycoming and Hartzell


Yakima, Washington – July 10, 2019: CubCrafters is upgrading its industry leading personal adventure
aircraft, the XCub, with a new firewall forward package, including a much more powerful engine and
propeller combination developed in cooperation with key industry partners.


FAA certified in 2016, the XCub is lighter, stronger, and faster than any aircraft in its category. Combined
with a larger payload and greater range, these attributes fulfill a wider mission profile than any other
comparative aircraft in this class. The new firewall forward package being offered expands the
capabilities of CubCrafters’ flagship aircraft even more.

Dubbed the CC393i, the new lightweight fuel injected engine develops more than 215 HP, but adds only
10 pounds to the aircraft’s overall empty weight when compared to similar legacy fuel injected 180 HP
engine options. Developed as part of a growing collaboration between CubCrafters and Lycoming, the
new CC393i engine is only available from CubCrafters and offered exclusively on the XCub.

“The opportunity to work together with Lycoming to develop this new, high-power and lightweight
engine for the XCub has been truly inspiring. The CC393i, with its advances in technology and materials,
absolutely delivers on the high performing adventure that we are dedicated to bring to our customers,”
shared Patrick Horgan, CubCrafters president.

A newly developed lightweight composite, three-bladed, constant speed propeller called the
‘Pathfinder’ will also be first launched by Hartzell Propeller as part of the updated firewall forward
package for the XCub. With both updated aerodynamics and internal structure, the new propeller is
quieter, smoother, and optimized for back country operations.

“From its inception, our XCub development team set out to design a modern Cub with terrific STOL
capabilities, like our LSA Carbon Cub, but one that could travel faster and farther, while accommodating
all of the gear that a pilot and passenger might want to carry for an extended adventure” recalls
CubCrafters founder Jim Richmond. “Now, after having met that goal, we have refined the design for
even more performance and capability.”

This new firewall forward package features many of the same improvements that were first introduced
on the massively popular CC363i engine that is offered exclusively on the 3rd generation of CubCrafters
experimental Carbon Cub aircraft, the EX-3 and FX-3.


Horgan explains: “With the CC363i, we started with the combination of a lightweight 180+ horsepower
engine with dual electronic ignition, fuel injection, and a high performance Hartzell composite constant


speed propeller. Our design team integrated the entire engine and airframe package using our own in-
house expertise, computational fluid design tools, and considerable testing to optimize both induction


airflow and cooling with spectacular results.” He continues that, “now we are doing the same with this
new 215+ horsepower Lycoming CC393i engine and the new Hartzell Pathfinder propeller; we’re giving
the XCub a huge performance boost, just as we did for the experimental Carbon Cub in 2017.”
Key components of the new CC393i engine include new lightweight magnesium parts such as the
accessory case, oil sump, and a new innovative lightweight magnesium cold air induction system. In
addition, standard equipment includes fuel injection, a high-performance ignition system, a lightweight
Sky-Tec starter, and lightweight alternator options. To house the CC393i, a new larger cowling with
better aerodynamics was designed. Cooling airflow for the engine is improved by a new lightweight
composite baffling system, and a new exhaust system is designed to increase power while scavenging
more heat than ever before for the XCub cabin.

“I’m very excited to be able to introduce this new powerplant combination to our customers” says
CubCrafters Vice President of Sales and Marketing, Brad Damm, who has flown behind the new CC393i
engine extensively during its testing and development phase. He comments that, “This is the highest
horsepower engine CubCrafters has ever offered and it doesn’t disappoint. The acceleration is
exhilarating. The takeoff and climb are impressive, even by CubCrafters’ high standards.”
CubCrafters notes that the XCub was always intended to be more than just a new airplane; it was
designed right from the start as a platform upon which new technologies and different configurations
can be offered to fulfill different missions. The company says that the new CC393i engine opens a host
of new possibilities for the airplane.

The new Lycoming CC393i engine and Hartzell Pathfinder propeller combination will be displayed as part
of CubCrafters’ AirVenture 2019 exhibit at Booth 273/274, and is an option for new XCub orders with
delivery in 2020 and beyond.
 
Best guess: it can be yours for only $500,000.

But, seriously. At what point does it stop making sense to pay so much for a cramped 2 seat rag wing? Aren’t there better options that can fulfill its mission equally well, with far greater comfort and useful load, for far less money? How much is a fully tricked out Helio, 185, or Beaver? Or even a freshly rebuilt souped up SC? Have you seen many 185s advertised in the $400,000 range and aren’t nice Beavers commonly listed in the $350-450 range?

Cubcrafters puts out a really great product, but I really don’t know how buyers justify spending that much money.
 
Best guess: it can be yours for only $500,000.

