American Legend vs Cub Crafters

[Steve Pierce]

I have flown and worked on both aircraft. The Legend is a Cub, built just like a Cub with interchangable parts. The Carbon Cub is a clean sheet of paper and only looks like a Cub. It has a bigger door, a sling back seat and toe brakes. Both models you have mentioned on your short list are amazing performers. I have a Legend AL11 project and most of the major parts are Piper and I can obtain those parts from multiple vendors. If you buy a used SS makes sure that all the service bulletins have been complied with. They can get expensive and will add to the cost. I would fly both airplanes and figure out if one happens to stand out to you.

 

[SinCityJets]

First, thank you everyone for the replies. I asked the question looking for the magic bullet that allowed CC to command almost $100,000 more for a similarly equipped plane if using the X, or $30k more if using the SS. Basically an “every option” AL vs an every option CC SS or X.

What i I took from this thread was they are both great planes, CC may have a better fit and finish on the interior, may be a little lighter on a similarly equipped bird, may take longer or be harder to get parts. May even be a little faster in a cruise due to their redesign, but I would have a hard time justifying a lot more money just for the ability to say I owned a CC.

The AL Legend Cub HP I am looking comes with flaps, toe brakes, TK1 suspension, Garmin G3X, 29” tires, extra storage, amazing paint scheme, 180 hp, for 10’s of thousands less than a similarly built CC.

I figured if if anyone could tell me why, you guys could. If I missed something or misunderstood something, please let me know. Again, I appreciate all the comments, feedback, and PM’s.

Chad

 

[stewartb]

If the question is simply which is more desireable? Look around. The market has spoken, and apparently price wasn’t a deterrent.

 

[Dave Prizio]

I would echo stewartb's comment. I owned a Legend Cub for 4 years and enjoyed it. I have flown several models of the Carbon Cub and must say that there is no better Cub-like plane on the market today than the latest version of the Carbon Cub, followed closely by older versions of the same plane. The last one I flew, the EX-2, was the finest flying plane of its type that I have ever experienced, and the workmanship and engineering are in a league of their own. That said, there is a significant price difference that must be factored into any value calculation. I suggest you fly both planes and decide for yourself. I think the Carbon Cub is worth the extra money, but that is just my opinion.

 

[hotrod180]

..I will also ad, I had a bad experience with Cub Crafters many years that has stuck with me so I was a little hesitant looking at them again.

Ah, the power of the first impression. This is a lesson that everyone, esp sellers, and esp sellers in the (declining) aviation industry needs to learn.
The needs-a-$5 part customer that you blow off today may be the customer that goes elsewhere to spend the big money next time.

 

[Carey Gray]

You never get a second chance to make a first impression, something every industry should learn.

 

[WWhunter]

Sincityjet, if it's the demo model you're interested in, I can tell you about it later. I'm going to look at it in a few days.

 

[SinCityJets]

Sincityjet, if it's the demo model you're interested in, I can tell you about it later. I'm going to look at it in a few days.

haha, no, I wasn't looking at the demo, although it is a sweet looking bird! I was really just looking for a direct comparison.

 

[Steve Pierce]

I would echo stewartb's comment. I owned a Legend Cub for 4 years and enjoyed it. I have flown several models of the Carbon Cub and must say that there is no better Cub-like plane on the market today than the latest version of the Carbon Cub, followed closely by older versions of the same plane. The last one I flew, the EX-2, was the finest flying plane of its type that I have ever experienced, and the workmanship and engineering are in a league of their own. That said, there is a significant price difference that must be factored into any value calculation. I suggest you fly both planes and decide for yourself. I think the Carbon Cub is worth the extra money, but that is just my opinion.

Have you flown the Super Legend with the O-340?

 

[Dave Prizio]

I have not yet flown the Super Legend. I am sure it is quite a performer with all that added power. I am also sure that you could have a lot of fun with one if you were to buy one. If the Super Legend is what you want, I would not discourage you from getting one. There is, however, much more to flying that power. I encourage you to fly the both the Super Legend and the Carbon Cub and then decide.

