but if you have a chance at a 11 with a 85 or even a 65 at your price, dont turn the other way by anymeans, not that easy to find any more. lotsa things can be done later.
That's a great point and the purpose of my original question. "Is the C-85 a deal breaker"? If I talk the Alaska guys, I'm told to wait and get the C-90 - that I won't be happy with the 85. And although nobody that has responded here is saying it in those direct terms, that is what I'm hearing - "get the C-90".
All good info!! Appreciated!!
So, are you actually LOOKING at a particular PA-11, or just "shopping"? As Gary noted above, don't pass up a really light airplane with a C-85 to buy a heavy one with a 90.
Also, check the prop ANY of these are equipped with. It seemed to me when I owned one that most folks believed that just any old prop that fit on a Continental was "approved" on a PA-11. Check the TC and look for STCs.
MTV
standard was one 18 gallon tank, wonder how the 12 gallon???
C-90. 5.5 an hour with the Stromberg. Great torque and a delight to fly.
The biggest issue I see is folks trying to morph a PA-11 into something it shouldn't be. Which turns it into something that is not such a pure delight to fly.
Regarding empty weight, our PA-11 has a C90-8F [no starter or generator] installed and weighs 775 pounds. It is the original configuration with no modifications.
Regarding empty weight, our PA-11 has a C90-8F [no starter or generator] installed and weighs 775 pounds. It is the original configuration with no modifications.
There's something fishy about a PA-11 with a "12 gallon tank". A 12 gallon J-3 tank is installed in the fuselage in front of the front seat occupant. It will not physically fit in a PA-11 fuselage.
All PA-11s came from Piper with a 17 gallon tank [NOT an 18 gallon tank]. About 9 months after production started in April of 1947, an AD was issued mandating the installation of a header tank installed in front of the instrument panel. This was due to fuel unporting from the pick up at the aft inboard of the tank when the airplane was in a long glide with less than five gallons of fuel aboard. The header tank resulted in nearly 18 gallons of usable fuel capacity for the airplane. The main tank capacity was still 17 gallons and is placarded as such. Airplanes that were produced after the AD was issued got their header tanks installed on the production line, but fuel capacity for a PA-11 is still listed as 17 gallons unless the airplane has been modified.
The guy that is advertising the Cub is the grandson of the man that built and owns this -11. When I asked him about the fuel capacity, he said, "12 gallons in the wing tank, but I need to verify". I reached out to them today to verify, but have not heard back yet.
As other posters have noted, this sounds like an experimental/amateur built Cub with a 12 gallon wing tank installed. I can't imagine someone modifying a standard category PA-11 to carry less fuel than the original.