But, seriously. At what point does it stop making sense to pay so much for a cramped 2 seat rag wing? Aren’t there better options that can fulfill its mission equally well, with far greater comfort and useful load, for far less money? How much is a fully tricked out Helio, 185, or Beaver? Or even a freshly rebuilt souped up SC? Have you seen many 185s advertised in the $400,000 range and aren’t nice Beavers commonly listed in the $350-450 range?

Cubcrafters puts out a really great product, but I really don’t know how buyers justify spending that much money.

It all the extra lawyer fees added to all the parts that makes all the new stuff expensive ........ :)


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app
 
Best guess: it can be yours for only $500,000.

But, seriously. At what point does it stop making sense to pay so much for a cramped 2 seat rag wing? Aren’t there better options that can fulfill its mission equally well, with far greater comfort and useful load, for far less money? How much is a fully tricked out Helio, 185, or Beaver? Or even a freshly rebuilt souped up SC? Have you seen many 185s advertised in the $400,000 range and aren’t nice Beavers commonly listed in the $350-450 range?

Cubcrafters puts out a really great product, but I really don’t know how buyers justify spending that much money.


cant take it with you, ive seen checks in peoples boxes but no cash.
 
As a supplier to Cub Crafters I can tell you that they sell a lot of airplanes.... there are people out there more than willing to put up the coin...

Brian


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
There are a lot of people out there with a lot more disposable income than I imagined. There is almost a 2 year backlog on $360K Carbon Cubs. Having flown them they are nice and they have made some obvious improvements over the original Carbon Cub and Super Cub. I like working on new also. I had to fly to a neighboring airport and change a starter on a Cardinal last night for a stranded transient. Yuk.
 
Having been to Yakima many times, I would say that if you haven't been to Cub Crafters it is really difficult to understand the infrastructure investment in both staff and hard assets required to produce what they do today especially at the pace the market demands which is more, more, and oh ya faster. CC is an impressive operation in a very bold market and I highly recommend that anyone who flies a Cub of any kind stop in for a tour if ever in the area. My only complaint is it's not really handy to much other than really great flying, hiking, and some epic trout fishing on the Yakima River 8).

Kirby
 
Last edited:
I have viewed the XCub as a direct competitor to the Husky. Similar fuel and similar claimed cruise speed. Huskys have not been cheap. There is an appeal to having a Cub that has real range and usuable cross country speed giving up only a little on the bottom end. I am not a player in that space, but I get it.
 
Direct competitor to the husky? Huh. Maybe I missed something but I didn’t realize the Husky was anywhere close to the speed of an XCub, even with the std engine.

But in terms of justify, its much like the boat business. There is no justification, so don’t even try. It’s an emotional purchase, you either want it and decide to get it, or you don’t. I don’t have the means, and therefore it doesn’t matter, but I get it. Don’t try to justify.

I’ve never seen a hearse with a luggage rack.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org
 
Direct competitor to the husky? Huh. Maybe I missed something but I didn’t realize the Husky was anywhere close to the speed of an XCub, even with the std engine.

But in terms of justify, its much like the boat business. There is no justification, so don’t even try. It’s an emotional purchase, you either want it and decide to get it, or you don’t. I don’t have the means, and therefore it doesn’t matter, but I get it. Don’t try to justify.

I’ve never seen a hearse with a luggage rack.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org

Well said, and the technology trickles down as well.
 
There’s more people with “fun money” then most people realize in the USA. This country has more multi-millionaires than you can shake a stick at. Check out any million dollar high end house price listings/locations, and those sell like hot cakes.
 
My original post wasn't intended to criticize Cubcrafters, but to suggest there may be other aircraft available that can fulfill the same mission equally well or better for the same money.

I think it's great that Cubcrafters is a success. They have brought 1930's technology forward in a way that few legacy aircraft manufacturers have done. What I find particularly important is that they continue to manufacture in the U.S., using American workers. They could substantially reduce their production costs by outsourcing production to other countries, but don't. For that reason alone, they deserve our respect and admiration.
 
X Cub, yes please Ill have the CC393 with the pathfinder.can i get a side of Garmin G3X, and hold the 35 bush wheels. the 31s should let it cruise at 150 or so

im going to lay down in the grass and cry now. Or potatoes as it were

IMG_4870.jpg
 

Attachments

  • IMG_4870.jpg
    IMG_4870.jpg
    574.4 KB · Views: 5,326
X Cub, yes please Ill have the CC393 with the pathfinder.can i get a side of Garmin G3X, and hold the 35 bush wheels. the 31s should let it cruise at 150 or so

im going to lay down in the grass and cry now. Or potatoes as it were


View attachment 43659
Oh Quit! I got to fly the new 393 couple weeks ago it’s bad ass. I just bought a bag of Lays so your all set now 🤣just don’t put any yellow on it please😝
 
Last edited:
How's that plane balancing out for CG? Are they adding tail ballast? That's a lot of motor sitting on the nose of what started out as a 100hp Cub.
 