 

[Sunshine]

Hi SinCityJets - Last year I bought a used AL18 Super Legend Cub with the 115hp lycoming engine with only 200 hours on it. I'm a newish taildragger pilot and this is my first airplane purchase. Along with being a low time pilot - I am definitely NO expert on much of anything other than I knew what I wanted and I lucked out and I got it. I didn't want to spend the money on the Titan 180. I knew I'd be flying low and slow with occasionally BOTH doors and windows open (which I understand CC can't do). I also wanted the ability to add floats some day. Flying in a cub at Jack Brown's seaplane base ruined me as I couldn't stop smiling nor could I forget that experience and that's what made me want a cub. New was important as I don't have time for maintenance these days. I am happy with the range, fuel burn, interior, paint, finish, and the panel (garmin 796), and baggage compartment (i'm a girl with lots of stuff), and I love the bigger tires, etc. As I said before I am definitely no expert and I hear over and over from friends that have flown the CC planes that they are are super fun and sporty. They were just too much money $$$ for me. I also wanted a design closer to the original Piper Super Cub. My experience with Darin - the owner of American Legend has been great. I have no complaints - seems to be a man of integrity whose actions match his words. He is always responsive and I believe he genuinely cares about me, my plane and wants me to be safe and have a ton of fun. I also really enjoy the laid back atmosphere in Sulphur Springs. I have made a few changes to my plane and he was happy to accommodate. So far it's been a great experience!!

 

[bob turner]

I personally think the choice to avoid the 180 hp Cub is a good idea. They go straight up, and fly like piglets. The Carbon Cub seems more balanced with the higher hp.

If I was not deliriously happy with my stroker J-3, and had to have a Super Cub on a budget, I would search for the absolute lightest 160 hp Cub I could find. Stock, except disc brakes, shoulder harnesses, radio, and maybe the overhead x-member for crash-worthiness.

 

[bob turner]

By the way, do you fly your AL to Zebulon/Concord ever?

 

[Jasperfield]

I've bought new airplanes from both companies; A 2003 PA-18-180 from CC and a 2012 AL3 from Legend. Both are great airplanes, and from good manufacturers. I bought the Legend AL3 because it is very well built, solid, light, and has few proprietary parts.

The second reason I chose Legend is Darin Hart, the owner. He is as straight-up and as genuine a good fellow as can be found. I specified the details of my airplane, they built it and transferred it to me on time and at budget. Nary a problem was had, not one...not even a glitch. And the airplane is completely trouble free. The fit, finish, and performance are flawless.

Jasperfield

 

[Little_Cub]

Gotta agree with Jasperfield.. we have an AL3 and the Super Legend in Az.. the wife flies the AL3 most of the time and loves it. We just landed at sunset after chasing each other around (and around) in the desert.. we are already planning ‘the next one’ and might let either one go to a good home. The melt of new parts and proven design is hard to beat!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SinCityJets]

I appreciate all the great replies to this thread. I think it will be a good thread to quote "use the search feature" to other newbies like me, in the future.

I know this after reading through this entire thread again.....you won't go wrong with either. Honestly, for as much support for both brands, I got 4 PM's from people expressing their displeasure with one of the brands. The biggest complaints were numerous AD's at the customer's expense, propriety of parts used, difficulty getting parts, and after the sales service. I am not here to spread "hearsay" so I won't mention which company it was, but I was surprised.

Again, I appreciate everyone's input. I believe it was all value added.

Chad

 

[Lasater]

I have owned a 115 hp Super Legend for 3 years and I have flow the 180 hp Super Legend. I have been very happy with 115 hp version. Performs like a 150 hp Super Cub wth lower fuel burn. 870 lb empty weight. I think the 180 hp engine adds about 40 lbs. Darin Hart has been great to work with.

I will add more thoughts tomorrow.

 

[SinCityJets]

I have owned a 115 hp Super Legend for 3 years and I have flow the 180 hp Super Legend. I have been very happy with 115 hp version. Performs like a 150 hp Super Cub wth lower fuel burn. 870 lb empty weight. I think the 180 hp engine adds about 40 lbs. Darin Hart has been great to work with.

I will add more thoughts tomorrow.

did you not like the 180hp version??

chad

 

[Lasater]

We got the 115 hp before the 180 hp was available. I dropped our plane at the factory for an annual, and Darin handed me the keys to the 180 hp. I really liked the 180 hp, but for our use the 115 hp is almost perfect. It performs so much better than you would expect. It is a great and balanced airplane. One consideration that favors the 115 hp is that 30 gallons of fuel goes a long way. 30-35 gallon tanks are inadequate for 180 hp in my opinion.

 

[ATXCubDriver]

Since you are fairly close to the CC factory I would suggest a visit. Good chance you could fly three different models of the Carbon Cub and that would answer a lot of questions for you. Both CC and Legend welcome tours.

 

[SinCityJets]

Since you are fairly close to the CC factory I would suggest a visit. Good chance you could fly three different models of the Carbon Cub and that would answer a lot of questions for you. Both CC and Legend welcome tours.

Great idea. I think I will actually do that.

 

[bob turner]

I am going to second Lasater's comments. I found the Carbon Cub well balanced and exhilarating in initial climb out. But it was designed for the 180.

The Super Cub was designed for 90 hp. Piper upgraded it to 150, and STCs exist for 160, which adds zero weight. Hanging a 180 on the front does increase climb angle, at the expense of everything else. A good Cub has a hull speed of about 110 mph, and if you try to go much faster than that fuel burn goes up dramatically.

The little O-200 Legend is a great airplane. Roomy, a little faster than a J-3 maybe, and economical. I suspect the 115 Lyc is the same. There was a Tango Cub here for a while with 115, and it did just fine on about 6 gph.

But wealthy beyond belief? Carbon Cub. Nothing would make me want a 180 Super Cub - in fact, if I ever run out the Decathlon 180 I would consider a 160.

 

[ross d]

SinCity, you know Sun n Fun is just a couple of months away. I can promise you both companies will be represented there. Might be a good place to start.

 

[Lasater]

The first Super Cub I flew/owned was a 1979 with 180 hp. I loved it, but I didn't have anything to compare it to. Then I owned a 150 hp PA-14. When we bought the 115 hp Super Legend, we had a 150 hp PA-18 that we concurrently for 3 months. The Super Legend out climbed the -18,got off and landed shorter, but was a little slower in cruise. The Super Legend is much lighter on the controls, but it is still pure cub.

I liked the 180 hp Super Legend, but for our use the 115 hp is about perfect. My father, daughter and I tend to fly alone. Most of our flights are local flights around Fort Worth or around our ranch in South Texas. We are not hauling moose or gold bricks. We haven't competed in STOL competitions although I think the airplane would be more than capable (the pilot would be the limitation). Once you get over the fun factor of climbing straight up, the extra hp just means higher fuel burns and fewer hours between refueling. I think the CC used to come with 24 gal tanks for 180 hp. 2 hours plus small reserve-not enough for me. With 30 gallons, I get 5 hours to empty tanks, more if I am throttled back.

I have not flown the Carbon Cub. Every report is that it is awesome. The criticisms are that the CC uses double sided tape and other weight saving construction techniques that do not hold up. I sat in a CC Sport Cub and grabbed the V-brace over the panel and was shocked that it "wiggled." I am sure it is plenty strong, but just not what I was used to.

Fly both and talk to mechanics. CC has clearly was the sales and marketing race. They are great innovators. Don't rule out the 115 hp Super Legend just for the bragging rights of a big engine.

Ed

 

[spinner2]

I sat in a CC Sport Cub and grabbed the V-brace over the panel and was shocked that it "wiggled." I am sure it is plenty strong, but just not what I was used to.