How's that plane balancing out for CG? Are they adding tail ballast? That's a lot of motor sitting on the nose of what started out as a 100hp Cub.
The XCUB was a clean sheet airplane it never had a 100hp on it 😂 and balances out nicely, being lucky enough to get to fly it, i didn’t notice the extra weight at all and that new engine pulls like a 🚜.
 
I'm sure it pulls just like my IO-400 did and like my Thunderbolt 390 will. ;) I'm familiar with the motor and the weight. I'll be interested to learn more about how they manage the CG.
 
Well, the slow flight on short final to that crappy moose hunting strip, will tell you you the story on the forward CG. Only problem is buying this plane for off-airport... I suspect you will have to carry power to get in short.
 
Well, the slow flight on short final to that crappy moose hunting strip, will tell you you the story on the forward CG. Only problem is buying this plane for off-airport... I suspect you will have to carry power to get in short.

Moose camp, yeah, right. Perhaps one of these MIGHT show up at some high end all inclusive LODGE with a 5000 foot GRASS strip manicured to look like a Pebble Beach golf course. Game bags will never see the inside of an X.

Got the dough, go get one, good on you for managing your money. There are a butt load of 100k plus regular Cubs for sale already that the owners dont want to scratch.
 
How do Cubcrafters planes hold up on the resale market?

Will we little guys ever be able to afford a used one?

Are they raising the value of original modified SuperCubs or lowering it?
 
Im the Fla dealer so I’m a little bias. I’ve personally owned 8-9 CC. Still have 2 one on floats one on 35s and a couple before I was a dealer and sold both for more then I paid for both. So I think they hold there value extremely well. Most of the used market is selling for close to what they were new. There’s plenty of us out there using our cubs as hard as anyone. I’ve poked holes in a few of them they patch just like a SC. The fact that there expensive has nothing to do with there capabilities. I believe SJ started this to show a new product CC came out with and it’s extremely impressive to fly. Guy has a Ex2 out in AK hauling moose and sheep all over the place treats it like a UHaul truck. There’s plenty out there running around just enjoying having a really nice cub don’t care about the off airport stuff. Nothing wrong with that either. Both the XCUB and the FX3 have close to a 1000lb useful load. Pretty tough to beat that .Spring gear on the 180s seem to do alright on the gravel bars why wouldn’t a XCUB. I’d would pick the FX2 or 3 if I was going to spend most of my time off airport in rough terrain that I need to haul a lot of weight out. I can say after flying the new 393 it’s a game changer for the XCUB STOL performance.
Chuck
 

Attachments

  • EB4EEF1E-AB34-4E28-BF57-9DBC157CE864.jpg
    EB4EEF1E-AB34-4E28-BF57-9DBC157CE864.jpg
    86.1 KB · Views: 307
  • F829C3D0-ADBE-4BE4-A136-C8FAA12E4C27.jpg
    F829C3D0-ADBE-4BE4-A136-C8FAA12E4C27.jpg
    56.3 KB · Views: 291
Im the Fla dealer so I’m a little bias. I’ve personally owned 8-9 CC. Still have 2 one on floats one on 35s and a couple before I was a dealer and sold both for more then I paid for both. So I think they hold there value extremely well. Most of the used market is selling for close to what they were new. There’s plenty of us out there using our cubs as hard as anyone. I’ve poked holes in a few of them they patch just like a SC. The fact that there expensive has nothing to do with there capabilities. I believe SJ started this to show a new product CC came out with and it’s extremely impressive to fly. Guy has a Ex2 out in AK hauling moose and sheep all over the place treats it like a UHaul truck. There’s plenty out there running around just enjoying having a really nice cub don’t care about the off airport stuff. Nothing wrong with that either. Both the XCUB and the FX3 have close to a 1000lb useful load. Pretty tough to beat that .Spring gear on the 180s seem to do alright on the gravel bars why wouldn’t a XCUB. I’d would pick the FX2 or 3 if I was going to spend most of my time off airport in rough terrain that I need to haul a lot of weight out. I can say after flying the new 393 it’s a game changer for the XCUB STOL performance.
Chuck

Never flown an x cub but it sure does look good on 35’s
422a61f4b56b54f112dc77a9d1094f80.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Like I said, “Wow.” Keep raising the cost of “new.”

If they weren’t so costly, no one would consider buying our old restored models for anything close to what they currently bring.
 
My original post wasn't intended to criticize Cubcrafters, but to suggest there may be other aircraft available that can fulfill the same mission equally well or better for the same money.

I think it's great that Cubcrafters is a success. They have brought 1930's technology forward in a way that few legacy aircraft manufacturers have done. What I find particularly important is that they continue to manufacture in the U.S., using American workers. They could substantially reduce their production costs by outsourcing production to other countries, but don't. For that reason alone, they deserve our respect and admiration.

I'm at...


Sent from my iPad using SuperCub.Org mobile app
 
Back
Top