I wondered what you mean by "wiggled"? There is some deflection when the tube it pulled on, just like there is in an -18. But wiggle? Not in mine. My recollection is that the -18 had more deflection. I've seen that tube on an -18 bent from pilots pulling their weight up and in with it.

 

[mvivion]

I wondered what you mean by "wiggled"? There is some deflection when the tube it pulled on, just like there is in an -18. But wiggle? Not in mine. My recollection is that the -18 had more deflection. I've seen that tube on an -18 bent from pilots pulling their weight up and in with it.

Holy crap, I didn’t know the Governator was a pilot.....

MTV

 

[Lasater]

I wondered what you mean by "wiggled"? There is some deflection when the tube it pulled on, just like there is in an -18. But wiggle? Not in mine. My recollection is that the -18 had more deflection. I've seen that tube on an -18 bent from pilots pulling their weight up and in with it.

When I grabbed the CC v-brace, I could deflect it back and forth (maybe as much a half inch or more in the middle), I have not been able to do that in Piper products or my Legend. That is a observation from spending less than 2 minutes in a CC sport cub. The CC v-brace seemed like it was a skinnier diameter-but I not willing to be on it. I want to reiterate that I am sure that the airplane was well engineered and plenty strong. I like my Legend, so I am biased and I want to acknowledge that.

 

[RoddyM]

The first Super Cub I flew/owned was a 1979 with 180 hp. I loved it, but I didn't have anything to compare it to. Then I owned a 150 hp PA-14. When we bought the 115 hp Super Legend, we had a 150 hp PA-18 that we concurrently for 3 months. The Super Legend out climbed the -18,got off and landed shorter, but was a little slower in cruise. The Super Legend is much lighter on the controls, but it is still pure cub.

I liked the 180 hp Super Legend, but for our use the 115 hp is about perfect. My father, daughter and I tend to fly alone. Most of our flights are local flights around Fort Worth or around our ranch in South Texas. We are not hauling moose or gold bricks. We haven't competed in STOL competitions although I think the airplane would be more than capable (the pilot would be the limitation). Once you get over the fun factor of climbing straight up, the extra hp just means higher fuel burns and fewer hours between refueling. I think the CC used to come with 24 gal tanks for 180 hp. 2 hours plus small reserve-not enough for me. With 30 gallons, I get 5 hours to empty tanks, more if I am throttled back.

I have not flown the Carbon Cub. Every report is that it is awesome. The criticisms are that the CC uses double sided tape and other weight saving construction techniques that do not hold up. I sat in a CC Sport Cub and grabbed the V-brace over the panel and was shocked that it "wiggled." I am sure it is plenty strong, but just not what I was used to.

Fly both and talk to mechanics. CC has clearly was the sales and marketing race. They are great innovators. Don't rule out the 115 hp Super Legend just for the bragging rights of a big engine.

Ed

I’m not 100% sure, however, you may be over estimating the 180 Titan fuel burn. In fact there’s a very good chance that it’s as good as your 115. Especially since most of your flying is for pure enjoyment and looking around. The fuel burn rate in the 180 Titan (not your typical 0-360) at 1800 rpm is very similar to a Rotax 912 which which might be 4 US gal. or less even.
Roddy

 

[spinner2]

I’m not 100% sure, however, you may be over estimating the 180 Titan fuel burn. In fact there’s a very good chance that it’s as good as your 115. Especially since most of your flying is for pure enjoyment and looking around. The fuel burn rate in the 180 Titan (not your typical 0-360) at 1800 rpm is very similar to a Rotax 912 which which might be 4 US gal. or less even.
Roddy

I agree. At 2350 I burn about 6 gph with my O-340 and Lightspeed ignition. Pull it back to the high teens and it sips 4 ish at 80 mph or so.

 

[cubdriver2]

I think most engine shops will tell you not to run very long at those lower rpms (1800)?

Glenn